yup it seems like a 60% market share MUSIC company, which it is...
nah, just messing with you, i know what ya mean
you know, 10 years from now, when the teenagers grow up, there'll be those 20-somethings all like, hey, yeah, i think apple started off making iPods then they got into making computers and stuff
it will be up to us old skool kids to set them straight and remind them what the world was like before iPods... wait, oh yes, now i remember, Discmans and before that Walkmans
Well since 75% of all iPods are sold here, and a survey by Merrill Lynch said that the store experience was of importance, I beg to differ.
Did you only read the last half of the second sentence? What about the rest of what I said? Read the first sentence and the first part of the second and then comment.
Obviously you and Merrill Lynch are wrong, IN EUROPE, since we have no Apple Stores except in London yet sales (not revenue) have increased 33.2%.
I'm not saying it's not important, but it's the products that are attracting people to Apple now, not the stores. If there is any halo effect, it's from positive experiences with good Apple products like the iPod and now good inexpensive products like the Mac Mini and iMacG5.
Yeah, but they've always had great products. I think the stores are important to educate people. I also think that because some of these stores are so elaborite, that Apple doesn't really seem like this >3% market share computer company.
You must have quite a short term memory. I didn't buy a Mac until 2001 because the products weren't up to scratch and saddled with an OS that should have been pensioned off 5 years earlier. They were also extremely expensive by comparison.
Now, they are competitively priced, have the best OS and come bundled with a load of very useful applications instead of the rubbish you usually get bundled with a PC.
In Europe they also had almost zero high street presence. Thanks to the iMac and iPod that is changing. And that's not because we have Apple stores.
Obviously you and Merrill Lynch are wrong, IN EUROPE, since we have no Apple Stores except in London yet sales (not revenue) have increased 33.2%.
I'm not saying it's not important, but it's the products that are attracting people to Apple now, not the stores. If there is any halo effect, it's from positive experiences with good Apple products like the iPod and now good inexpensive products like the Mac Mini and iMacG5.
Again, you didn't read my post too well. I said that for those WHO DID GO TO THE STORES. That obviously doesn't include those who DIDN'T go.
I did first mention the software and the hardware, perhaps in Europe reading is something that has been superceeded by those little pictures over everything?
You must have quite a short term memory. I didn't buy a Mac until 2001 because the products weren't up to scratch and saddled with an OS that should have been pensioned off 5 years earlier. They were also extremely expensive by comparison.
Now, they are competitively priced, have the best OS and come bundled with a load of very useful applications instead of the rubbish you usually get bundled with a PC.
In Europe they also had almost zero high street presence. Thanks to the iMac and iPod that is changing. And that's not because we have Apple stores.
I really don't think we're impressed about when you first bought your Mac. I bought my first one in 1991, and despite what you may think, those of us who made money professionally with our computers didn't think that the products weren't "up to scratch" or that the OS pensionable. Business's such as mine were reluctant to move to X. Believe me, there was no rush.
I know that my cousin in the Navy,bought a ipod...he didn't like it.
The battery was IMO designed to die after so long a period..thereby making you purchase a new ipod or send it to someone to haxor and replace with a good battery..or allah forbid, you send it to apple themselves...
Now my flash based RCA player's batteries die after a long period of time,and when that happens I buy some more Duracells.
Re aegis's post about my powermac G4
I clicked on the blue apple,went to About This Mac
Processor 450 Mhz PowerPC G4
Memory 1.38GB SDRAM
DIMM0/J21 SIZE 512MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM1/J22 SIZE 512MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM2/J23 SIZE 128MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM3/J24 SIZE 256MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC100
bringing the total to 1.38GB SDRAM. ur a nub aegis.
I know that my cousin in the Navy,bought a ipod...he didn't like it.
The battery was IMO designed to die after so long a period..thereby making you purchase a new ipod or send it to someone to haxor and replace with a good battery..or allah forbid, you send it to apple themselves...
Do people still keep bitching about iPod batteries? Good grief.
