Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2007 July 17

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

July 17

PowerPoint Presentation

Hi, I have recently made a ppt presentation on a Mac, however, when I wanted to open the file on a PC, the pictures can't be opened. It is said that I need a TIFF (uncompressed) decompressor and a Quick Time, well sth along those lines. I am wondering if I could simply save the ppt in a particular format (on the Mac)such that it can be read w/o the need of those applications mentioned above. Thanks in advance!

It sounds to me like the presentation has media embedded into it (movies? sound clips? odd image file types?) which require external plug-ins to render. If the PC doesn't have those plug-ins, it won't work.

If you convert all of the static images to standard formats (JPG, GIF, PNG, whatever) then that should take care of the TIFF issue. As for the movie or sound clip, you will need to know what movie/sound formats will work on the host computer, or carry around with you the necessary files to install the plug-ins (e.g. the QuickTime installer). --24.147.86.187 14:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Can cell phones be used for eavesdropping ?

Fox News reported that even if cell phones are turned off, "the government" can turn the microphone on and listen in on our conversations: [1]. Is this true ? And, if so, does it apply to all cell phone models ? Is there a list of which cell phones are safe from this ? StuRat 04:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

If the battery is removed they can't do anything to it. I'm pretty sure it is true, although I don't have any sources for this other than what I've read on a couple of forums.

If a cell phone is off, wouldn't it be disassociated with the cellular network? Splintercellguy 06:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

What does "off" really mean? Is the phone's microcontroller truly powered down and specific hardware is used to sens the "On' button and turn the phone back on, or is the microcontroller just mostly-sleeping and occasionally scanning for you to press the "On" key? For the former, "Off" might be safe but for the latter, it's all a question of what the firmware is programmed to do. And who controls the firmware? (Answer: Not you.)

Atlant 12:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

This is kinda off topic but if Bruce Schneier is not talking BS in his book Beyond_Fear, what the government need is a pointer to where to look for, not more data. The US government had all the information to prevent the 9/11 attacks, which they realised afterwards after processing information related to that. Unless you are really interesting, I don't see why "the government" would want to listen to your phone conversation. --antilived^{T | C | G} 07:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

A few thoughts:

• Phones must at some level be "off" when they are closed in the sense that they are not transmitting audio information to the cell network. Why? Because if they didn't then the batteries would run down at comparable speeds when they are "in use" and when they are "off". This isn't true, at least not with any phone I have ever owned — a phone can often be closed and not-transmitting for multiple days on a single charge, but if you talk for a few hours then it needs to be recharged pretty quickly.
• So we assume that the phone is not passively transmitting at any given time. So what would it take to "listen in"? You'd need to have a way to remotely connect to the phone, and to engage its microphone and transmitter. How would this work? And across different phone models? I am no electrical engineer but this seems a bit unlikely to me on the face of it, without a plausible explanation given. Especially when the phone is off, when the receiver is presumably not engaged.
• So OK, maybe the phone manufacturers have built in a back door. All of them? Even though most phones are produced out of the US (and not even for the US)? Would phone manufacturers risk that sort of privacy violation? There would be no legal incentive for this at all, and no economic incentive. The potential scandal would be far too large.

To me it makes very little sense on a technical, political, economic, and practical level. All that means is that I'd want to see some real compelling evidence before beginning to believe it. And as Fox News has been known to feature all sorts of nonsense, rumor, innuendo, etc., I don't consider it a very reliable news source. So personally, I would put this in the "tin-foil hat" category, barring additional information. --24.147.86.187 13:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

1. Sending a signal to turn a phone from "standby" to "listen" would be trivial, if the phone had been programmed to do it.Transitioning it from "off" to "listen" would take more effort, since you would have to assume the phone stays connected even in said off state, which would consume quite a bit of energy, if not as much as a standby mode. The more difficult part would probably be making sure teh user doesn't notice, but again, this is simply a matter of coding.
2. The phone probably wouldn't have to passively transmit- as long as it can recieve (similar to the technology in RFID tags, and the above mentioned WOL) That said, it would depend on the phone model, manufacturer, and programmers, but if someone wanted to, it would again be fairly trivial. BTW, This has almost nothing to do with electrical engineering.
3. Phones used in the US must meet FCC regulations- if you believe in conspiracies, who knows that that entails. If this sort of thing were true, it wouldn't really be a choice for phone manufacturers, it would be Government force.

