Seagate to compensate for GB confusion

[patrickl]

Wow, didn't know this could actually happen. They have been suing and winning (?) hard disk manufacturers over the confusion of GB in the binary sense (2^30) vs decimal sense (10^9) Which means that a 300GB disk is actually 279GB in filesize.


A Download for Your Troubles: Seagate Hard Drive Settlement Now Online

Cho v. Seagate was filed in April of 2005 by Sara Cho over claims that Seagate falsely advertised the capacity of their hard drives, overstating it by 7%. The nature of these claims lies in the difference between a gigabyte (1,000,000,000 bytes of 1 GB) and a giga binary byte (1,073,741,824 bytes or 1 GiB), as the abbreviation of “GB” is often used for both.

Seagate has denied and continued to deny both the false advertising claims and the fact that it has harmed anyone, and as of yet the courts have not ruled on the merits of the case.

[SavannahLion]

HDD manufacturers aren't the only one.

I'm old school. I seriously think that all memory measurements need to be done on the 2^* scale and not the 10^* scale. I'm still royally pissed off that at the CS majors who collectively collapsed to the inane pressures of those who use the 10^* scale and renamed the notations such as giga to gibi. 

So instead of fixating on just ONE ---smurfing--- notation and sticking to it, we have this mismash of ---fouled up beyond all recognition--- up notations where GB could mean anything from 1024MB or 1000MB or neither at all (when overhead is included but not counted). Of all the inane ---smurfing--- retarded dip moronic third grade subject to commercialism things to do, this is squarely in the top ten of stupid ---Cleveland steamer--- things CSE have done.

Changing ATA to PATA to accomodate SATA is another moronic move. Should've just left it at ATA and added SATA, save everyone the ---smurfing--- confusion.

Go one way, stick to it, and leave it the ---fudgesicle--- alone. If they need to add new technology then go ahead and just do it, don't change old technology terminology mid-beat.

[gonzo90017]

Changing ATA to PATA to accomodate SATA is another moronic move. Should've just left it at ATA and added SATA, save everyone the ---smurfing--- confusion.

No wonder.  The last time I went to buy a hard drive, I was like where the ---fudgesicle--- are all the ATA drives? All they had was PATA. 

[ChadTower]

The mass market has no interest in binary calculations... I've been asked that by a few different people...

"I bought a 300gb drive and it only has 278gb on it!"
"Windows is using a different method to calculate the capacity"
"What?  A gigabyte is a gigabyte, right?"
"doesn't seem that way"

[patrickl]

Windows is not using a different way to calculate capacity. All computer software under any OS does it that way. Only the hard disk manufacturers are using "a different way to calculate capacity". Anyway, with some luck they are now forced to use the proper capacity calculation.

Much like the screen diagonal measurement with monitors: What are you complaining about, that tube is 21". "Ehm yeah, but the outer 2" is behind the bezel so I really only get 19".

[ChadTower]

Windows is not using a different way to calculate capacity. All computer software under any OS does it that way. Only the hard disk manufacturers are using "a different way to calculate capacity".

That's what I meant.  Windows is using a different method than the people who printed the box.  The box says 300... Windows says 278.  I'm not going to get into an OS conversation with someone who calls me to ask that question.   

[ahofle]

When I formatted my 500 Gig drive and saw that it only gave me 465 Gig to work with, I slammed my fist down and spilled hot coffee on my lap.  Am I entitled to an extra settlement?

[ChadTower]

No, but you can file a hot coffee request with Rockstar.

[SavannahLion]

When I formatted my 500 Gig drive and saw that it only gave me 465 Gig to work with, I slammed my fist down and spilled hot coffee on my lap.  Am I entitled to an extra settlement?

Only if you were trying to drive at the same time.

[ChadTower]

He was... he was hard driving.

[Ed_McCarron]

So wait, Seagate is accused of saying its bigger than it really is?

Isn't that a basic internet right?

[ChadTower]

That way way predate the innernets.  I think that started with the advent of pants.

[knave]

Wow, looks like I'm entitled to a copy of the Seagate Software Suite. 

Is it worth the trouble of digging out my HD and filling out the form?

I don't even know what it does.

[Ed_McCarron]

That way way predate the innernets.  I think that started with the advent of pants.

Or rolled up socks.

[ChadTower]

Where would you put rolled up socks if you had no pants on?

[SithMaster]

Where would you put rolled up socks if you had no pants on?

Womens use rolled up socks sometimes to make their boobies look bigger.  Does this count.

[Tiger-Heli]

Wow, looks like I'm entitled to a copy of the Seagate Software Suite. 

Is it worth the trouble of digging out my HD and filling out the form?

I don't even know what it does.

I think I am in the class-action group as well.

The software settlement gets you the Seagate Software Suite, which is supposed to be a $40 value.  What this would include over and above DiscWizard which ships with the drive and is free, I have no idea.