IME of Applecare, they took 4 days to repair an iBook screen door to door. I can't imagine replacing a battery would be such a big deal.
Quote:
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
Now my flash based RCA player's batteries die after a long period of time,and when that happens I buy some more Duracells.
A battery is a battery is a battery. They don't have some pre-programmed life span in them. They last x hours under situation y regardless of them being from Apple or Duracell. If y changes, so does x. For most people x is a couple of years so what's the big deal?
My Palm Vx has a battery in it I can't replace without sending it back. So does my UPS. Yet I don't see websites devoted to the Palm Battery problem or the APC UPS problem.
Then again, since I bought those products knowing full well the battery was built in but that they were the best product regardless, I've no right to bitch.
Quote:
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
Re aegis's post about my powermac G4
I clicked on the blue apple,went to About This Mac
Processor 450 Mhz PowerPC G4
Memory 1.38GB SDRAM
DIMM0/J21 SIZE 512MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM1/J22 SIZE 512MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM2/J23 SIZE 128MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM3/J24 SIZE 256MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC100
bringing the total to 1.38GB SDRAM. ur a nub aegis.
LOL! it's rounded your memory up.
You actually only have 1.375GB. 'Do the Math' as USAians are often heard to say causing us Brits to wonder why they don't do spelling too. It's 'Maths' dog nabbit. ;-)
Was your UPS battery so cheap-ass that it was basically designed to fail after a period of time?
No, You send it back for a new battery.
Quote:
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
Ibook? what's that?...oh yes..wannabe Titanium Powerbook..now I remember.
Nothing of the sort. It's an iBook. G3 500Mhz, white and plastic with a 12" screen. I can assure you it's not trying to be a wannabe anything. It does get better wifi reception than a TiBook though, and better battery life, which was useful at the time plus the 12" Powerbook hadn't been released then and the Ti was too big and too pricey.
Quote:
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
last time i checked you didnt get 1.375GB from 512x2, 256, and
128..calculated it's 1.408GB
512
512
256
128 equals
1,408
but then again it's the mac os x..so there is some automatically taken away,reserved for system resources, blah blah blah
Give a man a rope, and he'll hang himself by it. Do the math again.
1 GB = 1024MB
Therefore 1408MB = 1.375GB (or 1.38 if you're Apple and round up)
It's got nothing to do with memory being taken away for system resources - utter tosh.
My iBook with 640MB says 640MB. My iMac with 1GB (2x 512MB) says 1GB, not 1.024 GB. ;-)
I'd have thought you'd be better off ditching the 128MB PC100 RAM as it's probably conflicting with the PC133 RAM and introducing extra wait states. It's generally not an idea to mix the two though it may depend on the model.
back in the day in grade-school the textbook for math said mathematics.
I would venture a guess of Australia.
like Dr. House said "You put the Queen on your money, you're British"
.....
good try. but it was one of the other colonies Singapore, early 90s. Singapore gained independence in the 1960s but since then almost all public high school is still done in British English...
**his south-east-asia history lecture over, sunilraman steps aside to continue watching the mudslinging between Aegis and Alaskanblacklab**
Whatever aegis...all I know is that there is 1.38GB of memory..that is if you follow the common method of 512x2=1024 plus 384(that's 128-256)
Follow this, 1GB plus 384MB=1.38
Now most people say 1,024MB of SDRAM..that's a GB of Ram...following the math of 1024 bytes equal a kilobyte and 1024 kilobytes equal a Megabyte and 1024 Megabytes equal a Gigabyte...
anything less than 1024, doesn't mean it's rounded up to the next unit..
Why in the world do you keep saying "it's 1.375" that's if your using a calculator and divide 1408 by 1024...then you end up with 1.375
However according to the computer..it has 1.384GB of SDRAM
System Software converts 1024 into 1GB..anything added to that makes it 1GB+whatever....ie 1024MB+256MB=1.25GB
I have 1.5GB of DDR400Mhz in my AMD Athlon...but if I were to use the 512x3 I would end up with 1,536...however the system recogizes 1,024 as 1GB so anything else is 1GB+512....