Now, all that aside, even though it is possible, I doubt it actually occurs, at least en masse. Giving someone a bugged cell phone, on the other hand, would be much easier.

It seems to me that this entire discussion is based on the fanciful idea that cell phones are ever turned off. I've never seen a cell phone turned off in a classroom, movie theater, or church. Sure, they might switch it vibrate, but it appears that cell phones don't actually have an "on/off" button. -- Kainaw^(what?) 16:30, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Apart from the technical aspects, what would the Gov't actually get out of this? Back when I worked collections for a wireless carrier I would get 5-10 calls a day from a phone in someones pocket (when you don't pay your bill and your phone gets shut off you can call two people, 911 and your carrier's collections department). I can't imagine much useful info can be derived from the sound of someone's keys scraping against the mic and muffled voices that make a fast food drive-thru sound like a top of the line 5.1 surround sound system. Unless the Gov't has given up on finding translators that speak actual languages and has found som people that speak Mmmf. 161.222.160.8 23:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well i can't answer the exact question but phones require a bit of energy even when they are "switched off" to power the clock thats inside so the phone is still slightly onWiki.user 20:01, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

XP SP2

I recently installed XP with SP2. The Ati-MMC when started gives the error" Atisserv registry access failed to startup" . Also whatever services are automatically enabled in the windows management needs to be manually started when starting the computer. Any help on this one??~~

Did you change any service startup settings from services.msc or msconfig? --soum ^talk 08:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I did not change any settings.In fact they(ATI MMC 8.9) worked perfectly on WINXP before I installed WINXPSP2.~~

Lots of things break when upgrading to SP2. I would check for newer versions of your programs [2]. -wizzard2k ^(C-T-D) 15:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

GLUT question on OS X

#include <stdlib.h>
#include </Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.4u.sdk/System/Library/Frameworks/GLUT.framework/Versions/A/Headers/glut.h>

int x = 100;
int y = 100;

int main(int argc, char **argv) {
void glutInit(int *argc, char **argv);

void glutInitWindowPosition(int x, int y); 

void glutInitDisplayMode(GLUT_RGB | GLUT_SINGLE | GLUT DEPTH);

int glutCreateWindow(char *title); 

return 0;
}

When I try to compile, I get this message from gcc:

/Users/ryangrasell/Desktop/opengl.c: In function 'main': /Users/ryangrasell/Desktop/opengl.c:13: error: conflicting types for 'glutCreateWindow' /Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.4u.sdk/System/Library/Frameworks/GLUT.framework/Versions/A/Headers/glut.h:429: error: previous declaration of 'glutCreateWindow' was here

Any help is greatly parreciated! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.195.124.101 (talk • contribs) 05:47, 17 July 2007

I'm no C or glut expert, but it looks like you've redeclared the glut* functions when you should be calling them. For example, the line

int glutCreateWindow(char *title);

where the error occurs declares a function taking a char* parameter and returning an int value. What you want is something like

int i = glutCreateWindow("Window Title");

which calls the function with a value (and, I assume, returns a handle for that window). --Dapeteばか 08:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow, now that I've looked at it, it looks like you have prototypes in your code. Declaring prototypes is different from actually calling a function. Should be something like this:

#include <stdlib.h>
#include </Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.4u.sdk/System/Library/Frameworks/GLUT.framework/Versions/A/Headers/glut.h>

int x = 100;
int y = 100;

int main(int argc, char **argv) {
     glutInit(argc, argv); //Call glutInit, which returns void, with the parameters passed to main.

     glutInitWindowPosition(x, y); //Call glutInitWindowPosition, passing in variables x and y, to set our initial window position.

