2048 GB Hard Disk

In message , G.
Morgan writes:
Char Jackson wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 14:26:13 +0100, Ed Cryer
wrote:

One thing I forgot to mention; we do it all in style! We're a
constitutional monarchy, when God alone knows just what would happen if
the Queen said "no" to just one little Parliamentary suggestion.
We have royal style, though. All that pageantry and riding in old
carriages brings in the bucks and respect. Did you see the concert
outside Buckingham Palace for the Jubilee? Man, what a concert! Who else
in the world could get a gig like that together?
It works, and it's working better and better the further we get away
from Dianagate.

I'm probably in the minority, but I'm embarrassed for you guys. A
"royal family" may have been unavoidable a thousand years ago, but I
don't know why you put up with it now. Willingly, even.

I don't think you're in a minority at all. This US citizen finds
the notion of 'royalty' repugnant, just like the founders of this
great nation.

I think the royalty you imagine isn't the sort we have (which is mostly
ceremonial, though I think the advisory aspect is important too). And I
think your founders were more concerned about religious persecution (and
unrepresentative taxation).

We have a bunch of teen girls (and even mature women) in the US
that thinks it's cool from the pageantry aspect. They apparently
don't understand the 'Royal Monarchies' history as I know it, a
brutal dictatorship with heavy Catholic church influence.


If you think it's Catholic influenced, you don't know it very well (-:!
[Henry VIII split from them.]





--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"I hate the guys that criticize the enterprise of other guys whose enterprise
has made them rise above the guys who criticize!" (W9BRD, former editor of
"How's DX?" column in "QST")

In message , Gene E. Bloch
writes:
On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 15:50:02 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

As an aside, I just canceled the sending of this message to point out
that my spell checker (in Forte Agent) flagged KiB as a spelling
error, but accepts KB.

My spell checker keeps me alert...

But I'm too lazy to find out whether I can fix it (or its dictionary) or
to find out whether I can find and connect another checker :-)

When it pops up to tell it thinks something's wrong, there should be an
"add to dictionary" button. Or, if you're just using it in
red-wavy-underline mode, right-clicking on such a word should give you
such an option.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"I hate the guys that criticize the enterprise of other guys whose enterprise
has made them rise above the guys who criticize!" (W9BRD, former editor of
"How's DX?" column in "QST")

In message , Char Jackson
writes:
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 22:43:50 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

In message , Char Jackson
writes:

Fortunately, most of us aren't disk drive manufacturers, so for us
it's pretty easy.

Yes, but unfortunately, we have to buy from drive manufacturers (and
most resellers maintain the decimal descriptions).

I'll take your word for the situation being unfortunate. That's not a
conclusion I would have arrived at by myself.

I meant, unfortunate that we have to deal with the only branch of the
industry who do not use binary powers (and do not, in a misleading
manner). Obviously, not that we have do buy from them at all.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"I hate the guys that criticize the enterprise of other guys whose enterprise
has made them rise above the guys who criticize!" (W9BRD, former editor of
"How's DX?" column in "QST")

G. Morgan wrote:

Church of England = Catholics !

HUH!?

http://www.churchofengland.org/about-us/history.aspx

If the CofE are catholic, why would they list catholics as one of the
other churches they work with?

http://www.churchofengland.org/about...s/england.aspx

On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 07:47:16 +0100, John Williamson wrote:

Stan Brown wrote:

And as for the Queen saying no to legislation, that hasn't happened
for three hundred and five years now, and every royal knows it's
constitutionally impossible. If Parliament passes a bill for her own
deposition, she has no choice but to sign it.

It was rumoured that one particularly unpopular and unworkable bill did
not meet with the Queen's approval, a quiet word was said to Mrs.
Thatcher (Something along the lines of "Do you think that's agood
idea?", and the bill was quietly and unobtrusively dropped.

Given the well documented antagonism between the Queen and Mrs.
Thatcher, I find that hard to believe.

But it's one thing for the Queen to express doubts in private. If
such a conversation had indeed taken place, and Mrs. Thatcher had
decided to press on, the Queen would have had to acqiesce, without
even the right to say anything publicly about disapproving of the
legislation.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...

