Dan Knight
- 2006.07.05
Misleading Hard Drive Capacity and the Western
Digital Settlement
Hi. Have you heard the Western Digital drive case on minus 7%
capacity? No wonder my drive on the my PC, says 75 GB instead of 80
GB. New Macs have this brand, I think. Is it a good choice to opt
out for the settlement of Retrospect software or just accept it?
They should really define 1 GB as exactly that. Western
Digital has a point there, though.
Also, I'm looking for a digicam. What's a good cam that's not
too much, that you've tried, that had sharp pictures? As far as I
know sharp pictures are not dependent on how much resolution, that
the bigger resolution you take, the larger the pictures but not
necessarily the most detailed. I heard that dpi should be more
considered than the MP. Is this accurate? At least this is what I
know from reading the tutorial on Photoshop and Illustrator. I want
to digicam now so I can photograph my room, the design in it, other
innovations, some inventions maybe, I designed to be submitted to
manufacturers online. Thanks.
God bless,
Alvin
Alvin, there has always been a discrepancy between
hard drive capacity when measured in millions or billions of bytes
and when rated in megabytes or gigabytes.
For better or worse - and I agree with you that
it's worse - drives are always advertised using MB or GB that are
decimal, not binary. That is, an 80 GB hard drive has 80 billion
bytes of capacity. That's decimal capacity. In binary, a gigabyte
is more than a billion bytes - 1,073,741,824 bytes to be exact.
Thus, 80 decimal GB = 74.5 binary GB (which is what most computer's
operating systems report), and all the hard drive boxes I've seen
in stores clarifies this.
Is it deceptive? Are you being cheated out of 7%
of your storage space? Not really. It's an industry standard, so
whether you're buying a Western Digital, Hitachi, Samsung, or other
brand of hard drive, all 80 GB drives will give you 80 billion
bytes of storage.
The lawsuit over this discrepancy is a perfect
example of what's wrong with the legal system today: The lawyers
get rich ($500,000 richer in this case), the companies offer
something that benefits them and is nearly worthless and scarcely
related as compensation (favorite example: old Kodak settlements
that gave you discount coupons for Kodak film), the end user is no
better off, and the industry changes from one standard way of
measuring things to another, as in the TV/computer monitor suit of
some years back, which only serves to confuse the market for older
product.
If you want a copy of Retrospect and are eligible
to claim it, by all means go for it. Me, I'd rather pay for and use
SuperDuper any day of
the week. (I say this as someone who use Retrospect for 10
years.)
Dan
Long Term Mac Value
Dear Dan and Low End Mac folks:
I love Low End Mac. I'm often teased by my G5/Core Duo-wielding
friends, but they just don't get it.
I wanted to tell you about something I realized regarding Macs
and costs - and ask if it still holds true.
At my university ('student worker') I have a 400 MHz G4 Sawtooth in my cube. The
graphic design group said it couldn't keep up, had hardware issues,
and wouldn't work under OS X. I really doubted this. So when I
had a chance, I installed Panther on this well over six year old
machine. "Lucy" is faster than my 1.33 GHz iBook! Or at least it
sure seems like it to me! It is more than capable at running modern
programs, and I haven't had any issues so far. It works too good -
the graphic design group wants it back.
The question is, do you see current Power Macs offering the same
life span and six years from now running a (future) modern OS?
If so, would you say they represent a far greater cost value
than high-end PCs or other less professional Macs?
Also, your page on the Sawtooth was a great find to tell me more
information on this machine - not even Apple.com can match the
information on this site.
The one suggestion I have is the creation an area of the site
that correlates computer specs to OSes. For example, I knew OS
10.3.9 would install on a Sawtooth, but I didn't know how well it
would run: Should I even try? Should I try for Tiger? Or even just
try Jaguar? Would I need a more powerful CPU or more RAM?
Thank you very much,
Clint
Thanks for writing, Clint. Low End Mac has been a
labor of love for over nine years now, starting back when there
were still a fair number of compact Macs and a lot of Mac II family
machines still in use. Except for high-end work (video, huge
Photoshop projects, and the like), almost any Mac should be very
useful 5-6 years after purchase.
As for the future, there are three factors: The
first is the Intel transition, which means we may start seeing
peripherals and software created specifically for Intel-based Macs.
Apple assures us several years of OS X support for PowerPC
Macs, but in 5-6 years OS X could become Intel-only and some
commercial apps may leave PowerPC behind. That said, there's a
wealth of stuff you'll be able to run even if it won't be the
latest and greatest.
The second factor is new hardware features. Just
as older Macs didn't support USB 2.0 at all while Intel-based Macs
can boot from it and Serial ATA (SATA) has replaced Parallel ATA,
we will continue to see improvements in hardware and new
technologies. There may be important technologies that can't be
retrofitted to PowerPC Macs, and the phasing out of Parallel ATA in
favor of SATA may make it harder to find parallel drives in 5-6
years (however, there are already PCI SATA cards for Power
Macs).
