The number of address lines needed to access N-KB is given by log2N Then the number of address lines needed to access 256KB of main memory will be log2256000=18 address lines.
Eight address lines would be required to access a 256x8 memory device.
Eight address bits are required for 256 bytes of memory.
A memory with a 16 bit address bus can address 216 or 65536 distinct items. If each item is 32 bits in size, then the item is 4 bytes. The size of this memory is then 262144 bytes. (256Kb)
256kb to 640kb
4000
Virtual memory is a special file on the harddisk that the operating system can swap pages of physical RAM back and forth with to allow more programs than fit in physical RAM to run on the machine at the same time. For example on the computer I am writing this on right now the installed physical RAM is only 1GB, but the virtual memory file is about 50GB. Thats a lot more resident programs and data than the machine could support without the virtual memory!
kbps refers to kilobits so it would be 32 kilobytes per second which is 32768 bytes or 262144 bits.
There are four segment registers in the 8086/8088 processor, CS, DS, ES, and SS, also known as Code Segment, Data Segment, Extra Segment, and Stack Segment. Any time an address is generated by the processor, it is added to the value of one of the segment registers, after that segment register is effectively multiplied by 16, or left shifted four bits, in order to generate the physical address that accesses memory. This gives an effective address range of 20 bits, or 1mb, but note that only 64kb is addressable through any segment register at one time, unless you stop to change the contents of that segment register. This is known as a segmented architecture. By default, the CS register is used when fetching instructions, the DS register is used when accessing data, the SS register is used when accessing the stack, and the ES register is used during certain string type instructions. If desired, an instruction prefix can be used to override, such as forcing use of CS instead of DS when using a table contained within opcode space.
A hypothetical 32x1 RAM chip provides storage for 32 bits or 4 bytes. 256k bytes require 256 * 1000 * 8 = 2048000 bits (or 256 * 1024 * 8 = 2097152 bits, if the k is interpreted to mean kibibyte rather than kilobyte, using the IEC nomenclature).Because 2048000 / 32 = 64000, you'd need 64000 chips.
This is just an estimate, but I'm thinking approximately 50,000 songs or so. I have a 500 GB hard drive that is a little over half full and I have a well over 65,000 songs on it. Hope it helps.
If you stick strictly to AAC 128 kb/s it will hold roughly 3,000 albums. I got this number by diving 40,000 songs (the number Apple says it will hold if in 128 kb/s) by 12 (The number of songs most albums commonly have). I got 3333.333... I think 3,000 albums is a very safe estimate since you'll most likely have albums that do not reach or exceed the "12 song" average.At AAC 256 kb/s the number of songs/albums would simply be half of the AAC 128 kb/s numbers.Obviously unless you're very strict about what format your music is in your number will fluctuate. I filled a 160GB Classic with music I had collected over time in various formats none exceeding 320kb/s in either AAC or MP3. The number of albums I could fit was around 2,000.@128kb/s AAC 3,000*@256kb/s AAC 1,500**Again these are rough but very safe estimates.
With the arrival of iTunes Plus and DRM-free 256kbs AAC files Maximum PC decided to put the higher encoding rate to the test. Running a double-blind experiment with ten subjects and both Apple's included earbuds as well as high-end Shure SE420 canalphones, the results were disappointing. Overall, while most of the subjects did prefer the higher bit rate encoding, "there wasn't a tremendous distinction between the tracks encoded at 128Kb/s and those encoded at 256Kb/s. None of [of the subjects] were absolutely sure about their choices with either set of earphones, even after an average of five back-to-back A/B listening tests." Personally, I'm skeptical. I listen to quite a bit of classical music and jazz, and I'm very much more inclined to buy these at the higher bit rate. Maximum PC concluded that the lack of DRM and not audio quality is the most important aspect of iTunes Plus (though they don't think it's worth 30 cents a track).
The floppy disk was originally developed at IBM for the purpose of loading microcode RAM in their System 370 computers introduced in 1971. As the disk would only be in the drive at most once a day for no more than a couple of minutes then returned to its protective sleeve, there was no concern about wear or exposure to dirt as there was with earlier removable hard discs. When they were first adapted to inexpensive data storage on microcomputers, while these issues now became important nothing was done originally to address them. The primary concern for years was only increasing the data capacity and keeping the cost low. The original IBM 8 inch floppy disks only had a capacity of 80KB, the first microcomputer 8 inch floppy disks increased this to 128KB which was then increased by spacing the tracks closer, doubling the density, and by making use of both sides to: 256KB, 512KB, and finally 1MB. More compact microcomputer 5.25 inch floppy disks were introduced initially had a capacity of 98.5 KB, which was then by a variety of improvements and use of different formatting increased to 110 KB, 360 KB, 720 KB, and finally 1.2 MB. Both the 8 and 5.25 floppy disks provided no protection to the media when outside the drive unless the user put them back in their sleeves (which often got lost). Also the "case" enclosing the floppy disk was itself flexible and this could allow the media to be damaged if it was flexed too much. A new microcomputer 3.5 inch floppy disk was introduced that addressed these issues by using a hard case with a shutter to cover the media when the disk was outside the drive. The most common capacity was 1.44 MB. However the floppy disks are becoming obsolete as Flash based storage devices (e.g. USB, SD, microSD, CompactFlash) have become widely available at low cost and much higher capacity than floppy disks. Flash based storage devices do not have the problems of wear and dirt that have always challenged the Floppy disks (however they do undergo electrical wearout that limits their lifetime).
The floppy disk was originally developed at IBM for the purpose of loading microcode RAM in their System 370 computers introduced in 1971. As the disk would only be in the drive at most once a day for no more than a couple of minutes then returned to its protective sleeve, there was no concern about wear or exposure to dirt as there was with earlier removable hard discs. When they were first adapted to inexpensive data storage on microcomputers, while these issues now became important nothing was done originally to address them. The primary concern for years was only increasing the data capacity and keeping the cost low. The original IBM 8 inch floppy disks only had a capacity of 80KB, the first microcomputer 8 inch floppy disks increased this to 128KB which was then increased by spacing the tracks closer, doubling the density, and by making use of both sides to: 256KB, 512KB, and finally 1MB. More compact microcomputer 5.25 inch floppy disks were introduced initially had a capacity of 98.5 KB, which was then by a variety of improvements and use of different formatting increased to 110 KB, 360 KB, 720 KB, and finally 1.2 MB. Both the 8 and 5.25 floppy disks provided no protection to the media when outside the drive unless the user put them back in their sleeves (which often got lost). Also the "case" enclosing the floppy disk was itself flexible and this could allow the media to be damaged if it was flexed too much. A new microcomputer 3.5 inch floppy disk was introduced that addressed these issues by using a hard case with a shutter to cover the media when the disk was outside the drive. The most common capacity was 1.44 MB. However the floppy disks are becoming obsolete as Flash based storage devices (e.g. USB, SD, microSD, CompactFlash) have become widely available at low cost and much higher capacity than floppy disks. Flash based storage devices do not have the problems of wear and dirt that have always challenged the Floppy disks (however they do undergo electrical wearout that limits their lifetime).