I intend no offence will this post I'm just gonna explain the math again to you because you did not understand what I was saying and explain what answere I wanted from my original question, I do understand that I have poor english grammar skills and I sometimes don't even understand what I have written myself when I read it after I have written it, anyways I hope this will make it perfectly clear what my original question and my quote intended to say.

My question was not answered in the stub, I asked how thin NORMAL nand memory is, the article does not explain how thick that is, it simple states "40% smaller then currently available memory", If you didn't notice no particular memory is named and I'm sure there are lots of different thinness of memory on the market, for example lets say 1.20 mm 1.25 mm 1.3 mm , what I was asking was which is the normal thinness, not what the thickness was on the last memory chip that was the thinnest. The normal thinness is not necessarily the thinness the memory the article compared with.

Actually your still wrong, your saying the memory the samsung was compared with is .96 mm thick.
The memory that the article is comparing with is 1.00 mm thick
When you calculate if something is smaller then something you don't just use random % numbers, you use the original number itself (1.00mm) and multiply that with 0.40(40%)
1.00*0.40=0.60 0.60 is 40 % less then 1.00

agian I would like to state that this is not intended to look like any kind of insult, I'm just trying to make my points clear. :)

There you go - that makes sense.

Ahh, even on the second try, I fudged up. I now owe you dinner and movie. :-)

It's a date ! ^_^