     glutInitDisplayMode(GLUT_RGB | GLUT_SINGLE | GLUT DEPTH); //Set initial display mode.

     glutCreateWindow("Some Title"); //Need to feed glutCreateWindow a string for the caption.

     return 0;
}

Declaring a function like this:

     int aRandomFunction(int Something, char* Something2);

is different from actually invoking the declared function:

     int returnValue = aRandomFunction(0, "Blah");

You may wish to review your C knowledge. Splintercellguy 09:33, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks everyone, I'm a complete C newbie :) I still have a problem though: With this code:

#include <stdlib.h>
#include </Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.4u.sdk/System/Library/Frameworks/GLUT.framework/Versions/A/Headers/glut.h>

int x = 100;
int y = 100;

int main(int argc, char **argv) {
     glutInit(argc, argv); //Call glutInit, which returns void, with the parameters passed to main.

     glutInitWindowPosition(x, y); //Call glutInitWindowPosition, passing in variables x and y, to set our initial window position.

     glutInitDisplayMode(GLUT_RGB | GLUT_SINGLE | GLUT DEPTH); //Set initial display mode.

     glutCreateWindow("Some Title"); //Need to feed glutCreateWindow a string for the caption.

     return 0;
}

I get this problem:

/Users/ryangrasell/Desktop/opengl.c: In function 'main':
/Users/ryangrasell/Desktop/opengl.c:8: warning: passing argument 1 of 'glutInit' makes pointer from integer without a cast
/Users/ryangrasell/Desktop/opengl.c:12: error: 'GLUT' undeclared (first use in this function)
/Users/ryangrasell/Desktop/opengl.c:12: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
/Users/ryangrasell/Desktop/opengl.c:12: error: for each function it appears in.)
/Users/ryangrasell/Desktop/opengl.c:12: error: parse error before 'DEPTH'

You probably want to use GLUT_DEPTH instead of GLUT DEPTH in the glutInitDisplayMode function. -- JSBillings 18:09, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

That's fixed now with this code:

#include <stdlib.h>
#include </Developer/SDKs/MacOSX10.4u.sdk/System/Library/Frameworks/GLUT.framework/Versions/A/Headers/glut.h>

int x = 100;
int y = 100;

int main(int argc, char **argv) {
     glutInit(&argc, argv); //Call glutInit, which returns void, with the parameters passed to main.

     glutInitWindowPosition(x, y); //Call glutInitWindowPosition, passing in variables x and y, to set our initial window position.

     glutInitDisplayMode(GLUT_RGB | GLUT_SINGLE | GLUT_DEPTH); //Set initial display mode.

     int window1 = glutCreateWindow("Some Title"); //Need to feed glutCreateWindow a string for the caption.

     return 0;
}

I still get an error though:

/usr/bin/ld: Undefined symbols:
_glutCreateWindow
_glutInit
_glutInitDisplayMode
_glutInitWindowPosition
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status

You have to reference the GLUT libraries so the linker can link your code to them. What compiler are you using? Splintercellguy 22:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

GCC —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.195.124.101 (talk • contribs)

You need to tell gcc to link against the GLUT libraries when you compile the software. If you have the software installed, a simple

gcc -lglut opengl.c

will tell it to search for the libglut library. -- JSBillings 14:01, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Switching to another network port ("NIC") on W2K and XP

For testing purposes, I have a PC configured with several different types of NICs (or equivalents), all set to use the same static IP address/subnet mask (10.0.0.1/255.255.255.0). At any given point in time, only one of these ports is actually connected to the downstream system (which lives at 10.0.0.2). During my testing, I need to switch among these several NICs and make sure the downstream system operates with all of the different NIC types.

Windows/2K grudgingly lets me set all these NICs to the same address. But to switch from one NIC to the next, not only must I move my cable, but I find that I must also either:

• Reboot, or
• Manually disable (Status->Disable) the current NIC and Enable (Status->Enable) the new NIC

Is there a more-automatic way of accomplishing this? Is the behaviour essentially the same in Windows/XP as in Win2K?