I retract my statement about 1,408....because I didn't figure in Operating System recognition of Memory...
again Aegis
1GB+(for example 512MB) equals 1.5GB
I admit my mistake,can you admit you were wrong aegis??
Whatever aegis...all I know is that there is 1.38GB of memory..that is if you follow the common method of 512x2=1024 plus 384(that's 128-256)
Follow this, 1GB plus 384MB=1.38
No. That doesn't follow unless you round up to two significant decimal places as Apple have done. Fair enough I guess if a little cheeky on their part as it inflates the value by a whole .005GB.
Quote:
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
Now most people say 1,024MB of SDRAM..that's a GB of Ram...following the math of 1024 bytes equal a kilobyte and 1024 kilobytes equal a Megabyte and 1024 Megabytes equal a Gigabyte...
Agreed, because 'most people' would be spot on correct.
Quote:
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
anything less than 1024, doesn't mean it's rounded up to the next unit..
Why in the world do you keep saying "it's 1.375" that's if your using a calculator and divide 1408 by 1024...then you end up with 1.375
Because I'm not confusing Base 2 with Base 10 and using a _decimal_ point as a _decimal_ point not some delimiter between GB and MB.
1408MB = 1.375GB if G = 1024. Your RAM adds up to exactly 1408MB.
Quote:
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
However according to the computer..it has 1.384GB of SDRAM
Wow! it's grown another .004 of a GB since you last looked. Or are you confusing number systems again?
Quote:
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
System Software converts 1024 into 1GB..anything added to that makes it 1GB+whatever....ie 1024MB+256MB=1.25GB
No, No, No.
1024MB + 256MB = 1280MB
1280 / 1024 = 1.25 exactly.
No magic there - just basic maths.
Quote:
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
I have 1.5GB of DDR400Mhz in my AMD Athlon...but if I were to use the 512x3 I would end up with 1,536...however the system recogizes 1,024 as 1GB so anything else is 1GB+512....
You do realise that 1024 + 512 = 1536 also.
1536 / 1024 = (surprise, surprise) 1.5 exactly. You're quite good at proving my point.
Quote:
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
I retract my statement about 1,408....because I didn't figure in Operating System recognition of Memory...
Huh?
Quote:
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
again Aegis
1GB+(for example 512MB) equals 1.5GB
I admit my mistake,can you admit you were wrong aegis??
LOL!
1GB + 512MB = 1024MB + 512MB = 1536 MB
1536 / 1024 = 1.5
There's nothing to admit to being wrong about, except maybe arguing with someone who can defy logic even when it's written down for them.
*sigh* i always got top grades in the 'standard maths' subject at high skool. but then i always ended up with the really smart kids doing stupid 'advanced maths' subjects which were bloody useless... i sucked at the 'advanced maths' subjects, particularly in 8th grade we had a female teacher that liked to wear fairly translucent white long trousers, lets just say when she was writing on the blackboard i wasn't looking at the numbers... but i digress
... i guess i am biased towards computer-science-related maths, such as 'standard maths' techniques used in above calculations, base-N, logarithms, trigonometry, vectors and matrices... all that 'theorem' proving shite we did in 'advanced maths' is only useful if you're the russel crowe character in A Beautiful Mind... and look what it did to him...!
umm can someone else confirm or deny Aegis' claim. i'm too tired to look at the calculations, i was just watching the fireworks ...also i think i have distracted myself with memories of my 8th grade 'advanced' maths teacher
when I said the computer (the G4) had 1.38GB..I purposely didn't include the .004 part..
I didn't use the calculator..
and your not following me aegis...
1GB+256=1.25GB. 1GB+512MB=1.51GB 1GB+128=1.12GB (of course I didn't add the .006 to the 256,the .002 to the 512 and .008 to the 128...)
