WinXP not recognizing full hard drive storage space

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

I have installed a Hitachi 120GB hard drive and a 60GB Fujutsu hard drive in
my notebook. Both computers are running on the most current BIOS version and
up to date SP2 and all the other update. During the start up both computers
display the full hard drive storage space both in boot up and in BIOS.
However, when I'm inside WindowsXP the 120GB HD is shown as 115GB ande 60GB
HD is shown as 55GB. What happened to the rest of 5GB. This amount of space
is too big to be used as a buffer for windows and anything else.

I've tried everything that comes to mind and I asked around... I'm running
out of options. Can anyone help me with this?
 
David, Although most hard disk manufacturers' definition of GB is
1,000,000,000 bytes (only computer memory has a natural inclination towards
units that are powers of 2), most computer operating systems use the
1,073,741,824 byte definition. This distinction can cause confusion. Hence
the Discrepancy. So in real storage what's left is 115 and 55.
You are doing fine.
 
Thank you Rich for answering my question, I never knew such thing existed. I
have asked all my friends that are computer technitions and CIS majors,
including myself and none gave me a logical answer to my question that seemed
reseanable. However, doesn't this create a false information to the people
that are purchasing computer hard drives. People are purchasing hard drives
thinking that what ever is written on the box is the storage size that they
will be recieving. Isn't there any international standard organization like
ISO or ANSI that sets standard for this kind of hardware/software issues.
Because when you realize it when a person sees an adwartising for a 500GB or
more hard drive storage drive, they are given the wrong information, when
they are actually getting a lower storage space.

Does this issue exist in all existing Operating Systems, Linux, UNIX, OSX,
Solaris, and Windows, for example? How and/or will this issue get resolved
in Windows Vista?

Thank you.
 
David, I fully agree with you since the descrepancy in Gigs is
proportional to the size of the drive it's more blatant at
the higher numbers. However it's a marketing ploy like $9.99 instead of
$10 . And in the end your still left with somewhat less than what was
advertised.
 
incase you want to know more, almost all electronic devices like handphones
or mp3s are same like your problem here. These devices usually states like
256MB or 512MB, but they are usually lower than that the one stated. Some
devices basically round off to the nearest MB. So, don't be shocked if any
electronic devices memory is lower than stated.peace off..~
 
David said:
Thank you Rich for answering my question, I never knew such thing existed. I
have asked all my friends that are computer technitions and CIS majors,
including myself and none gave me a logical answer to my question that seemed
reseanable. However, doesn't this create a false information to the people
that are purchasing computer hard drives. People are purchasing hard drives
thinking that what ever is written on the box is the storage size that they
will be recieving. Isn't there any international standard organization like
ISO or ANSI that sets standard for this kind of hardware/software issues.
Because when you realize it when a person sees an adwartising for a 500GB or
more hard drive storage drive, they are given the wrong information, when
they are actually getting a lower storage space.

Does this issue exist in all existing Operating Systems, Linux, UNIX, OSX,
Solaris, and Windows, for example? How and/or will this issue get resolved
in Windows Vista?

Thank you.
:
Click to expand...
Yes, there are international standards and national (in the US)
standards) that
apply. The HD vendors comply with those standards (e.g., 1 KB = 1,000
B), while
Windows chooses to (mostly) use the other common choice (e.g., 1 KB =
1,024 B).

If you look at the Properties of a HD in your (XP, I assume) PC, you'll
find the
capacity listed both ways; try it.
 
Back
Top