What's the largest capacity empeg out there? Mine's only 60 - I know there's much bigger...

- Jon

I think there's 60-gig laptop drives, so logically, I would assume that the biggest 'peg is probably a 120.

I think Paul Grzelak has a 120...?

I believe he actually has two set up that way.

Yup, though in theory at some point Mark hooked up a desktop drive to his for testing the extra bit's in a filesystem, so for a while he could claim this distinction technically... 120 is as big as you can get these days however, and I wonder about people that feel they need more space...

Matthew

I wonder about people that feel they need more space...

Yeah, they're really asking to end the relationship when they say that, they're just trying to let you down easy.

LOL

You're sufficating me!!

It's not you, it's me...

It's not you, it's me...

Translation: "It's you, I just don't have the balls to tell it to your face."

A note from the lunatic fringe:

Trust me, you can never have too much space. I only have about 9GB left, and I hope to fill it in the imminent future with a few new books / CDs. Granted, I am the first to admit that I don't listen to all of it very often and I have favorites playlist set, but it is nice to know that I have my entire CD collection, portable and at the ready in case I ever need it (parties, audio server at the office, etc.).

I eagerly await a larger hard drive capacity, and I hope to get my lab empeg up to spec soon!!!

Hm. Ok, so I upgraded to 120 GB, but emplode only reports 111 in the status line. [ Jemplode reports 111.43681144714355... :-) ]

Is this "normal"?

- Jon

Ok, so I upgraded to 120 GB, but emplode only reports 111 in the status line. [...] Is this "normal"?

Sadly, yes. You were stitched up by your supplier: they sold you 120,000,000,000 bytes of storage, not 120GB. Eventually, a bit like those sold-as-17in monitors with only 15.7in of visible area, the courts or the Advertising Standards people will decide that this is fraudulent, deceptive, and unacceptable. Until then, just remember to take about 7.5% off any gigabyte figure quoted to you by drive manufacturers.

Edit: Gosh, I'm in a ranty mood this morning, aren't I? I'd better also add that not all 120,000,000,000 bytes are available for music storage, as some is used for the Empeg software, swap space, etc. -- about 80MB per drive

Peter

160MB for all the software vs. 9GB. Hmm... Rant on!!!

Eventually, a bit like those sold-as-17in monitors with only 15.7in of visible area

No one ever claimed that there was 17" of viewable area. The tube itself is 17" in diagonal dimension, which is how tube manufacturers describe them, and that nomenclature is just carried through the monitor manufacturers. Just because the consumer hasn't bothered to investigate what is common knowledge among anyone with any passing familiarity with the industry isn't reason enough to claim fraud.

OTOH, drive manufacturer's GB claims, IMO, are intentionally fraudulent, as they are using a definition of terminology that is in opposition to everyone else's definition of the same terminology.

in opposition to everyone else's definition of the same terminology

Except the fans of the GiBi / MiBi notation, but IMHO that is such an ugly construction that it should be taken out and shot...

/Michael

Ok, so I upgraded to 120 GB, but emplode only reports 111 in the status line.

Jon, although others have answered your question elsewhere in this thread, just for completeness, I'd like to point out the FAQ entry on this topic.

Thanks Tony.

You know, I've read through the faq many times, but there's so much info in there, that I sometimes forget if a topic is covered or not. Thanks for the pointer.

- jb

Except the fans of the GiBi / MiBi notation

But even that's really just a response to manufacturers' misuse of the original terms.

It could have worked, though, if whoever (rms, I believe) hadn't picked such idiotic sounding names.

(rms, I believe)


That really wouldn't surprise me. He seems to have a thing about Nomenclature....the sad thing is that whilst most people agree with his reasoning, they don't tend to use his solutions - if for no other reason but to avoid appearing to be as anal as he is..

No one ever claimed that there was 17" of viewable area. The tube itself is 17" in diagonal dimension, which is how tube manufacturers describe them, and that nomenclature is just carried through the monitor manufacturers. Just because the consumer hasn't bothered to investigate what is common knowledge among anyone with any passing familiarity with the industry isn't reason enough to claim fraud.