Or you can get 5% of the purchase price back, which since I think I bought my drive for $20 after MIR, gets me $1 back, not counting my $0.43 for postage to send the claim in - assuming the Judge rules on the merits of the case and decides against Seagate (which is unlikely), and Seagate accepts the decision without appealing it (which is also unlikely).

And personally, I agree with Savanah Lion (sp?) - A kilobyte is 1024 Bytes, A gigabyte is 1024 Kilobytes - the HD manufacturers should have stuck with this instead of going to 1,000,000 bytes, but you can't blame only Seagate when Maxtor (which is now Seagate), IBM, Toshiba, WD and all the other companies were doing (and still are doing) the same things.

You also can't limit it to computers, as there is similar confusion over tons, tonnes, etc - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonne, but it is less of an issue here because the smaller item is more common.  I.e. nobody buys a truck to haul metric tons and then finds out - "Oh, you quoted English tons for that spec?"

[patrickl]

assuming the Judge rules on the merits of the case and decides against Seagate (which is unlikely), and Seagate accepts the decision without appealing it (which is also unlikely).

The way I understood it, this is a settlement that Seagate proposed.

And personally, I agree with Savanah Lion (sp?) - A kilobyte is 1024 Bytes, A gigabyte is 1024 Kilobytes - the HD manufacturers should have stuck with this instead of going to 1,000,000 bytes, but you can't blame only Seagate when Maxtor (which is now Seagate), IBM, Toshiba, WD and all the other companies were doing (and still are doing) the same things.

Western Digital settled in the same way already.

I don't think the HD manufacturers will be forced to change their capacity calculations. Seems like they will be getting away with a warning that the capacity may be different.

[Tiger-Heli]

assuming the Judge rules on the merits of the case and decides against Seagate (which is unlikely), and Seagate accepts the decision without appealing it (which is also unlikely).

The way I understood it, this is a settlement that Seagate proposed.

[/quote]
Yes, reading it again, it looks like Seagate is offering to settle out of court for this amount, so unless the plaintiff appeals for more or the judge rules it is inadequate it will likely stand.

Western Digital settled in the same way already.

Cool - Another $0.58 cents for me - I can almost buy some value-menu fries!!!

I don't think the HD manufacturers will be forced to change their capacity calculations. Seems like they will be getting away with a warning that the capacity may be different.

Likely correct also.

[ChadTower]

Cool - Another $0.58 cents for me - I can almost buy some value-menu fries!!!

Hey, wait... Taco Bell said everyone in America could get a free taco if anyone stole a base in last night's World Series game.  Did that happen?   

[Tiger-Heli]

Cool - Another $0.58 cents for me - I can almost buy some value-menu fries!!!

Hey, wait... Taco Bell said everyone in America could get a free taco if anyone stole a base in last night's World Series game.  Did that happen?   

Not yet:
http://mlb.mlb.com/stats/sortable_team_stats.jsp?c_id=mlb

[ChadTower]

Oh it's the whole series... my wife was suggesting someone should get a taco, leave, come back in 5 minutes, get a taco, leave... etc... the main problem being that in the end all you'd have to show for it is a bunch of Taco Bell food.   

[SithMaster]

Oh it's the whole series... my wife was suggesting someone should get a taco, leave, come back in 5 minutes, get a taco, leave... etc... the main problem being that in the end all you'd have to show for it is a bunch of Taco Bell food.   

Unless you convert the taco bell food into wendy's.  But isnt the conversion rate like 100 to 1 or something?  So youd need like a 600 tacos to get a value meal.

[ChadTower]

I didn't know Wendy's accepted tacos as payment.

[Tiger-Heli]

Oh it's the whole series... my wife was suggesting someone should get a taco, leave, come back in 5 minutes, get a taco, leave... etc... the main problem being that in the end all you'd have to show for it is a bunch of Taco Bell food.   

If you read the rules it says:

To obtain the Free Taco, consumers must visit any participating Taco Bell® restaurant in one of the fifty (50) the United States or District of Columbia between 2:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. (local time) on the Redemption Date only and request a Free Crunchy Seasoned Beef Taco. Free Taco's will not be offered on any other date or time, regardless of circumstance. Limit one (1) Free Crunchy Seasoned Beef Taco per person. Participating Taco Bell restaurant manager reserves the right to deny Free Taco to any person he/she reasonably believes has already received a Free Taco or has engaged in any other fraudulent activity. All eligible consumers: Everyone in line at a participating Taco Bell restaurant before 5:00 p.m. local time will receive a Free Taco, even if it is provided after 5:00 p.m. Free Taco offer is subject to store availability and Taco Bell reserves the right to substitute an item of equal or greater value if due to unavailability. All restaurant managers decisions are final regarding to Free Taco offer.

So what you have to do is drive to Taco Bell A at 2:00 and get first Taco, drive to Taco Bell B at 2:10 and get second Taco, etc - not that I am advising this or would consider it ...

