Uploading files from PC

I’ve been backing up my GoPro files on to an external drive and copying them as a second backup on to MyCloud Home.

The files are held in a folder with different subfolders and, until recently, it was a simple task using the designated drive letters in File Explorer. Since we have lost that functionality it has become more complex and it fails to copy all the files. Yesterday I had an error message stating there was a limit on file sizes.

I can’t be the only GoPro user, but I really need to find a simple and reliable way to do something for which I originally bought MyCloud Home ie large storage and easy access

Mounting a drive letter is only a click away for Win file explorer or macOS, that has nothing to do with recent changes with the My Cloud Home (MCH).

For the MCH there is no OS limit and no Samba limit on file sizes, however there is often a GoPro file size limit of ~4 GiB. One can do this test on the OS easily, running a 8GiB test below (only Seq performed):



I use KiB, MiB, GiB, TiB when appropriate. It’s a very easy way for intelligent people to understand what someone is talking about.

You can continue to use furlongs, firkins and fortnights. The rest of the world doesn’t care. We’ve all moved on to an intelligent system of weights and measures. Even the Brits have recognised how stupid their imperial system really is. (BTW, do you measure your gasoline in US or imperial gallons?)

I see an octogenarian in a MAGA hat, railing against the 21st century. Face it, the imperial system is an anachronism that the rest of the world long ago consigned to the dustbin of history. The plain and simple reason is that, in the metric system, you either divide by 10 or multiply by 10. It’s uncomplicated, efficient and easy to learn. Why is this not self evident?

As for gallons, or fluid ounces, or pints, or quarts, or gills (?), a litre is a litre (or liter) everywhere on the planet, even in the USA and Myanmar, and it has never varied.

(One of the most epic fails was when NASA bounced a spacecraft off the Martian atmosphere and never saw it again. It turned out that NASA had been calculating trajectories in metres per second since 1990 while Lockheed’s idiots were still using furlongs per fortnight.)

Back to the subject of decimal and binary kilo/mega/giga/terabytes, you really need to understand the historical background. I grew up with memory chips and storage devices during the late 1970s and early 1980s. RAM chips were, and still are, accessed via data and address buses. These were almost always binary in nature. The address bus was either 4-bit or 8-bit or 16-bit and so on. The data bus was 1-bit or 4-bit or 8-bit, etc. Therefore the capacities of memory chips were nearly always expressed in powers of 2.

OTOH, hard drives and floppy diskettes were assigned all sorts of capacities which were never usually binary in nature. For example, a 3.5" floppy diskette has two sides, 80 tracks, 18 sectors per track, for a total of 2880 sectors. The sector size is 512 bytes, which is a power of 2. The total capacity is 1474560 bytes which is 1.40625 MiB. So where does the 1.44MB figure come from?

Typical 10MB and 20MB MFM HDDs of the 1980s had 17 sectors per track. Here is a 42MB Miniscribe HDD:


The CHS geometry was 809 cylinders, 6 heads, 17 sectors/track, 512 bytes/sector. The capacity was 42249216 bytes which is 42.24MB or 40.29MiB

Now tell me, how should the manufacturer specify the capacity? In short, memory capacity has historically been binary while storage capacity has been decimal.

Moreover, today we have SSDs which add a new twist to the capacity issue. Being memory devices, the NAND arrays will have a binary capacity, but part of this capacity will be reserved for firmware and overprovisioning. For example, a 1TB SSD will actually have 1TiB of memory, but 9% of it will be set aside for internal use. Creating an SSD with 1TiB of usable capacity would therefore be logistically impossible. No amount of stupid lawyers or stupid judges or stupid consumers can change that.

We, as in the rest of the world, do have a common frame of reference. We call it the metric system.

As for storage devices, we now have a capacity standard (aka “common frame of reference”) that is set by IDEMA. In fact, you will nearly always be getting more than the advertised capacity in your storage device, whatever it may be.


Should the metric world redefine the kilometre to be 1024 metres, and the kilogram to be 1024 grams, just to mollify you?

The powers-that-be have come up with KiB, MiB, GiB and TiB as a logical solution to the decimal/binary confusion. Eventually people will accept it and learn to live with it, as I did.

BTW, I still think of a person’s height in units of feet and inches instead of metres and centimetres. But that’s because I’m old, and old habits die hard.

The only logical argument that can be mounted against the adoption of the metric system in the USA is one of cost. That’s all. Any other argument is just absurd.

As for WD’s shady practices, I exposed several of them years ago. For example, WD’s Intellipower drives were falsely claimed to vary their spin speed from 5400 RPM to 7200 RPM according to workload. In fact, WD’s own datasheets stated that they rotated at a fixed invariable rate, usually 5400 RPM, although you had to zoom up the fine print to see it. The drive’s Identify Device data reported a rotation rate of 0. Clearly, WD was trying to hide something.

I was also the first to expose the reality behind WD’s “5400 RPM class” HDDs, long before Ars Tecnica became aware of it. In fact, these drives rotated at 7200 RPM, not 5400, and the firmware was “tuned” to reduce the performance.

In short, I’m not a WD shill. Far from it. In fact, there is no love lost between us.