[silverflyer]

than it did on my previous iBook?

honestly, I have no more stuff on my MBP C2D now than I did on my iBook and I am using 25.77gb.

My iBook only had a 30gb drive and I was only using about 16-17GBs. Why the big difference?

edit: also, I realize that a 120gb drive will never have a full 120gb capacity, but mine only has 111gb capacity, why is it losing so much?

[Randman]

Perhaps the iBook had fewer language packs installed, or printer setups that you don't need.

[silverflyer]

Originally Posted by Randman 

Perhaps the iBook had fewer language packs installed, or printer setups that you don't need.

I used Monolingual on both machines to get rid of the stuff I dont need or want. I don't know how to delete the printer packs, so that was the same on both.

[silverflyer]

Is there a way to see where all the disk space is going?

[Chuckit]

Probably because Mac OS X for Intel installs all Universal binaries.

[silverflyer]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Probably because Mac OS X for Intel installs all Universal binaries.

And those are larger files?

[Big Mac]

Yes. Strangely, though, even Intel only binaries are larger than their PowerPC counterparts.

[Catfish_Man]

Originally Posted by silverflyer 

Is there a way to see where all the disk space is going?

OmniDiskSweeper or similar

[analogika]

Originally Posted by silverflyer 

edit: also, I realize that a 120gb drive will never have a full 120gb capacity, but mine only has 111gb capacity, why is it losing so much?

This gets asked every week or so - we really should make it a sticky.

The reason for this is that hard drive manufacturers for SOME BIZARRE REASON insist on figuring that 1 kilobyte = 1000 bytes, and 1 megabyte = 1000 kilobytes, and 1 gigabyte = 1000 megabytes.

That is standard decimal terminology.

However, for SOME EQUALLY BIZARRE REASON, computer engineers way back when decided to use kilobyte to mean not 1000 bytes, but 1024 bytes (since computers are based on binary, not decimal, math). Why they used kilo-, mega-, giga-, tera-, and peta- despite the fact that they don't mean what they do in every single other context is beyond me.

Anyway, that means that 120GB hard drives are sold in *decimals*, i.e. marketing Gigabytes (1000 x 1000 x 1000), while the computer sees them in binary gigabytes (1024 x 1024 x 1024), which comes out to about 111GB for a 120 marketing-GB hard drive.

This would be a disadvantage if it weren't common practise: ALL storage media manufacturers figure this way.

Incidentally, this is also the reason a 4.7GB DVD-R will hold 4.4GB of data.

[Tsilou B.]

Originally Posted by silverflyer 

Is there a way to see where all the disk space is going?

A really great application for that purpose is DiskInventoryX from http://www.derlien.com/. Be sure to download the "universal beta version" for the MacBook.

[Curiosity]

Originally Posted by analogika 

Anyway, that means that 120GB hard drives are sold in *decimals*, i.e. marketing Gigabytes (1000 x 1000 x 1000), while the computer sees them in binary gigabytes (1024 x 1024 x 1024), which comes out to about 111GB for a 120 marketing-GB hard drive.

I thought that difference was because the formatting on the drive takes up some space, and the capacity quoted is the full size of the drive, not just the data storage area after formatting.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Curiosity 

I thought that difference was because the formatting on the drive takes up some space, and the capacity quoted is the full size of the drive, not just the data storage area after formatting.

That eats into it a little bit, but the big difference is because of what Analogika said.