DON'T USE THE CALCULATOR..just use the MegaByte description..
that's the problem aegis,your using the calculator...
DON'T USE IT!!
Run System Profiler you nub..
of course if your imac had 1GB+256MB you would have 1.25GB
are you done Aegis?
Ugh, I'm not using a calculator. It's basic kindergarten maths! Dividing 1024 by 128 doesn't require a calculator. Apart from that any programmer would know binary without thinking! Being an ex-ASM programmer it's engrained in my psyche.
I'm following you perfectly but you're totally wrong. Didn't you do decimal fractions at school? Never did binary maths either?
1GB+256MB = 1.25GB because 256MB is 0.25GB exactly, not 0.256GB
1GB+512MB is not 1.51GB, it's 1.5GB because 512MB is 0.5GB exactly.
1GB+128MB is not 1.12GB, it's 1.125 because 128MB is 0.125GB exactly. It's an eighth of a GB exactly. Apple would probably round it up to 1.3GB - I don't know as I don't have one and an eighth of a GB of RAM
Stop trying to use the decimal system to represent base 2 multiples and you'll be fine or stick to decimal and learn how to divide.
Comments
Originally posted by sunilraman
yup it seems like a 60% market share MUSIC company, which it is...
nah, just messing with you, i know what ya mean
you know, 10 years from now, when the teenagers grow up, there'll be those 20-somethings all like, hey, yeah, i think apple started off making iPods then they got into making computers and stuff
it will be up to us old skool kids
Originally posted by melgross
Well since 75% of all iPods are sold here, and a survey by Merrill Lynch said that the store experience was of importance, I beg to differ.
Did you only read the last half of the second sentence? What about the rest of what I said? Read the first sentence and the first part of the second and then comment.
Obviously you and Merrill Lynch are wrong, IN EUROPE, since we have no Apple Stores except in London yet sales (not revenue) have increased 33.2%.
I'm not saying it's not important, but it's the products that are attracting people to Apple now, not the stores. If there is any halo effect, it's from positive experiences with good Apple products like the iPod and now good inexpensive products like the Mac Mini and iMacG5.
Originally posted by the cool gut
Yeah, but they've always had great products. I think the stores are important to educate people. I also think that because some of these stores are so elaborite, that Apple doesn't really seem like this >3% market share computer company.
You must have quite a short term memory. I didn't buy a Mac until 2001 because the products weren't up to scratch and saddled with an OS that should have been pensioned off 5 years earlier. They were also extremely expensive by comparison.
Now, they are competitively priced, have the best OS and come bundled with a load of very useful applications instead of the rubbish you usually get bundled with a PC.
In Europe they also had almost zero high street presence. Thanks to the iMac and iPod that is changing. And that's not because we have Apple stores.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Obviously you and Merrill Lynch are wrong, IN EUROPE, since we have no Apple Stores except in London yet sales (not revenue) have increased 33.2%.
I'm not saying it's not important, but it's the products that are attracting people to Apple now, not the stores. If there is any halo effect, it's from positive experiences with good Apple products like the iPod and now good inexpensive products like the Mac Mini and iMacG5.
Again, you didn't read my post too well. I said that for those WHO DID GO TO THE STORES. That obviously doesn't include those who DIDN'T go.
I did first mention the software and the hardware, perhaps in Europe reading is something that has been superceeded by those little pictures over everything?
Originally posted by aegisdesign
You must have quite a short term memory. I didn't buy a Mac until 2001 because the products weren't up to scratch and saddled with an OS that should have been pensioned off 5 years earlier. They were also extremely expensive by comparison.
Now, they are competitively priced, have the best OS and come bundled with a load of very useful applications instead of the rubbish you usually get bundled with a PC.
In Europe they also had almost zero high street presence. Thanks to the iMac and iPod that is changing. And that's not because we have Apple stores.
I really don't think we're impressed about when you first bought your Mac. I bought my first one in 1991, and despite what you may think, those of us who made money professionally with our computers didn't think that the products weren't "up to scratch" or that the OS pensionable. Business's such as mine were reluctant to move to X. Believe me, there was no rush.
