SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Computer Learning
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: PMS Witch who wrote (17437)3/8/2001 2:44:07 PM
From: Magnatizer  Read Replies (2) of 110652
 
PW

good idea but not sure I can implement it. The large drive is 4 gig, small is 2. Large holds 2.59 already and the image copy is 1.648 gig.

A side note. I just realized the copy is not 1/2 the size of the 2.59 original. It is possible I was having problems with the image because of what you asked me before... the slave drive may not be large enough. I was calculating the necessary space by multiplying 2.59 * .60 (the medium compression states it is 40% compressed). This left me needing 1.554 gigs of free space. As the higher compressed image is 1.648 gig and I have other backups on that drive... there is no way the meduim compressed option would work.

Now I wonder why my calculations did not work properly.

Guess 40% compressed is not really 40% compressed just as 50% is not 50%. Does this make sense?

so confused,
Mag
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News