LT commander Data specs

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 5:04 am

LT commander Data
about 14,545 GHz or 14.545 THz 
88 million Gb of storage or 88,0000 Tb of storage 
60 trillion operations per second 


maybe thats why the Borg queen wanted data, to work on the Borg perfection project ! 

Picard approved  :detective:

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 7:43 am

If only I had my own Data, just plug in a monitor and he becomes the best gaming computer ever

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 1:20 pm

If only I had my own Data, just plug in a monitor and he becomes the best gaming computer ever

data obviously doesn't have the correct architecture to run our programs. so he'd probably need an emulator, and if he didn't have one then somebody would need to write one. he could probably do it if he had the specs of our current architecture. he'd also need to find a way to interface with peripherals like keyboards/mice/joypads.

he probably still can't stop you getting noob tubed anyway.

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 2:53 pm

If only I had my own Data, just plug in a monitor and he becomes the best gaming computer ever

Nah because he wouldnt shut up so you couldnt hear the action.

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 4:49 pm

No, it's 88,000 Teraquads. Larger than an exabyte, larger than a yottabyte.

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 6:45 pm

Basically a quad is a realistic computing value. Its full name is QuadBit and its band calculation is at a 512bit cycle (I think... school was a long time ago).

Like today we have 64bit processors, data has 512bit. And instead of electrons he has positrons. Positrons are the opposite of electrons, where electrons have a negative charge, the positrons have a positive charge!

[trekky]

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 7:22 pm

Last edited by trekky on January 2nd, 2012, 7:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

No, it's 88,000 Teraquads. Larger than an exabyte, larger than a yottabyte.

no its 800 quadrillion bits = 88million gb

"Data has a storage capacity of 88.81784 PB" PB = petebyte

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 8:28 pm

Do you know you're trying to lecture a computer technitian about data stream width?

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 9:35 pm

quads are fictional, they purposefully kept quads ambiguous so that real tech doesn't overtake the sci fi tech. like tos with really chunky mobile phones and loads of switches and buttons.

tng actually had consistency, voyager then went absolutely insane with prefixes.

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 10:20 pm

Basically a quad is a realistic computing value. Its full name is QuadBit and its band calculation is at a 512bit cycle (I think... school was a long time ago).

Like today we have 64bit processors, data has 512bit. And instead of electrons he has positrons. Positrons are the opposite of electrons, where electrons have a negative charge, the positrons have a positive charge!

I've never heard anyone use quad as a real unit. Are you sure? The name Quadbit would indicate a half-byte, which doesn't have much use besides corresponding to a single hex value.

Technically, the use of positron circuitry doesn't make any sense, Asimov just picked it because it sounded awesome (and it's an antiparticle, anything with anti in it makes scifi writers go nuts). Today it's more likely that Soong would have used a quantum computer or early bioneural circuitry.

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 10:25 pm

Data with a Bioneural brain would be funny, an Android vulnerable to the common Cold and Neelix's "cooking".

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 10:41 pm

Not even the Borg can adapt to Neelix's "cooking". 

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 11:23 pm

where electrons have a negative charge, the positrons have a positive charge!

You are confusing positrons with protons, aren't you? 

posted on January 2nd, 2012, 11:34 pm

You are confusing positrons with protons, aren't you? 

he isn't. positrons have positive charge. the name isn't misleading. protons have positive charge as well. antiprotons have negative charge. the biggest difference between protons and positrons is that protons have a much larger mass. positrons have similar mass to electrons, which isn't much.

[Anonymous]

posted on January 3rd, 2012, 12:02 am

Last edited by Anonymous on January 3rd, 2012, 12:05 am, edited 1 time in total.

To be even more clear, positron is the same thing as an antielectron. It is identical in every way to an electron, except it has an opposite charge (and since electrons are negative, antielectrons are positive, hence positron) Every other property is identical, e.g. mass and spin, and when the two particles collide they convert all their combined mass into energy, in the famed matter-antimatter explosion that Star Trek is famous for.