I found a nice article about the halo effect. (In this case it was the iPod and not the store experience)
Halo effect
The battery was IMO designed to die after so long a period..thereby making you purchase a new ipod or send it to someone to haxor and replace with a good battery..or allah forbid, you send it to apple themselves...
Now my flash based RCA player's batteries die after a long period of time,and when that happens I buy some more Duracells.
Re aegis's post about my powermac G4
I clicked on the blue apple,went to About This Mac
Processor 450 Mhz PowerPC G4
Memory 1.38GB SDRAM
DIMM0/J21 SIZE 512MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM1/J22 SIZE 512MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM2/J23 SIZE 128MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM3/J24 SIZE 256MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC100
bringing the total to 1.38GB SDRAM. ur a nub aegis.
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
I know that my cousin in the Navy,bought a ipod...he didn't like it.
The battery was IMO designed to die after so long a period..thereby making you purchase a new ipod or send it to someone to haxor and replace with a good battery..or allah forbid, you send it to apple themselves...
Do people still keep bitching about iPod batteries? Good grief.
IME of Applecare, they took 4 days to repair an iBook screen door to door. I can't imagine replacing a battery would be such a big deal.
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
Now my flash based RCA player's batteries die after a long period of time,and when that happens I buy some more Duracells.
A battery is a battery is a battery. They don't have some pre-programmed life span in them. They last x hours under situation y regardless of them being from Apple or Duracell. If y changes, so does x. For most people x is a couple of years so what's the big deal?
My Palm Vx has a battery in it I can't replace without sending it back. So does my UPS. Yet I don't see websites devoted to the Palm Battery problem or the APC UPS problem.
Then again, since I bought those products knowing full well the battery was built in but that they were the best product regardless, I've no right to bitch.
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
Re aegis's post about my powermac G4
I clicked on the blue apple,went to About This Mac
Processor 450 Mhz PowerPC G4
Memory 1.38GB SDRAM
DIMM0/J21 SIZE 512MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM1/J22 SIZE 512MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM2/J23 SIZE 128MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC133
DIMM3/J24 SIZE 256MB TYPE SDRAM SPEED PC100
bringing the total to 1.38GB SDRAM. ur a nub aegis.
LOL! it's rounded your memory up.
You actually only have 1.375GB. 'Do the Math' as USAians are often heard to say causing us Brits to wonder why they don't do spelling too. It's 'Maths' dog nabbit. ;-)
Originally posted by aegisdesign
'Do the Math' as USAians are often heard to say causing us Brits to wonder why they don't do spelling too. It's 'Maths' dog nabbit. ;-)
while y'all may not suspect it i was taught the Queen's English at school, and she would prefer us to say, instead of "do da math":
"One would be wise to perform various mathematical calculations before making up one's mind"
and yo dawgs check this out, in high school my "math" or "maths" textbooks actually said Mathematics on the cover
old skool
bonus points for anyone that guesses where i did high skool. hint: is not UK, Ireland, Europe, or USA.
I would venture a guess of Australia.
like Dr. House said "You put the Queen on your money, you're British"
Was your UPS battery so cheap-ass that it was basically designed to fail after a period of time?
Ibook? what's that?...oh yes..wannabe Titanium Powerbook..now I remember.
last time i checked you didnt get 1.375GB from 512x2, 256, and
128..calculated it's 1.408GB
512
512
256
128 equals
1,408
but then again it's the mac os x..so there is some automatically taken away,reserved for system resources, blah blah blah
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
Was your UPS battery so cheap-ass that it was basically designed to fail after a period of time?
No, You send it back for a new battery.
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
Ibook? what's that?...oh yes..wannabe Titanium Powerbook..now I remember.
