Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Kobalt_merged

For all you WD owners...

Recommended Posts

What I can't understand is why do the lawyers get the cash, and we get crapola software?

The lawyers are the only winners here. The consumers will end up paying a higher cost that the hard drive manufacturers will pass down to us, all because some dumb nitwit with time and money to burn, and the knowhow to pick up a phone and call a lawyer, can’t understand how hard drives are made, and why they are made that way, and sees nothing but loopholes and dollar signs. :mad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's hardly only Western Digital that does this.

 

Hell, they probably don't even know for sure how many bits/bytes are on the platter, just a close estimate.

I had IBM/Hitachi that were real gigabytes as what they advertised the size to be, if it said 80 gb it was real 80 gb.

 

I don't think its worthless (lawsuit)... I think the punishment for ignorance or trying to fool the consumers should be greater than just paying a miserable amount of money. How can you work in a company that makes hard drives for computers, and don't know what a bit is? :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think its fair they got slapped with a lawsuit....most computer users buying a harddrive for the first time probably got surprized by the actual capacity thing. it IS false advertizing coz the consumer believes the number on the box is for his/her machine. its a deception plain and simple designed to increase sales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont know about anyone else, but I got into the assumption that drives were always under their listed capacity, and that was ok.

Absolutely. My 80 gig WD weighs in at 74.4 gigs. My 160 gig Maxtor weighs in at 152.0

gigs. Who cares? Even using decimal vs. binary, their actual vs. advertised capacity is lower. Again, who cares? I’m happy with what I got. With the size of disk storage nowadays, I’m more concerned with performance and whether it will take a nose dive than whether its listed vs. actual capacity is a few gigs off. I can remember when I bought a WD 4 gig around 8 or 9 years ago. When I loaded it, I got a message that said it was actually 4.3 gigs. I didn’t see anyone suing over false advertising back then.

Never knew I could sue for false advertising over it...:rolleyes:

Heck, this is America. You can sue your parents because you were born ugly. If the courts in your jurisdiction won’t take it, shop it around ‘til you find one that does.

The lawyers are the only winners here. The consumers will end up paying a higher cost that the hard drive manufacturers will pass down to us, all because some dumb nitwit with time and money to burn, and the knowhow to pick up a phone and call a lawyer, can’t understand how hard drives are made, and why they are made that way, and sees nothing but loopholes and dollar signs.

As much as I hate to say it, I don’t blame the lawyers and plaintiffs for working the system. I blame the system for not having judges with the kouhonies to throw this BS off the docket and thus, allow the possibility of a trial where inept, bleeding heart jurists can decide outrageous awards.

 

Yes, you guys are right. A precedent has been set. Next up, Maxtor, Seagate, etc.. Dang, I should have been a lawyer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can sue your parents because you were born ugly.

 

I could make a bloody fortune and Ace could retire :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i think its fair they got slapped with a lawsuit....most computer users buying a harddrive for the first time probably got surprized by the actual capacity thing. it IS false advertizing coz the consumer believes the number on the box is for his/her machine. its a deception plain and simple designed to increase sales.

 

I first ran into the hard drive size problem over 3 years ago. At the time, I didn’t have a clue, but it was completely documented on the Western Digital site at the time. Once I read it, I understood, and no longer had a problem with it. At the time, it was quite well buried in the web site. You had to know it was there. Sort of like “Read the small print”. Today, it is right up front. False advertizing? The lawyers and courts will interpret anyway they want to.

 

Whether this lawsuit has anything to do with the documentation of the size discrepancy being out in front, I don’t know, but it’s always been there. Stupid lawsuit. Just simply stupid. :mad: Now you and I will be paying for the lawyers thru increased hard drive price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Another worthless lawsuit and settlement that benifits the attourneys only. Like the creative lawsuit that gave the lawyers a great little sum o cash and gave the consumers a discount on merchandise purchased at creative website only. After the discount you couls still purchase any of the products at creative site cheaper elswhere. It's obvious these attourneys bring these lawsuits not to benifit the consumer but to get fees. There has to be a special place in hades for attourneys. :rolleyes:

have to agree

 

americans will file a lawsuit over the most stupid things...the fact that an 80GB drive once formatted might only be true 75GB useable space = the dumbest lawsuit ever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have'nt they ever heard of slack space?

