Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.sys.laptops > #198

Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken

From Roger Mills <watt.tyler@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.sys.laptops
Subject Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken
Date 2011-05-14 20:57 +0100
Organization Association of Revolting Peasants
Message-ID <93853pFpuhU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References <91146369-341d-4b1a-95b1-c907d1ee178b@z7g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <932i5qFr0aU1@mid.individual.net> <77trs616nf4grbrcva38ltbghjdf0mhabl@4ax.com>

Show all headers | View raw


On 14/05/2011 04:23, Anthony R. Gold wrote:
> On Thu, 12 May 2011 18:03:03 +0100, Roger Mills<watt.tyler@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> What happens when you copy:
>> a) between two different USB devices
>> b) from hard-disk to USB stick and then back to hard-disk?
>>
>> The amount of disk space used will probably be different in different
>> media because of differences in the format system and/or block size.
>>
>> But it's almost certain that the actual *contents* of the files - as
>> seen by the applications which use those files - will be the same.
>
> Back in the days of 8 bit CP/M that could have been true but Windows counts
> file sizes to the exact byte and I have never even once seen something that
> you claim to be "almost certain".

As far as I know, the OP hasn't been back to tell us how he was 
comparing the files.

I was making the point that, in Windows, a file has *two* sizes - the 
number of bytes of contents and the number of bytes of disk space occupied.

If you copy a file from one storage device to another, the first of 
these should always be the same - but the second frequently won't 
because it will always be an integral number of blocks, and will thus 
change with blocksize.

I suspect that the OP's copy is ok (which is what I meant by saying that 
the contents will almost certainly be the same) and that he has been 
misled by some spurious comparison into thinking that he has a problem.
-- 
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom 
checked.

Back to comp.sys.laptops | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Data transferred via USB ports is broken Stefan Mueller <seekware@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-11 16:04 -0700
  Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken Tom Cole <tacoleNOSPAM@yahoo.co.nz> - 2011-05-12 11:22 +1200
  Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken Roger Mills <watt.tyler@gmail.com> - 2011-05-12 18:03 +0100
    Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken "Anthony R. Gold" <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk> - 2011-05-13 23:23 -0400
      Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken Roger Mills <watt.tyler@gmail.com> - 2011-05-14 20:57 +0100
        Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken Stefan Mueller <seekware@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-14 15:41 -0700
          Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken "Anthony R. Gold" <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk> - 2011-05-14 19:41 -0400
          Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken "~misfit~" <sore_n_happy@nospamyahoo.com.au> - 2011-05-15 13:54 +1200
            Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken "Anthony R. Gold" <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk> - 2011-05-14 22:47 -0400
              Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken "Anthony R. Gold" <not-for-mail@ahjg.co.uk> - 2011-05-15 01:29 -0400
            Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken Stefan Mueller <seekware@yahoo.com> - 2011-05-15 12:10 -0700
          Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken lmarco@panix.com (Lou Marco) - 2011-05-17 17:01 +0000
            Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken ak621@chebucto.ns.ca (Richard Bonner) - 2011-05-26 16:02 +0000
          Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken ak621@chebucto.ns.ca (Richard Bonner) - 2011-05-26 15:57 +0000
  Re: Data transferred via USB ports is broken lmarco@panix.com (Lou Marco) - 2011-05-17 16:56 +0000

csiph-web