iPod Space


Recommended Posts

  cyclingplatypus said:
The 30GB one has 27.8GB of space (according to the iPod itself), in iTunes it comes out to 27.88GB (13.67GB used - 14.21GB free).
  psgamer0921 said:
The 60GB one is really about 55.87. If you want a close estimate of a hard drive's real space, take the advertised space and multiply it by 0.9313225.
Thank you.
Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/411486-ipod-space/#findComment-586964117
Share on other sites

  psgamer0921 said:

The 60GB one is really about 55.87. If you want a close estimate of a hard drive's real space, take the advertised space and multiply it by 0.9313225.

Is that only for GB? So if i wanted to know the real space on a 1TB drive i would need to convert TB>GB?

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/411486-ipod-space/#findComment-586964128
Share on other sites

  Hell-In-A-Handbasket said:

The diffrence in space is how FAT/Window's handles space, if format'd for MAC, the space would actually be teh size on the back of the iPod

Nope, both operating systems address one gig as 1024mb, and all hardware creators address is as 1000mb

  mikeS said:

1GB = 1024MB on Windows so 30*1000/1024 = 29.29GB

Don't know where you got your numbers, but my 30gig, 5G iPod has about 27.8gb of space.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/411486-ipod-space/#findComment-586969301
Share on other sites

  psgamer0921 said:

The 60GB one is really about 55.87. If you want a close estimate of a hard drive's real space, take the advertised space and multiply it by 0.9313225.

27.3g or so here, on a mac.

  Quote
If you want a close estimate of a hard drive's real space, take the advertised space and multiply it by 0.9313225.

how'd you come up w/ that? I noticed like all HDDs are off by about 10%, and WHY are they off by that much? It always ****es me off :(

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/411486-ipod-space/#findComment-586979073
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Sure - let's expand on that a bit then to try and be of more help. It's not a one-time use code that can be gamed - each time the proof is required a new transaction takes place to go through the "proof" process. It's a unique step each time. Not a...reusable QR code or pass so to speak. Each time proof is required, a new cryptographic transaction is required. The tricky part here, is trusted issuers. That is still needed. Since this is open source - it doe snot mean that Google has to be the issuer. Google has just provided the tooling to do this, but they don't store the data - to be clear. Presumably, again - you would have some type of government or state issued digital ID that supports the zero-knowledge functions. Effectively, the same entities today that have your information and you (assumingly trust) would continue to have it, it would just be able to be leveraged in a more private manner when you go somewhere or interact with anything requireing age verification. To fake this, someone would need to have a legitimate private key tied to an actual real identity. Cryptographic checks using zero-knowledge would fail otherwise - and again - it can't be used over and over again. Can someone screw up and somehow leak that private key? Sure. No different than leaking your password to your private accounts - a password change would be necessary and let's hope that future implementation of ZKP-based identities bake in some kind of 2FA/MFA for better security. There's not much to hack here, as I said - really comes down to the issuer. If you receive this from the government, none of your real data gets sent to say "MyHubOfChoice.com" when doing age verification - the protocol is only designed to say "Yes - I meet the requirement." Reality is, this keeps you more anonymous than you could ever be today with age verification without having to share anything else about you. However, it's worth stating that anonymity isn't the goal with ZKP - it's removing disclosure. True anonymity is more difficult, as how everything works today to an extent you need to prove who you are with a "trusted" source (ie government/state issued ID). And that data, at the end of the day, does sit in a centralized db as designed. Could that change in the future, perhaps. But the goal of this is just to not have to hand over anymore information than you need to.
    • Oh yeah because its SO hard to duplicate some of the server's logic on the client
    • Software versions increase while older ones are deprecated. This is nothing new, except now it's not included with Windows. Do you not upgrade your software? The biggest issue for me living with 2.0 was that the new versions never upgraded it, it installed side-by-side. I accidentally launched the shite version more than once on accident.
    • They would have to include .NET (not be to be confused with legacy .NET Framework), and they don't. That might be why...dunno. Or maybe because it's open source (guessing)? It's kind of nice to have it separated from the OS.
    • the version 7 needs to be installed separately, why not include it in windows 11 release ?
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Year In
      K.I.S.S. earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      solidox earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      solidox earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Devesh Beri earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      956400 earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      447
    2. 2
      ATLien_0
      162
    3. 3
      +FloatingFatMan
      147
    4. 4
      Nick H.
      66
    5. 5
      +thexfile
      61
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!