Keh.

 

Still, that is useable space, just not normally useable.

There's nothing to sue over either becuase there's likely really 80gig there in an 80 drive, a moment here.

 

 

Lets find out ;)

 

I'm scanning a 120gig drive of mine, using a direct access method(not windows) from windows...

And checking for slack/surplus sectors not in the format(yes I'm to lazy to doit right, I did it like anyone else sorta).

(I meant how I formatted it, I am checking the disk space good enough though)

(I'm checking the whole disk, not the partitions)

 

120,034,123,776 Bytes Total

Let's se if there's something to sue over here...

 

120034123776 / 1024 (to make it Kilobytes)

117220824 K

 

117220824 / 1024 (To make it Megabytes)

114473.4609375 M

 

114473.4609375 / 1024 (To make it Gigabytes...)

111.79048919677734375 G

 

Yep, something to sue over, it's not here...

 

The truth is, this is'nt that surprising...

I mean, Sorrento was right, ibm's do have more space per gig.

That's for sure, I noticed it long long ago.

Likely anyways, it seemd liek I got alot more out of an old 40gig then I would of with a wd of the same size.

 

So it's true....

 

You want me to check my 160 gig?

I could...

 

None the less, there's something to sue here, I was thinking, yeah what a dumb lawsuit, but truthfully, it went through because it was straight up true.

You guys that say the lawsuit is bs, well, check it out before you say such things :, no offence, only took me a min.

 

 

Anyways...

You can get slack into the format, if you combined diffrent tools together.

I've done it a few times before using linux and fdisk.

Probably possible with testdisk maybe.

Who knows, I dn care right now anyways, as you can see, I don't have the true 120gigs at all anyways period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Kobalt
have to agree

 

americans will file a lawsuit over the most stupid things...the fact that an 80GB drive once formatted might only be true 75GB useable space = the dumbest lawsuit ever

Pffft... you don't know how dumb lawsuits can get.

 

Check this out for a laugh:

http://www.power-of-attorneys.com/stupid_l...ion.asp?wacky=0

 

 

example:

"Meredith Berkman, seeking $50 million, filed one of the first anti-fat lawsuits against the manufacturer of a snack food named Pirate's Booty. It looks like eating too much Pirate's Booty had added too much booty to Ms. Berkman's booty.":rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Absolutely. My 80 gig WD weighs in at 74.4 gigs. My 160 gig Maxtor weighs in at 152.0 gigs. Who cares? Even using decimal vs. binary, their actual vs. advertised capacity is lower. Again, who cares? I’m happy with what I got. With the size of disk storage nowadays, I’m more concerned with performance and whether it will take a nose dive than whether its listed vs. actual capacity is a few gigs off. I can remember when I bought a WD 4 gig around 8 or 9 years ago. When I loaded it, I got a message that said it was actually 4.3 gigs. I didn’t see anyone suing over false advertising back then.

Again, this is not a Decimal vs. Binary issue... unless Western Digital said their 80gb HD was instead of 10010001100001001110011100101010000000000000000 teraabits :rolleyes:

 

Some people, even in this thread, don't know what the decimal numeric system is, who created it and why we are using it... much less the binary one.

 

I understand what you are saying Mojo about performance and quality, but it would be the same as to get 15 gallons of high octane fuel (super unleaded?) instead of 18 gallons when you "fill up the tank", and pay for the 18 instead of the 15... "its high performance high octane fuel" you might say, but they are stealing from you, from all of us actually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...