Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Yeah, But the PR Fallout ...' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Yeah, But the PR Fallout ...
Authored by: Anonymous on Oct 09, '02 10:23:03AM

A little embarrassing, though. Could you imagine if Microsoft decided to roll out their own Switch ads? That same music in the background, and some stoned teenager saying, "Yeah, and when my math teacher said that the answer to 37+37 wasn't wasn't 74.00000002, I realized ... I needed Windows." (Note: I hate M$ and have been a loyal Apple user for three years so far. But this *IS* a bit of a potential PR "d'oh!" for Apple.)



[ Reply to This | # ]
Yeah, But the PR Fallout ...
Authored by: Polemarchus on Oct 09, '02 01:07:20PM

Back in the early 90's, Microsoft had a similar glitch with the calculator provided with Win 3.0 through Win 3.11. In these versions subtracting an integer such as "3" from a decimal like "3.1" would result in an answer of "0"

Personally, I don't have Jaguar yet and so I can't try this out, but what happens when the resultant ".07000000001" is multiplied by 100000000? Does the error remain? Or is it like a previous poster commented only a display glitch?

Even if the problem is more than a display glitch, Microsoft wouldn't be wise to attack Apple on this, since their bug was even more significant valuewise.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Yeah, But the PR Fallout ...
Authored by: weber on Oct 09, '02 06:58:09PM

no, it doesn't carry through the extra digit; apparently it is just a display-only bug.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Yeah, But the PR Fallout ...
Authored by: paploo on Oct 09, '02 04:50:01PM
Since the number holds more digits of precision during calculations, it turns out that 0.07+0.07 is indeed 0.14, not 0.140000...02. Even if you use the memories, so as to actually be using the 0.0700000...01 values.

Indeed, if you program in floating point very often, you'll find that having those little errors like this are actually normal and *extremely* common. However when operations are done with them, things always work out.

I don't know all the details of the whys and hows, but it has to do with the IEEE way in which floating point numbers are represented. Certain exact values are impossible to exactly represent (or something like that). I know that often times the results of calculations give things like 14.9999999999999 or 15.0000000000001. But I'm unsure of any of the details as to why. I'm just vague on this. (Anyone with exacting knowledge care to follow up on this for me?)

Anyway, it is a tad embarrassing that they didn't write complete algorithms to display it as 0.07 instead of 0.0700000...01, but what users don't know (and can't tell), is that that extra algorithms are written to handle displaying the number the way we want to see it. Internally, the floating point variable is still holding the same value.

-Jeff

(I've written a few calculators in my time. :) )

[ Reply to This | # ]