The third factor is the computer itself. Apple has
tended to use quality components that don't degrade quickly, so the
life span of a Mac may be 5-10 years. But some of the newer Macs
can get pretty hot inside, which could accelerate component
failure.
In the end, no Mac you ever buy will become less
capable than when it was built - and most Macs can be readily
upgraded with more RAM, bigger hard drive, and (especially in the
case of the Power Mac G4 models) faster CPUs and better video
cards.
Your Sawtooth experience bears this out. The fact
that it seems faster than your 1.33 GHz iBook tells me the Power
Mac probably has a lot more RAM (512 MB is a realistic minimum for
decent performance, and more RAM helps a lot) and a faster hard
drive. For instance, despite my ongoing advice, one of my sons has
a three-year-old 12" PowerBook
G4/867 with just the base 256 MB of RAM and stock hard drive.
My five-year-old 15" PowerBook
G4/400 is much perkier with 10.3 and 10.4 - it has a 5400 rpm
hard drive and 1 GB of RAM to help unleash OS X.
As for the usefulness of Low End Mac, I decided
early on that LEM would be different. Where Apple and a few other
sites are great at listing specs, and where some individuals do a
great job profiling one model or family of Macs, LEM would include
specs plus personal experience plus collected wisdom plus advice
plus warnings plus useful links to those great pages put up by
experts in certain areas.
On top of that, we have several columnists sharing
their thoughts and also manage about 30 different Mac-related email lists, which are a
great searchable and interactive resource supported by very helpful
communities.
That would be the best place to ask for advice,
such as how well 10.3 or 10.4 would run on a 400 MHz Power Mac G4.
We try to offer some general guidelines, but with OS X
performance is as much tied to installed RAM and hard drive
throughput as to CPU speed and video performance. There are few
easy answers with this many variables, and all we can say is to
first address whatever bottleneck is impacting your work.
Dan
Color Classic/LC 575 Upgrades
Hi, it's hard to get rid of the CC. I'd like to upgrade it for not
that much. What is the largest hard disk capacity that it's
compatible with. Is it possible to put two 200 MB SCSI in say the
LC 575 or Color Classic?
Thanks.
God bless,
Alvin
As you may know, you can put an LC 575 motherboard
in a Color Classic, giving it 33 MHz 68040 power. My son Brian has
done the mod, and it only requires a small, simple software patch
to enable the 512 x 384 resolution of the CC's small display.
As for maximum hard drive size, all versions of
the Mac OS that support hard drives can handle up to 2 GB per
partition, so a 200 MB drive won't challenge it at all. I haven's
spent any time inside a CC or LC 575, so I don't know if there's
room for a second hard drive. I think it would tax the CC's power
supply if it did fit, but it may be feasible with the LC 575.
Hard Drive Advice for a Classic II
Howard L. Salter writes:
Hi,
I have tons of software on CD-ROM from OS 6/7 vintage that I'm
not able to adequately use. I just inherited a Mac Classic II to compliment my
son's Performa 6400. We are a
vintage family!
Anyway, I need to know what kind of 50-pin drive I should get to
upgrade the Classic II. What's the max size?
I read this article, How Can I
Upgrade a Classic II or LC II?, but it doesn't address any of
those issues. Please advise: Mounting bracket? HD size?
And where can I get a version of the OS from that vintage (OS
6). I heard that Apple has it on their website, and when I
downloaded it on to my OS 9 machine I had some trouble getting
it to actually decompress on a 720 KB floppy from my Beige Desktop G3.
V/R,
Howard L. Salter
Almost any 50-pin SCSI drive under 2 GB (yes,
gigabytes) will work in any Mac with any OS that supports hard
drives with no trouble at all. If you should find a SCSI drive
larger than that, you would need to partition it for use with
System 6 or early versions of 7. Each partition should be no larger
than 2 GB.
Later versions of System 7.5.x support 4 GB per
partition, and you can have up to 8 partitions on a hard drive. All
of this is probably overkill for your Classic II, which originally
shipped with 40 MB and 80 MB hard drives.
I suggest you check on our Swap List for a used drive in the
160 MB to 700 MB range.
You can download System 6 and 7.5.3
from Apple. System 6.0.8 is available in both 1.4 MB and 800 KB
versions; the Mac doesn't normally support 720 KB floppies. For
simplicity, I suggest using the 1.4 MB floppies, as System 6.0.8
only requires two disks.
You should have no problems at all doing this on
your beige G3.