Nothing of the sort. It's an iBook. G3 500Mhz, white and plastic with a 12" screen. I can assure you it's not trying to be a wannabe anything. It does get better wifi reception than a TiBook though, and better battery life, which was useful at the time plus the 12" Powerbook hadn't been released then and the Ti was too big and too pricey.
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
last time i checked you didnt get 1.375GB from 512x2, 256, and
128..calculated it's 1.408GB
512
512
256
128 equals
1,408
but then again it's the mac os x..so there is some automatically taken away,reserved for system resources, blah blah blah
Give a man a rope, and he'll hang himself by it. Do the math again.
1 GB = 1024MB
Therefore 1408MB = 1.375GB (or 1.38 if you're Apple and round up)
It's got nothing to do with memory being taken away for system resources - utter tosh.
My iBook with 640MB says 640MB. My iMac with 1GB (2x 512MB) says 1GB, not 1.024 GB. ;-)
I'd have thought you'd be better off ditching the 128MB PC100 RAM as it's probably conflicting with the PC133 RAM and introducing extra wait states. It's generally not an idea to mix the two though it may depend on the model.
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
back in the day in grade-school the textbook for math said mathematics.
I would venture a guess of Australia.
like Dr. House said "You put the Queen on your money, you're British"
.....
good try. but it was one of the other colonies
**his south-east-asia history lecture over, sunilraman steps aside to continue watching the mudslinging between Aegis and Alaskanblacklab**
Originally posted by sunilraman
sunilraman steps aside to continue watching the mudslinging between Aegis and Alaskanblacklab**
Sorry, Is this the right room for an argument? I did pay for the full 30 minutes.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Sorry, Is this the right room for an argument? I did pay for the full 30 minutes.
yes, please continue, i paid for the full hour.
Whatever aegis...all I know is that there is 1.38GB of memory..that is if you follow the common method of 512x2=1024 plus 384(that's 128-256)
Follow this, 1GB plus 384MB=1.38
Now most people say 1,024MB of SDRAM..that's a GB of Ram...following the math of 1024 bytes equal a kilobyte and 1024 kilobytes equal a Megabyte and 1024 Megabytes equal a Gigabyte...
anything less than 1024, doesn't mean it's rounded up to the next unit..
Why in the world do you keep saying "it's 1.375" that's if your using a calculator and divide 1408 by 1024...then you end up with 1.375
However according to the computer..it has 1.384GB of SDRAM
System Software converts 1024 into 1GB..anything added to that makes it 1GB+whatever....ie 1024MB+256MB=1.25GB
I have 1.5GB of DDR400Mhz in my AMD Athlon...but if I were to use the 512x3 I would end up with 1,536...however the system recogizes 1,024 as 1GB so anything else is 1GB+512....
I retract my statement about 1,408....because I didn't figure in Operating System recognition of Memory...
again Aegis
1GB+(for example 512MB) equals 1.5GB
I admit my mistake,can you admit you were wrong aegis??
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
May as well give the masses their paid time...
Whatever aegis...all I know is that there is 1.38GB of memory..that is if you follow the common method of 512x2=1024 plus 384(that's 128-256)
Follow this, 1GB plus 384MB=1.38
No. That doesn't follow unless you round up to two significant decimal places as Apple have done. Fair enough I guess if a little cheeky on their part as it inflates the value by a whole .005GB.
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
Now most people say 1,024MB of SDRAM..that's a GB of Ram...following the math of 1024 bytes equal a kilobyte and 1024 kilobytes equal a Megabyte and 1024 Megabytes equal a Gigabyte...
Agreed, because 'most people' would be spot on correct.
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
anything less than 1024, doesn't mean it's rounded up to the next unit..
Why in the world do you keep saying "it's 1.375" that's if your using a calculator and divide 1408 by 1024...then you end up with 1.375
Because I'm not confusing Base 2 with Base 10 and using a _decimal_ point as a _decimal_ point not some delimiter between GB and MB.
1408MB = 1.375GB if G = 1024. Your RAM adds up to exactly 1408MB.