Atlant 12:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

• Check out the article on netsh and its subsequent links. You can make some handy scripts that can do the work for you. -wizzard2k ^(C-T-D) 15:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Problems with ubuntu fiesty fawn, screen resolution, on a Dell monitor.

Hi, I've just installed ubuntu 7.04, and can't get the correct screen resolution on my monitor. Here are the contents of my xorg.conf file

 Section "Monitor"
	 Identifier	"DELL SE197FP"
	 Option		"DPMS"
 EndSection

 Section "Screen"
	 Identifier	"Default Screen"
	 Device		"nVidia Corporation C51 [GeForce 6150 LE]"
	 Monitor		"DELL SE197FP"
	 DefaultDepth	24
	 SubSection "Display"
	 	Depth		1
	 	Modes		"1272x1272" "1024x768" "880x704" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
	 EndSubSection
	 SubSection "Display"
		 Depth		4
		 Modes		"1272x1272" "1024x768" "880x704" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
	 EndSubSection
	 SubSection "Display"
		 Depth		8
		 Modes		"1272x1272" "1024x768" "880x704" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
 	 EndSubSection
	 SubSection "Display"
		 Depth		15
		 Modes		"1272x1272" "1024x768" "880x704" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
	 EndSubSection
	 SubSection "Display"
		 Depth		16
		 Modes		"1272x1272" "1024x768" "880x704" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
	 EndSubSection
	 SubSection "Display"
		 Depth		24
		 Modes		"1272x1272" "1024x768" "880x704" "800x600" "720x400" "640x480"
	 EndSubSection
 EndSection

I don't understand the contents of this file, and the options displayed are nor available under system - preferences - screen resolution. My Dell handbook does not tell me the screen resolution which I am supposed to be working at, but I know it should be higher than 800*600, which is what I am currently set at. What can I do? Please explain in laymans terms.

Maria

Have you tried running sudo dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg? Make sure to backup /etc/X11/xorg.conf before doing so. Splintercellguy 13:55, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

What SCG said, but you will need to know the native resolution of the monitor in order to configure it properly --L^augh! 13:57, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've followed splintercellguy's advice, and have got up to a terminal screen which has a series of options for screen resoltuion. These options have boxs which look like this [ ] or [*] , however, I can't seem to edit these boxes, and I need to put a star in the one which says 1280*1024.

spacebar. --L^augh!

Ah lovely, thanks

Maria

Let me explain what you saw in the file above a bit:

1) First, they list various screen resolutions. The first number is the number of pixels (dots) displayed from the right to left side of the monitor, and the second number is the dots from top to bottom. I assume your monitor is physically 4/3 times as wide as it is high, as that's quite standard for computer monitors. That means if it's 9 inches high, then it's 12 inches wide, since 9 x 4/3 = 12. If this is the case, then you would do best to use a screen resolution which also has an aspect ratio of 4:3 or approximately 1.33:1. Of those screen resolutions listed, these have that ratio:

880x704

800x600

640x480

So, you would do best to pick one of those screen resolutions. If you choose a screen resolution with a different aspect ratio you will either have black areas on the edges of the screen or the picture will be distorted (circles will look like ovals). This is especially true of the 1272x1272 resolution, which has a 1:1 aspect ratio, and the 720x400 resolution, which has a 1.8:1 aspect ratio. The 1024x768 resolution has a 1.25:1 aspect ratio, which is fairly close to 1.33:1, so you could probably just adjust the display width and height on the monitor to make that work.