Dan
Low End Mac Survey
After visiting our current
demographic survey (in which you can be entered into a drawing
for a free iPod nano), Christopher Sandberg writes:
Dan - I very much like your site, but I want to note my
objection to the survey you are currently running. A "mandatory"
question is family income - this seems to be a data item with no
purpose other than to mark a survey respondent's email address as a
prime target for email advertising if the income is over a
particular level. I will not be participating in the survey, and I
will look more carefully at links and materials on your site in the
future. I think you have made a serious mistake in this
promotion.
- Christopher K. Sandberg
Thanks for writing.
We are not conducting this survey ourselves, nor
will we have access to the email addresses received or the
specifics of any individual survey.
I can assure you that this data is only being
collected for demographic purposes. There will be no targeted
emails based on family income or any other factor. The email
addresses are being collected only so Backbeat Media can choose a
winner for the iPod nano and contact that individual.
I am forwarding this to Backbeat with the
suggestion that they move email address collection to a second page
and include a note that this information will not be used except
for the iPod nano drawing.
Thanks for sharing your concerns.
Dan
Dave Hamilton of Backbeat Media writes:
Hi all!
Thanks for your emails, concerns, and suggestions. I did want to
clarify two things, since it seems like you overlooked a few
very important details before deciding there was a
problem.
- Dan's right: The email addresses will not ever be used for
targeted email campaigns or, frankly, for anything other than
selecting a winner for the nano. In fact, you can choose to leave
this 100% completely blank, and no one will mind.
- With income level, we have given you the option of choosing
"Prefer not to state" and plenty of people have done so, as
expected.
Hope this clears things up.
Kind regards,
-Dave
He followed up with this:
After I sent that, I realized I neglected to address yet a third
misconception: We are collecting income level (from those who
choose to answer it) because that is one of the prime questions
advertisers and agencies have about a site on the whole (and in the
aggregate). Knowing this sort of information about a site's overall
readership allows us to find the right advertisers for that site,
keeping the advertising both relevant (for the site and the reader)
and lucrative (for the site publisher, so they can continue to
provide you with the content you've come to know and love).
Hope this helps clarify things for you!
Have a great day!
-Dave
iPod Hard Drive Upgrades
Hi Dan,
After reading about your experience purchasing an older iPod, I
went out and did the same. I won a 2nd generation iPod on eBay that
had been immaculately looked after. It works perfectly with my OS
9.2.2 clamshell iBook and I'm very happy with it.
A couple of weeks ago I purchased a replacement battery from
Sonnet as I was getting about 4.5 hours use out of the original.
The process was very easy and while I was changing it I could see
the little hard drive peeking out behind.
My question is, is it an involved process to replace the HDD? Is
there anywhere that sells these little drives? I imagine people
must go to places other than Apple to have their damaged iPods
looked at, and if it's just a little ribbon cable that needs
disconnecting/connecting then I'd be very interested in having a
go.
Cheers,
Matt
Yes, Matt, it is possible to replace the iPod's
hard drive. I am far from expert in this area - Low End Mac is
primarily about Macs, not iPods - but I know that some services
offer higher capacity hard drives.
I did a
Google search for "replace iPod hard drive" and learned that
you need to make sure that the new drive has the same physical
dimensions as the one it's replacing. Full sized iPods use 1.8"
hard drives, and I'm not sure where is the best place to start
looking for them.
As to what's possible, iPod Mods offers 10 GB drives for
the 1G iPod, 20 GB for 2G, 40 GB for 3G, and 60 GB for 4G. Higher
capacities may be available elsewhere.
Dan
Selling iPods vs. Apple's Recycling
Program
Dan,
Could you please let me know whether Apple is still giving
discounts for used iPods like you stated in your article on
06/22/2005 (Bring Out Your
iPods!). I would also like to know if you have heard of any
online locations that buy used iPods (mostly dead).
Your article was very well written and the tone of voice used
made it seem like I was having an actual conversation. I never
write to writers, but your article seemed like it was written by
someone with a fresh thought... V
Tony V.
Thanks for your kind words, Tony. I try to
maintain a conversational style when writing.
At that time I had hoped to start a Low End iPod website and
launch a used iPod store. We never got past the iPod profiles, and
I suspect that eBay would make it difficult to launch a successful
service that buys used iPods, verifies their usability, cleans them
up a bit, and resells them.
My frustration with the Apple trade-in program was
the ridiculously low value they offered - whatever iPod you had to
trade was worth just 10% of the value of the iPod you wanted to
buy. Sure, it's a great way to get rid of a dead iPod and maybe
even one with a dead (or nearly so) battery, but it's a lousy deal
for a working iPod.
I don't know if Apple has continued the program.
With refurbished iPod shuffles selling for as little as US$49 and
the top-end 60 GB video iPod retailing at US$399, a $5 to $40
trade-in just doesn't sound worthwhile for any working iPod.
Dan
Dan Knight has been publishing Low
End Mac since April 1997. Mailbag columns come from email responses to his Mac Musings, Mac Daniel, Online Tech Journal, and other columns on the site.