Ed Cryer wrote:


I have a 2TB internal drive, partitioned thus;
17GB
100GB
922.95GB
922.97GB
=
1962.92GB in all.

Don't forget that manufacturers give disk size in decimal units, but
when you look at it in the computer you'll see binary units.

If the manufacturer says the disk in 2TB, that's 2 times 10**12 =
2,000,000,000,000 bytes. But a binary terabyte is 2**30 =
1,099,511,627,776 bytes. Divide that into the decimal measure and
you've got something like 1.8 (binary) terabytes.

And 2**30 == 1,073,741,824 bytes in a binary Gigabyte. That two
terabyte disk has 1,862.6 binary gigabytes.

--
Tim Slattery

On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 07:17:33 -0400, Stan Brown wrote:

On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 07:47:16 +0100, John Williamson wrote:

Stan Brown wrote:

And as for the Queen saying no to legislation, that hasn't happened
for three hundred and five years now, and every royal knows it's
constitutionally impossible. If Parliament passes a bill for her own
deposition, she has no choice but to sign it.

It was rumoured that one particularly unpopular and unworkable bill did
not meet with the Queen's approval, a quiet word was said to Mrs.
Thatcher (Something along the lines of "Do you think that's agood
idea?", and the bill was quietly and unobtrusively dropped.

Given the well documented antagonism between the Queen and Mrs.
Thatcher, I find that hard to believe.

But it's one thing for the Queen to express doubts in private. If
such a conversation had indeed taken place, and Mrs. Thatcher had
decided to press on, the Queen would have had to acqiesce, without
even the right to say anything publicly about disapproving of the
legislation.

When the new One Pound coin was introduced
a movement was started to call it "The Maggie",
the reasoning "she was bold, brassy and wanted to be Queen".

Char Jackson wrote:
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 18:47:59 -0500, wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 08:38:56 -0500, wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:

Hmm, I would say the yes answer is indeed correct and I have to marvel
at some of the drawn out responses this simple yes/no question has
generated. The funny things is that most (all?) of the longest replies
failed to give a yes/no answer at all. A forest versus trees thing, I
suppose.

Understand that the OP says 2 TB (decimal prefix), not 2 TiB (binary
prefix, aka tebibyte or TiB).snip

Understand that the OP asked a simple question. Why read more into it
than what was given? What was in that question that prompted a few of
you to launch into a scientific and technical discussion of capacity
measurements? Does "2048GB" refer to a 1TB drive? No. Does it refer to
a 3TB drive? No. Does it refer to a 2TB drive. Obviously, yes, so why
not just say yes, which in fact is what some of us did.

Which some of you were wrong and you, as one of them, are now trying to
cover your butt with rationalization.

I guess I was hoping that being obviously right would mean that I
wouldn't have to cover anything. You apparently see it differently.


There's no absolute right or wrong in this question. It's about
different points of view into a muddle of different conventions and
different starting points.
I would have hoped that a denizen of The Land of The Free would have
realised that and not attempted to dictate truth with such a fascist
heavy-handedness.

Ed

"Stan Brown" wrote in message
t...

It was rumoured that one particularly unpopular and unworkable bill did
not meet with the Queen's approval, a quiet word was said to Mrs.
Thatcher (Something along the lines of "Do you think that's agood
idea?", and the bill was quietly and unobtrusively dropped.

Given the well documented antagonism between the Queen and Mrs.
Thatcher, I find that hard to believe.


Well one could just ask the Queen g

The Queen
You can write to Her Majesty at the following address:

Her Majesty The Queen
Buckingham Palace
London SW1A 1AA

General enquiries can be made by telephone during working hours: (+44) (0)20
7930 4832.


--
....winston
msft mvp mail

On 11/06/2012 4:30 PM, Irwell wrote:
On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 07:17:33 -0400, Stan Brown wrote:

On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 07:47:16 +0100, John Williamson wrote:

Stan Brown wrote:

And as for the Queen saying no to legislation, that hasn't happened
for three hundred and five years now, and every royal knows it's
constitutionally impossible. If Parliament passes a bill for her own
deposition, she has no choice but to sign it.

