new UI has a downside!
the friggin ammount of space it takes up. i first noticed this when i saw the touch on apple.com the 8gb nano holds 2000 songs, and the 8gb touch only holds 1750 songs. but i figured hey its got OSX and alot fo stuff to pack in. but then today i bought a nano and out of 8gb only 7.4gb is availabe. now that seems like alot of space used up for the new UI. if thats the case apple needs to start packin in an extra .5gb for the OS so i actually get the space im paying for.
Comments
good story.
Good post Buddha... if i know one thing, Buddha is always right. Don't believe me? read Siddartha
2 gig nano, 8 gig, 7.2 gig avail ~~
It's just marketing people work in base 10. Computing people work in base 2.
A marketing gigabyte = 10^9 = 1,000,000,000 bytes.
A computing gigabyte = 2^30 = 1,073,741,824 bytes.
An operating system works with the computing gigabyte, so the 8,000,000,000 bytes you've paid for comes out as 7.45 GB.
It's a weasley way of expressing capacity (literally 8 billion bytes) but the whole drive industry does it.
customer: good morning to you, too!
sales guy: how can i help you?
customer: i would like to buy a PC2-5300 DDR2 1'073'741'824 bytes ram-modul
sales guy: you want a what?
customer: gimme one gig ram for a macbook pro
sales guy: here ya go!
You are getting 8 GB.
It's just marketing people work in base 10. Computing people work in base 2.
A marketing gigabyte = 10^9 = 1,000,000,000 bytes.
A computing gigabyte = 2^30 = 1,073,741,824 bytes.
An operating system works with the computing gigabyte, so the 8,000,000,000 bytes you've paid for comes out as 7.45 GB.
It's a weasley way of expressing capacity (literally 8 billion bytes) but the whole drive industry does it.
I hate to dredge this up again, but... oh who am I kidding, I live for this crap.
8GB is 8*10^9 bytes. It is indeed the correct and accurate measure of the drive's capacity.
7.45 *GiB*, or 7.45 * 2^30, is also a correct and accurate measure of the drive's capacity.
7.45*GB* is not.
It's the OS that is reporting the erroneous amount by using the wrong &*(%$@% units. The drive industry is actually not only not being weasely, but is being honest and accurate. Consumers are just used to the OS lying to them.
I'm all for requiring marketing material to use the most specific unit possible. It would probably be enough to finally shift the colloquial usage of GB to no longer be ambiguous.
"A GiB is a little bigger than a GB so there are slightly less of them. It's like yards and meters."