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
However according to the computer..it has 1.384GB of SDRAM
Wow! it's grown another .004 of a GB since you last looked. Or are you confusing number systems again?
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
System Software converts 1024 into 1GB..anything added to that makes it 1GB+whatever....ie 1024MB+256MB=1.25GB
No, No, No.
1024MB + 256MB = 1280MB
1280 / 1024 = 1.25 exactly.
No magic there - just basic maths.
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
I have 1.5GB of DDR400Mhz in my AMD Athlon...but if I were to use the 512x3 I would end up with 1,536...however the system recogizes 1,024 as 1GB so anything else is 1GB+512....
You do realise that 1024 + 512 = 1536 also.
1536 / 1024 = (surprise, surprise) 1.5 exactly. You're quite good at proving my point.
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
I retract my statement about 1,408....because I didn't figure in Operating System recognition of Memory...
Huh?
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
again Aegis
1GB+(for example 512MB) equals 1.5GB
I admit my mistake,can you admit you were wrong aegis??
LOL!
1GB + 512MB = 1024MB + 512MB = 1536 MB
1536 / 1024 = 1.5
There's nothing to admit to being wrong about, except maybe arguing with someone who can defy logic even when it's written down for them.
*sigh* i always got top grades in the 'standard maths' subject at high skool. but then i always ended up with the really smart kids doing stupid 'advanced maths' subjects which were bloody useless... i sucked at the 'advanced maths' subjects, particularly in 8th grade we had a female teacher that liked to wear fairly translucent white long trousers, lets just say when she was writing on the blackboard i wasn't looking at the numbers... but i digress
... i guess i am biased towards computer-science-related maths, such as 'standard maths' techniques used in above calculations, base-N, logarithms, trigonometry, vectors and matrices... all that 'theorem' proving shite we did in 'advanced maths' is only useful if you're the russel crowe character in A Beautiful Mind... and look what it did to him...!
umm can someone else confirm or deny Aegis' claim. i'm too tired to look at the calculations, i was just watching the fireworks
I didn't use the calculator..
and your not following me aegis...
1GB+256=1.25GB. 1GB+512MB=1.51GB 1GB+128=1.12GB (of course I didn't add the .006 to the 256,the .002 to the 512 and .008 to the 128...)
DON'T USE THE CALCULATOR..just use the MegaByte description..
that's the problem aegis,your using the calculator...
DON'T USE IT!!
Run System Profiler you nub..
of course if your imac had 1GB+256MB you would have 1.25GB
are you done Aegis?
Originally posted by alaskanblacklab
when I said the computer (the G4) had 1.38GB..I purposely didn't include the .004 part..
I didn't use the calculator..
and your not following me aegis...
1GB+256=1.25GB. 1GB+512MB=1.51GB 1GB+128=1.12GB (of course I didn't add the .006 to the 256,the .002 to the 512 and .008 to the 128...)
DON'T USE THE CALCULATOR..just use the MegaByte description..
that's the problem aegis,your using the calculator...
DON'T USE IT!!
Run System Profiler you nub..
of course if your imac had 1GB+256MB you would have 1.25GB
are you done Aegis?
Ugh, I'm not using a calculator. It's basic kindergarten maths! Dividing 1024 by 128 doesn't require a calculator. Apart from that any programmer would know binary without thinking! Being an ex-ASM programmer it's engrained in my psyche.
I'm following you perfectly but you're totally wrong. Didn't you do decimal fractions at school? Never did binary maths either?
1GB+256MB = 1.25GB because 256MB is 0.25GB exactly, not 0.256GB
1GB+512MB is not 1.51GB, it's 1.5GB because 512MB is 0.5GB exactly.
1GB+128MB is not 1.12GB, it's 1.125 because 128MB is 0.125GB exactly. It's an eighth of a GB exactly. Apple would probably round it up to 1.3GB - I don't know as I don't have one and an eighth of a GB of RAM
Stop trying to use the decimal system to represent base 2 multiples and you'll be fine or stick to decimal and learn how to divide.