It was rumoured that one particularly unpopular and unworkable bill did
not meet with the Queen's approval, a quiet word was said to Mrs.
Thatcher (Something along the lines of "Do you think that's agood
idea?", and the bill was quietly and unobtrusively dropped.

Given the well documented antagonism between the Queen and Mrs.
Thatcher, I find that hard to believe.

But it's one thing for the Queen to express doubts in private. If
such a conversation had indeed taken place, and Mrs. Thatcher had
decided to press on, the Queen would have had to acqiesce, without
even the right to say anything publicly about disapproving of the
legislation.

When the new One Pound coin was introduced
a movement was started to call it "The Maggie",
the reasoning "she was bold, brassy and wanted to be Queen".

Similarly, when the 50p piece came out it was known as the Wilson bit
(after Harold, the PM of course) since it was two-faced, seven sided and
no use to anyone.

--
Bob
Tetbury, Gloucestershire, UK


It has been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have
learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first." - Ronald Reagan

On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 08:37:03 +0100, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

In message , Gene E. Bloch
writes:
On Sat, 09 Jun 2012 15:50:02 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

As an aside, I just canceled the sending of this message to point out
that my spell checker (in Forte Agent) flagged KiB as a spelling
error, but accepts KB.

My spell checker keeps me alert...

But to find out whether I can fix it (or its dictionary) or
to find out whether I can find and connect another checker :-)

When it pops up to tell it thinks something's wrong, there should be an
"add to dictionary" button. Or, if you're just using it in
red-wavy-underline mode, right-clicking on such a word should give you
such an option.

Translation (to clarify what I said above): "I'm too lazy" = "I don't
care enough".

Not to mention that there are several spell-checkers on this system,
which kind of makes it not very productive to make changes in only one
of them.

Also, and really much more pertinent, for this newsreader in particular,
the vagaries of the spell-checker go way beyond just what it finds or
fails to find in the dictionary.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 16:43:52 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 16:22:59 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

I have known for years that to disk manufacturers, 1K is 1000, not 1024,
and the same for powers of that value. So I expect to get only
2000000000000 bytes when I buy a 2TB drive. (If I got the number of
zeros wrong, please be so kind as to think of it as though I got it
right.)

You got the number of zeroes right, but if you wanted me to check g
you should have put commas in.

You forgot how mean I am.

I left the commas out on purpose. And I'm not kidding: omitting them is
related to my so-called sense of humor.

Thanks for checking :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:06:40 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 16:43:52 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 16:22:59 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

I have known for years that to disk manufacturers, 1K is 1000, not 1024,
and the same for powers of that value. So I expect to get only
2000000000000 bytes when I buy a 2TB drive. (If I got the number of
zeros wrong, please be so kind as to think of it as though I got it
right.)

You got the number of zeroes right, but if you wanted me to check g
you should have put commas in.

You forgot how mean I am.

I left the commas out on purpose. And I'm not kidding: omitting them is
related to my so-called sense of humor.


OK, I'm not laughing out loud, but I'm at least smiling.

On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:52:28 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Mon, 11 Jun 2012 14:06:40 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 16:43:52 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 16:22:59 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

I have known for years that to disk manufacturers, 1K is 1000, not 1024,
and the same for powers of that value. So I expect to get only
2000000000000 bytes when I buy a 2TB drive. (If I got the number of
zeros wrong, please be so kind as to think of it as though I got it
right.)

You got the number of zeroes right, but if you wanted me to check g
you should have put commas in.

You forgot how mean I am.

I left the commas out on purpose. And I'm not kidding: omitting them is
related to my so-called sense of humor.

OK, I'm not laughing out loud, but I'm at least smiling.

Even a slight smile helps...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

In message , Irwell
writes:
[]
When the new One Pound coin was introduced
a movement was started to call it "The Maggie",
the reasoning "she was bold, brassy and wanted to be Queen".

Come on, get it right: "It was thick, brassy, and thought it was a
sovereign." (Which, for those that don't know, was a gold coin.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)Ar@T0H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

People wear anoraks because it's cold outside and it rains, not to annoy the
editors of style magazines. - Ben Elton, Radio Times 18-24 April 1998