2) The color depth is the next issue. A color depth of 1 bit means pixels are only black or white, not even any greys (which makes horrid black and white pictures). A color depth of 4 is usually greyscale, with each pixel having 2⁴ or 16 possible shades of grey (which makes OK greyscale pictures). I've also seen some computers use 16 different colors (which makes horrid color pictures). A color depth of 8 is either greyscale with 2⁸ or 256 shades of grey (which makes an excellent greyscale pic) or 256 colors (which makes for a poor color pic). A color depth of 15 is 2¹⁵ or 32,768 colors (which makes for an OK color pic). A color depth of 16 is 2¹⁶ or 65,536 colors (which makes for a good color pic). A color depth of 24 is 2²⁴ or 16,777,216 colors (which makes for an excellent color pic). (I've also seen a color depth offered of 32 bits, which, at 4.3 billion possible colors per pixel seems like silly overkill, to me.)

3) So, of the choices listed, I'd go with 24 bit color and a resolution of either 880x704 or 1024x768 (then fiddle with the controls on the monitor to fix the aspect ratio).

StuRat 16:23, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Safari, OS X and sortable tables

Message posted at Village Pump and it was suggested I try here. Original note with two brief replies follows.Ben MacDui (Talk) 18:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I recently discovered the the sort function on "wikitable sortable" e.g. List of United States cities by population does not work with OSX and Safari. Sometimes clicking in the data fields just toggles the list up and down alphabetically; today for some reason the sort buttons are missing completely. This applies to both OS 10.3.9 with Safari 1.3.2 and OS 10.4.10 with Safari 2.0.4. OS 10.4.10 with Firefox 2.0.0.3 is fine. Ben MacDui (Talk) 19:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Konqueror, which has a common origin with Safari, seems to handle that page fine. I'm running Konqueror 3.5.6 on Kubuntu i386.-203.173.179.215 23:58, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

It seems to work with Safari on Windows XP. DuncanHill 00:06, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

I just looked at the table and found that it kind of works under Safari in OS X. The buttons are there, but regardless of column, it only sorts by population. Donald Hosek 18:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Funny they told you to come here from the Village Pump — it is entirely the wrong place for reporting bugs with Wikipedia code. Village Pump/Technical is better; Help Desk might work; or you might try directly to the mailing lists. --24.147.86.187 02:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Village Pump/Technical was where the question was originally posed. Where are the mailing lists'? Ben MacDui (Talk) 07:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Whoever told you to come here was totally wrong — we don't debug Wikipedia software problems here, that's what VP/T is supposed to do. Anyway, you probably want Wikipedia:Bug reports. --140.247.236.107 19:11, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks - looks like it has been reported already as bug No 8288. Ben MacDui (Talk) 08:17, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Total RAM replacement

I was ordering a 1GB RAM upgrade from Crucial, but somehow ended up ordering two of them. I'm running 512MB of RAM in my computer right now, and there are two RAM slots; would there be any negative side effects if I removed the 512MB module and replaced it with a 1GB module? If there aren't, I'll just replace the old module to have a total 2GB of memory. If there are, I'll have to cancel the order.--The Ninth Bright Shiner 20:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

No, there shouldn't be any problem as long as you bought the correct type/size ram. In any case, having 2 of the same size ram is better if you motherboard supports dual-channel memory.--GTPoompt(talk) 20:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Great, thanks! I just can't wrap my mind around any part of the RAM article...--The Ninth Bright Shiner 20:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

If you are running dual-channel then you will lose that as your sticks of RAM are different-sized. It shouldn't matter much for AMD platform (well not as much) but for the older NetBurst based Pentiums and Celerons, performance can reduce up to 10%. --antilived^{T | C | G} 06:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Different sized? The way I understand it, TNBS bought 2 identical memmory sticks and will remove the old memmory before insert new sticks. That way he should have no problems, and whats more the dual-channel capabilities will be utilized to its fullest. — Shinhan < talk > 11:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm on second look it does seem like the case, as now he/she has 3 512MB sticks lying around with one not used. --antilived^{T | C | G} 04:49, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Um, actually, I'm running 512MB, and I accidentally ordered two 1GB modules. There's only two RAM ports on my computer, so I have the options of either 1.5GB or 2GB of RAM right now. I'm pretty sure that my computer is capable of dual channel.--The Ninth Bright Shiner 00:55, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