[mr.Curmudgeon]

"Participating Taco Bell restaurant manager reserves the right to deny Free Taco to any person he/she reasonably believes has already received a Free Taco"

Whuuuu?

What if they just normally walk around with Taco sauce on their face or clothes? That's discrimination!!

[SithMaster]

"Participating Taco Bell restaurant manager reserves the right to deny Free Taco to any person he/she reasonably believes has already received a Free Taco"

Whuuuu?

What if they just normally walk around with Taco sauce on their face or clothes? That's discrimination!!

I bet they just want to hoard all the tacos for themselves.

I didn't know Wendy's accepted tacos as payment.

I would think they would accept exchanges based on their commercials showing how a junior bacon cheeseburger equals a dollar.

[ChadTower]

or any other fraudulent activity

Damn!  I lied to my mom in 6th grade about where I was one day... no free taco for me!   

[SithMaster]

or any other fraudulent activity

Damn!  I lied to my mom in 6th grade about where I was one day... no free taco for me!   

As long as they dont find out about it then they cannot refuse you your God given right to get a free taco.  When they ask you your name for the taco dont say chadtower itll be a dead giveaway when they run a trace on your name.

[Agent Davis]

Back OT, anyone know if this applies to Maxtor drives bought since the merge.  I have a Maxtor drive that is in fact a Seagate (has an M in the serial number).

[RandyT]

While I understand that there are fewer unique disk operating systems than there used to be in the old days, isn't a drive's usable capacity dependent upon the manner in which it is partitioned and managed by software?  Or is the claim stating that even before any of this is taken into consideration, the number of available bits present on the platters does not equal the claimed capacity?

BTW, it only takes one dirtbag company to start doing things like this to force every other company to do the same in order to be "competitive".  If you think this is bad, try to get a good handle on how many "HP" the motor in one of your power tools has.  Or how many "watts" your stereo can put out. There are real definitions for these units of measure, but they are mostly ignored in favor of a contrivance that falsely inflates the ratings.

*edit*

I like free tacos.  But you usually end up paying for them at Taco Bell, one way or the other.

[ahofle]

I like free tacos.  But you usually end up paying for them at Taco Bell, one way or the other.

   

[Tiger-Heli]

Back Off-Topic - Free Tacos Today!!!

While I understand that there are fewer unique disk operating systems than there used to be in the old days, isn't a drive's usable capacity dependent upon the manner in which it is partitioned and managed by software?  Or is the claim stating that even before any of this is taken into consideration, the number of available bits present on the platters does not equal the claimed capacity?

Randy,

Usable capacity will indeed depend on format options (Fat16, FAT32, NTFS) and cluster size, even with the same OS, but that isn't what the lawsuit is addressing.

Windows and really the entire IT industry defines a GB as 1024 Kilobytes, and a Kilobyte as 1024 bytes (I hope I got that right.  So a 1GB drive equals 1048576 Bytes.

The HD Manufacturers have decided to define 1GB as 1,000,000 Bytes.  So when you buy your 300GB (their definition) drive and format it for Windows, Windows says you have 300*1,000,000/1048576=286 GB available (i.e. you lost 14GB.)  The drive manufacturers have always done this, but when drives were 3GB and you lost 140Mb it was a lot less noticeble.  Also, this is the total available capacity of the drive.  Cluster size will affect how much of that can be used, (and access time/fragmentation), but the total capacity is still the same.

Hope This Helps!!!

[RandyT]

Thanks, that was what I was wondering.  I'm so used to not getting anywhere near the stated capacity in use that I never even think about what's on the box as anything other than an approximate (high) figure anyway.  That makes it hard for me to feel "gypped" in this situation, but I do feel all drive manufacturers should stick with one method and state what it is somewhere on the box.

RandyT

[patrickl]

It would be easiest if everybody would use M for 1,000,000 and k for 1,000, but I guess that's just never gonna happen.

It's actually most confusing with CD discs and DVD's. Not exactly sure which is which, but IIRC some formats are measured in millions of byes and others in "megabytes".

[jbox]

are measured in millions of byes

Damn, that's a lot of matches forfeited! 

[ChadTower]

It would take 5 minutes of effort to mark the box with both measurements.

[Tiger-Heli]

But the company that does it loses out to the uneducated consumer.

"Look, this drive says it's 300Gb, but then it says it's only 286 Gb formatted.  This one just says 300Gb regardless, it must be bigger!"

[ChadTower]

The landscape has just changed a bit, of course, with this lawsuit.  It's probably not going to be followed up by more of them seeing as how the lawyers got rich and the plaintiffs got a useless software package.

[Tiger-Heli]

The landscape has just changed a bit, of course, with this lawsuit.  It's probably not going to be followed up by more of them seeing as how the lawyers got rich and the plaintiffs got a useless software package.

I would have gotten enough to buy my free taco!!!!