Someone did. Back before the lawsuit, many monitor makers never specified what the viewable size was. So someone started a lawsuit, the industry got a slap on the wrist, and consumers got an extra spec number on the monitor data sheets.

Now if only LCD makers would realise they need to put all the specs out there. It's a pain in the ass to find many LCD's pixel response time figures, and that number is the second most important number to me, beyond the size of the screen.

I wish people who sold laptops would tell you what the max resolution is. I mean, sure it's 15", but at 640x480? At least they finally started including weight.

Speaking of which, why doesn't anyone make a minimal laptop with a big-ass screen? All I need is a CPU and 1600x1200, but no one makes one that doesn't also have 4 removable drive bays, an attachment to give you a blow job, and cost $40,000.

I wonder what that attachement looks like in the x-ray at the airport.

-Zeke

Yes, I would really like one of those screens for my laptop. When I want a flat screen, I want one that is 1cm thick not one that is 3 inches thick like the ones you can buy now.

By the way, there is a manufacturer who makes a "minimal" laptop. So far, I've seen it with the 1400x1050 15"screen, but I would suppose that could be switched for the 1600x1200.

This "laptop" does not have a floppy, no battery, no pcmcia, and one CD/DVD drive. As far as I can see, it costs 30% less than a "normal" laptop. (700-1000 Euro) The chipset and CPU and things are desktop versions and not the more expensive laptop variants. (You can uese Any Pentium 4 processor in one of the models)

I'm seriously looking to buy one of these, since my (former) employer wants this computer back. I fear though, that my wallet instructs me to buy a second-hand laptop instead.

URL: http://www.desknote.net/

Marius (Escort Cab + MarkII)

Aren't these the "laptops" that don't come with a battery? Batterys are a big part of the cost of a laptop, and they're pretty much a required item for most applications.

Matthew

Yes, that's correct. They themselves don't use the word "laptop" as far as I remember. But, my present laptop is used 99% of the time on AC power, and you can buy an external USB(!) battery for the laptop if you really need that. The lack of PCMCIA is a larger worry, though.

Marius (Escort Cab + Mark II)

I can't seem to find any real specs on their web site.

Besides which, from your description, it doesn't sound like what I want anyway. My requirements are for it to weigh as little as possible and have a screen of at least 1280x1024, preferably larger. I would prefer it to have a reasonably fast CPU and have a decent battery life. It would be neat if it had a DVD player, but that's by no means a requirement, and I could get an external one, anyway, if I did want it at some future date.

What I specifically don't want is a ``desktop replacement''.

I see.
The only one of those requirements that it does not cover is the "decent battery life".

I'm not quite sure I understand which parts of the laptop you would like to see removed. You stated you "only need CPU and screen".

As far as I understand, These ECS desknotes have very fast CPUs, are very light (due to a lot of air in them for cooling) can have a screen up to 1400x1050 15", and come without most of these unneccessities like a battery and a floppy drive.

I just realized that I have got a 20GB 2.5" Hard disk and a VIA 3C cpu lying ariond, so I might get the VIA version without a CPU and a disk, if nothing better shows up soon.

Marius (Escort Cab + Mark II)

I have twin 60's at half capacity. I believe IBM is to release yet another generation of their "pixie dust" (Ruthenium) drives, doubling capacity of their 2.5" from 60 to 120GB. Sometime Q1 '03? Can't rip fast enough to keep up with the pace of technology :-)

The only one of those requirements that it does not cover is the "decent battery life".

Oh, I see. I suppose I should have stated that it should have an internal battery. I want a laptop solely to use when not at a desk. I want to be able to haul it around easily. That's my real concern, and having an external battery doesn't help.

I should also have mentioned it should have the capability of 802.11b (specifically, since that's what I've got right now and I have no plans to upgrade soon).