OK then, I suggest replacing the single 512MB module with the two 1GB modules, which should give you the ability to run dual channel. You can try to sell the old 512MB module on eBay, if you wish. Incidentally, the double order problem normally happens when you hit the BUY button, nothing seems to happen, so you hit it again. Each hit of the button then generates a purchase request. Many sites will ship two items purchased on the same day in the same package. StuRat 15:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

good antivirus software

what are good antivarius software? i use panda and its pretty good. i'm thinking about buying one. i looked around and bitdefender and kaspersky seem to be best but i know nothing about them!!!--anon

NOD32 is amazing. JoshHolloway 21:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Avast! has treated me very well and it is free 161.222.160.8 23:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Depends on your usage, if it is not critical than free AV software such as Avast, AVG, or Antivir should do fine. If you really want to keep your system up and running and have better support than professional antivirus software is most likily better. Either way make sure you do regular backups, they are more important than the antivirus software to protect your data.--64.40.88.131 20:03, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Hard drive space

years ago there was not even 1GB and now there is 1TB why do they wait they know we want more why dont they just make the 1PB now instead of waiting 10 years —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.185.130.11 (talk • contribs) 23:07, 17 July 2007

Years ago there were no cars or TVs and we hunted with sticks. Now there are computers and airplanes and stuff. Why do they wait? They know we want more. Why don't they just make the spaceships now instead of waiting 100 years? -131.215.167.225 23:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, and I want a flying car and a robot to do my dishes! Seriously though i don't know about the technical aspect of it but it may be worthwhile to read about planned obsolescence. 161.222.160.8 23:23, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Look at Moore's law. Gutworth (talk) 02:12, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

You can get a PB, by chaining together lots and lots of large drives. They are just expensive at this point. As drive technology gets better, and as demand for such high volumes rises, they'll become cheaper and more common. At the moment there's not a whole lot of demand for them: all of Google takes up "only" 2 PB, according to our petabyte article. Relatively few people can actually use a TB of data; even fewer can use a PB. So there's not a lot of incentive to make them onto small, consumer-sized drives, yet. --24.147.86.187 02:43, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Are you kidding? Even a modest collection of DVDs (fewer than a hundred) fills a terabyte of storage as does a fair-sized collection of CDs if stored with lossless compression; our terabyte-sized disk is starting to look mighty cramped already! Bring on the petabytes!

Atlant 11:41, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

A few hypothesis on why disk space for the average consumer became a larger issue: higher bandwidth (56k -> cable speeds) and its associated demand for larger files and transfer (such as uploading video and downloading torrents/warez), the switch from floppies to CDs and partially now DVDs due to increases in both program complexity and required assets (PC games as the best example of the latter), and the rapidly declining price of HD-based storage. I expect most consumers to max out at about 2TB in the near future. If bandwidth speeds continue to increase (due to network coding and other technologies, or perhaps more consumers using shared fiber lines for some reason), that may go up, but we've gone from Internet text taking up all available bandwidth to pictures and animated .gifs (spinning Under Construction gifs anyone?) taking up the most bandwidth to music and sound taking up the most (Napster era, early P2P) to eventually video (YouTube). And once you hit video, then what? Representations of reality only go higher when talking about technologies such as (the popular/sci-fi use of the word) holography. The irony is if bandwidth limits start to increase and some sort of 3D information transfer and display takes place over the Internet we may need holography-based storage to store it :) -Wooty [Woot?] [Spam! Spam! Wonderful spam!] 06:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Years ago they didn't know how to cram 1G on a hard disk and now they do. People learn how to do things and then they do them. They know you want 1PB, they just don't know how to cram it into a little box yet.

Normal PC disk drives come in standard form factors (sizes and shapes) so that they can fit in a standard computer case or laptop. Disk companies usually just release drives of whatever round-number capacity they can fit into a device of that size and shape. They could release a PiB-capacity single-drive, but its non-standard size would limit its commercial success. It all comes down to data storage density, which grows over time as technology progresses. --TotoBaggins 14:45, 18 July 2007 (UTC)