Can Vista use all 4MB of RAM?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rmo555
  • Start date Start date
Lessee....that works out to 18,446,744,073,709,551,615. That's 18
quintillion and change, I think. Is the term for 2^64 bytes "exobyte"?
Click to expand...


An "exabyte" (note the spelling) is 2^60. 2^64 is 18 exabytes.
 
From: "Ken Blake, MVP" <[email protected]>



| An "exabyte" (note the spelling) is 2^60. 2^64 is 18 exabytes.

Ahhhhhhhh That's the term. Win64 addresses 18 Exabytes of memory.

What do you think of the chances we hit that ceiling in say 10 years ?
 
From: "Ken Blake, MVP" <[email protected]>




| An "exabyte" (note the spelling) is 2^60. 2^64 is 18 exabytes.

Ahhhhhhhh That's the term. Win64 addresses 18 Exabytes of memory.

What do you think of the chances we hit that ceiling in say 10 years ?
Click to expand...



I'm a terrible person to ask. <g> I've been terrible at making
forecasts like this in the past, and have almost always been
dramatically wrong.
 
On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 17:21:13 -0400, "David H. Lipman"



I'm a terrible person to ask. <g> I've been terrible at making
forecasts like this in the past, and have almost always been
dramatically wrong.
Click to expand...

BTW, in talking about memory, engineers tend to use 1024 as the
'thousands' multiplier, so 2^64 should probably be called 16 EB (if
that's the right abbreviation). Disk drive makers (and marketers), of
course, like the number 18 that you used, as do physicists, who still
think a thousand is 10^3 :-)
 
BTW, in talking about memory, engineers tend to use 1024 as the
'thousands' multiplier, so 2^64 should probably be called 16 EB (if
that's the right abbreviation). Disk drive makers (and marketers), of
course, like the number 18 that you used, as do physicists, who still
think a thousand is 10^3 :-)
Click to expand...


Note my standard message on of subject of whether a gigabyte is
1,000,000,000 bytes or 1,073,741,824 (in particular, note the last two
sentences):

All hard drive manufacturers define 1GB as 1,000,000,000 bytes, while
the rest of the computer world, including Windows, defines it as 2 to
the 30th power (1,073,741,824) bytes. So a 120 billion byte drive is
actually a little under 112GB. Some people point out that the official
international standard defines the "G" of GB as one billion, not
1,073,741,824. Correct though they are, using the binary value of GB
is so well established in the computer world that I consider using the
decimal value of a billion to be deceptive marketing.
 
David H. Lipman said:
| An "exabyte" (note the spelling) is 2^60. 2^64 is 18 exabytes.
Click to expand...
Ahhhhhhhh That's the term. Win64 addresses 18 Exabytes of memory.
Click to expand...

If it used the full 64-bit address space, then it would address 18
exabytes. But the current implementations use 37 bits and address
only(!) 128GB.
What do you think of the chances we hit that ceiling in say 10 years ?
Click to expand...

Who knows? I'm constantly amazed by this industry.
 
Note my standard message on of subject of whether a gigabyte is
1,000,000,000 bytes or 1,073,741,824 (in particular, note the last two
sentences):

All hard drive manufacturers define 1GB as 1,000,000,000 bytes, while
the rest of the computer world
Click to expand...

<pedant>
except networking, which also uses the decimal definitions.
</pedant>

, including Windows, defines it as 2 to
the 30th power (1,073,741,824) bytes. So a 120 billion byte drive is
actually a little under 112GB. Some people point out that the official
international standard defines the "G" of GB as one billion, not
1,073,741,824. Correct though they are, using the binary value of GB
is so well established in the computer world that I consider using the
decimal value of a billion to be deceptive marketing.
Click to expand...

I consider it accurate communication. YMMV.

Carl
EAC Liar, Damned Liar, and Statistician
 
From: "Tim Slattery" <[email protected]>


| If it used the full 64-bit address space, then it would address 18
| exabytes. But the current implementations use 37 bits and address
| only(!) 128GB.

Really ?

I did not know that. Do you have a MS URL about that Tim ?
 
<pedant>
except networking, which also uses the decimal definitions.
</pedant>
Click to expand...
, including Windows, defines it as 2 to
Click to expand...
I consider it accurate communication. YMMV.
Click to expand...
Carl
EAC Liar, Damned Liar, and Statistician
Click to expand...

Yes. They've been doing it since the Fall of Rome, so I, for one, know
that a GB on a hard drive is 10**9 bytes, not 1024**3 bytes.

But like you (Carl), I catch on quickly.
 
From: "Gene E. Bloch" <[email protected]>

| On 9/17/09, the entity Carl Kaufmann wrote this:
| Yes. They've been doing it since the Fall of Rome, so I, for one, know
| that a GB on a hard drive is 10**9 bytes, not 1024**3 bytes.

| But like you (Carl), I catch on quickly.

| --
| Gene Bloch 650.366.4267 lettersatblochg.com


I have always looked at it as the unformatted capacity vs. the formatted capacity.
 
I have always looked at it as the unformatted capacity vs. the formatted capacity.
Click to expand...

Which isn't correct. You use a tiny percentage to overhead when you
format. The difference you see is due to the decimal - binary units
thing.
 
Which isn't correct. You use a tiny percentage to overhead when you
format. The difference you see is due to the decimal - binary units
thing.
Click to expand...



I was about to say the same thing, but you took the words out of my
mouth (or, in this case, off my fingers).
 
I was about to say the same thing, but you took the words out of my
mouth (or, in this case, off my fingers).
Click to expand...

And for an example with explicit numbers, look at a gigabyte. Using
1024, the number is 1073741824, and using 1000 it's 1000000000 (of
course). If the HD maker used binary units, he'd have to call his
decimal-gigabyte drive 931 megabytes. That's ~7% worth of marketing...

I'm too lazy to carry this out for exabytes, but the marketing bonus is
obviously gonna be huge. When we get there :-)
 
Back
Top