OS X HD Partitioning

[Gil]

I'm not sure where exactly to put this, but since we're dealing with a PCI PowerMac, I'll put it here. I am trying to install OS X on one of my Macs with XPostFacto. I load the program and it says I cannot install it to my drive, because the partition exceeds the first 8 GB limit (or something like that; I have a 20 GB Hard Drive). What exactly should I do to fix this? Should I repartition it to make a HFS+ partition that is no larger than 8 GB's? Or does it just need to be the FIRST partition on the drive, whatever that means.

plllllease help.

 

[equill]

If by PCI Mac you in fact mean an Old World Mac (Beige G3 and older), the answer is:

1) less than 8GB and

2) the first partition (meaning visible volume) on the drive.

If you explicitly set the first partition to nominal 7.95GB and the second to nominal 12.05GB, you cannot go wrong without trying very hard to do so. Be sure to install OS 9 drivers if you will (and you will) wish also to be able to boot into OS 9.

de

 

[thinkdifferent]

I'm not sure where exactly to put this, but since we're dealing with a PCI PowerMac, I'll put it here. I am trying to install OS X on one of my Macs with XPostFacto. I load the program and it says I cannot install it to my drive, because the partition exceeds the first 8 GB limit (or something like that; I have a 20 GB Hard Drive). What exactly should I do to fix this? Should I repartition it to make a HFS+ partition that is no larger than 8 GB's? Or does it just need to be the FIRST partition on the drive, whatever that means.
plllllease help.

I don't think you can install OS X on old world Mac's... but maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Gil]

I'm not sure where exactly to put this, but since we're dealing with a PCI PowerMac, I'll put it here. I am trying to install OS X on one of my Macs with XPostFacto. I load the program and it says I cannot install it to my drive, because the partition exceeds the first 8 GB limit (or something like that; I have a 20 GB Hard Drive). What exactly should I do to fix this? Should I repartition it to make a HFS+ partition that is no larger than 8 GB's? Or does it just need to be the FIRST partition on the drive, whatever that means.
plllllease help.

I don't think you can install OS X on old world Mac's... but maybe I'm wrong.

XPostFacto.

Thanks for the tips, equill!

 

[tmtomh]

Because of the difference between binary and decimal Gigabytes (1.000 GB vs. 1.024 GB), I would recommend making your first partition no larger than 7.4GB.

Best,

Matt

 

[equill]

Which is why I suggested, and use, 'nominal' 7.95GB. Neither 7.95GiB nor 7.95GB will exceed 8GiB.

de

 

[tmtomh]

True, but if the 8GB limit is actually a decimal limit rather than a binary one (and I have no idea if it is or not), then 7.95GiB (binary) will most definitely exceed 8GB (decimal). By my reckoning, 8GB is about 7.45GiB.

M

 

[equill]

Surely 8GoB would be an unusual target for any purpose in a purely binary system, given that eight is exactly two cubed? Especially a system that is so bereft of mentation as to begin counting from zero rather than one as a first value? Zero is a concept, that, amongst other things, enables algebraic calculation, but no living human has ever seen zero quantity of anything.

de

 

[porter]

but no living human has ever seen zero quantity of anything.

Can you see "black"?

 

[Charlieman]

Zero is a concept, that, amongst other things, enables algebraic calculation, but no living human has ever seen zero quantity of anything.

If I place two oranges on the table, I can take one away and see the one remaining. I can take the other one away and thus see zero oranges. It is a relative difference -- zero versus "something" -- but one that is appreciated by most (all?) animals.

 

[Gil]

Uhhh...what. :O :?:

 

[porter]

It is a relative difference -- zero versus "something" -- but one that is appreciated by most (all?) animals.

Hi Honey, I'm home. Oh, I see you haven't done dinner.

 

[equill]

If I place two oranges on the table, I can take one away and see the one remaining. I can take the other one away and thus see zero oranges. It is a relative difference -- zero versus "something" -- but one that is appreciated by most (all?) animals.

No. That is altogether-human metonymy, and vernacular use of a highly-specific concept out of context. If there is none (=not one) or nothing present, you see none or nothing, not zero. The antonym of 'something' is 'nothing'. The very word zero (=emptiness) embraces that. Zero is the point from which algebraic mensuration begins, and as a point has no dimensions, including quantity. Arabic notation emphasizes that in its use of a '.' rather than a '0'.

The principal reason for its slipping into common parlance is much the same as the perversion of the mathematical operator 'plus' to serve in place of the specific 'also' or 'in addition'. It is on a par with the ceaseless churning of the advertising and bigbiz world's quest to justify its existence with feeble grandiloquence: deliverables, issues, stakeholders, transitioning, across, yecch ... Oh! How with it we are.

We have become inured to the inherent nonsense of using 'zero' as if it were a quantity because programmers wished to avoid the effort of translating the minimal value of a digital array into rational notation. That doesn't mean that we should lose sight of the reality that zero is an artifice, a concept. When you believe that you have four digits (0-4) on each hand rather than five (1-5), your example may begin to hold water, if not sense.

de

 

[Dog Cow]

If I place two oranges on the table, I can take one away and see the one remaining. I can take the other one away and thus see zero oranges. It is a relative difference -- zero versus "something" -- but one that is appreciated by most (all?) animals.

Illogical. Nothing is always nothing; it's never something or anything. Frankly, "nothing" is an abstract concept at best. I think you should refer to it in the opposite, ie, "There was not anything to see", rather than "There was nothing to see."

"I have nothing". What's that? You say you have something, either an idea or a physical entity. But in actuality, nothing is neither of those. Instead you should say "I don't have anything."

And lastly, you can't "see nothing," as in "I see nothing there," because there isn't anything at all to see. To say I "see nothing" means first you see something, but nothing is never something, so you should really revise that statement to instead read, "I don't see anything."

 

[porter]

Oh! How with it we are.

The two I like are

(a) negative growth - lots of that at the moment

( B) going forward - as if there was a time travel option

 

[equill]

but no living human has ever seen zero quantity of anything.

Can you see "black"?

I can 'see' black surroundings (ie, my retinas can receive insufficient light), because my brain interprets the apparent absence of light thus. Pure black, or total non-reflection of light, probably doesn't exist on this planet.

Can you count 'black'?

de

 

[porter]

Pure black, or total non-reflection of light, probably doesn't exist on this planet.

Have you been caving (potholing, coal-mining) and turned off the light?

 

[Charlieman]

Mathematical zero is a mathematical construct that suits your rules. In the rest of the world, one bone minus one bone equals zero bones. If my diet is bones, I can tell the difference between one bone and zero, because it means the difference between survival and hunger. Given that I live on bones, and there will be lots of other objects ("something") in my environment, I also need to be able to count bones. I must be able to see zero bones, otherwise I will not survive.

There are human cultures that count objects as one, two, three, more; in those cultures (numerically) there is no difference between four and 167. But that does not deny you the use of the higher numbers for your maths.

Incidentally, most dictionaries define zero in terms of a cardinal or ordinal number.

 

[Christopher]

but no living human has ever seen zero quantity of anything.

Can you see "black"?

duh.