02-Mar-2012, 4:42 PM
5' 9"
The Wannabe Longest Thread
|
02-Mar-2012, 4:42 PM
5' 9"
02-Mar-2012, 4:43 PM
Wow. Wow. That is epic. Darn you!
Quote:In Jr. High School, I would take a gummi bear, squeeze its ears into points so it looked like Yoda, and then I would say to it "Eat you, I will!". And of course then I would it eat.
02-Mar-2012, 4:44 PM
Quote:Wow. Wow. That is epic. Darn you! LOL thanks
02-Mar-2012, 6:51 PM
So, because this is supposed to be The Longest Thread, I offer up another digression:
How about gigabytes, eh? They're really something. [i'm not sure where, exactly, this line of discussion will go, but I'm sure someone here can think of something creative.] Quote:In Jr. High School, I would take a gummi bear, squeeze its ears into points so it looked like Yoda, and then I would say to it "Eat you, I will!". And of course then I would it eat.
02-Mar-2012, 7:29 PM
Terabytes are the new gigabytes when it comes to personal storage space. Of course, your garden variety corporation probably is up to petabytes by now. I shudder to think of what kind of storage a government agency has.
02-Mar-2012, 7:40 PM
I actually originally wrote "terrabytes" (sic), but I purposely changed it to "gigabytes" because I wasn't sure about the spelling (it turned out that I had it wrong), and I was too lazy to look it up.
The storage space of a government agency isn't what should concern you; their organizational scheme is what should be cause for worry! Quote:In Jr. High School, I would take a gummi bear, squeeze its ears into points so it looked like Yoda, and then I would say to it "Eat you, I will!". And of course then I would it eat.
02-Mar-2012, 11:10 PM
MS moved people from large to gigantic pretty fast. I prefer smaller footprints. My first database program for our research nursery held information on each individual tree we had in our nursery, about 5000, covering 6 different species, and placement on a grid in just under 100 different plantations. Program and data fit on a 720Kb 5 1/4 inch floppy for distribution. Of course, that was DOS based. The windows version used more than twice the space.
ian
04-Mar-2012, 8:52 PM
As much as I'm not a huge fan of these type of topics, I'll let it slide.
Anyway, is it true that USB hard drives are slower than SATA hard drives?
04-Mar-2012, 9:36 PM
Exabytes is where it's at. And I do where hats -- love covering up my balding scalp.
I hear USB3 is freaky fast.
"Bad news, bad news came to me where I sleep / Turn turn turn again" - Bob Dylan
04-Mar-2012, 10:25 PM
USB is very slow compared to SATA. If it wasn't, we'd be using USB for hard drive interconnects, and they wouldn't have invented eSATA and Thunderbolt.
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|