While this lawsuit is dumb Apple will be really shooting themselves in the foot if they don't make 32GB the starting point for storage (and wherever they're selling 8GB models upping that to 16GB). Apple makes money hand over fist. Keeping the base model at 16GB is a money grab pure and simple. Offering 32GB for the price of 16GB won't prevent Apple from investing in R&D or paying dividends. Apple will still make a shit load more profit than anyone else sans Exxon Mobile. But most importantly they'll Improve customer satisfaction.
While this lawsuit is dumb Apple will be really shooting themselves in the foot if they don't make 32GB the starting point for storage
But that won't stop this argument... because a 32GB iPhone still only has about 28GB of user-addressable storage space.
The lawsuit claims Apple is "misrepresenting" iPhone storage. They say the storage advertised is not how much storage the user can actually use.
I think it's a silly lawsuit... because Apple is simply saying how much storage is in the device. And why wouldn't they? A 16GB iPhone has 16GB of storage in it. A 32GB iPhone has 32GB of storage in it. Seems logical to me.
But there are some people who think Apple is lying to them... saying the available storage is much less than the advertised storage.
Well duh... it's been like that for years... from every manufacturer. The operating system has always taken up some space.
I'm really curious to see how this lawsuit turns out. Will Apple be forced to show available storage space instead of total storage space?
But that won't stop this argument... because a 32GB iPhone still only has about 28GB of user-addressable storage space.
32 GB is 29.8 GiB before formatting. Remove, say, 2.5 GiB for formatting, recovery, OS and default apps, etc., and you have about 27.3 GiB, +/- 400 MiB, listed in Settings » About.
So there are two things Apple could address, and one of them I'm surprised they haven't since they addressed it years ago in Mac OS X.
Of course this has merit. That's why lawyers took the case. It's an easy payout in a settlement. Lawyers will make their many many bucks, the plaintiffs will get a few bucks back for the cost of their devices, other iOS 8 users may get a $5 Apple gift card, and those of us sitting on iOS 6 devices with 4 gigabytes of space stolen by unwanted iOS 7 upgrade installers will get nothing (whatever became of that lawsuit anyway?).
Where are they getting their figures from? Why would iOS take up more space on an iPod than an iPhone? And are these people going to sue every other manufacturer since they're even worse than Apple in this regard?
Yes but some of these devices feature removeable storage making this a non issue.
An empty drive is like an empty house. You have a certain amount of useable space. Then you put in your furniture and other belongings, and you have a significant fraction [B]less[/B] space than you started with. Chip makers aren't going to make odd sized chips to accommodate how large a given OS might be, or grow to. Adding an additional drive or chip for the OS to live on adds extra complexity and cost, therefore I don't see this situation ever changing. You will always get less than the full capacity.
Of course this has merit. That's why lawyers took the case. It's an easy payout in a settlement. Lawyers will make their many many bucks, the plaintiffs will get a few bucks back for the cost of their devices, other iOS 8 users may get a $5 Apple gift card, and those of us sitting on iOS 6 devices with 4 gigabytes of space stolen by unwanted iOS 7 upgrade installers will get nothing (whatever became of that lawsuit anyway?).
Business as usual.
So all cases that are dismissed by the courts as being frivolous have merit because a lawyer decided to represent a plaintiff? :???: If they are getting paid by the plaintiff directly then I guess it's merit for the lawyer(s) because it's revenue, but I wouldn't call the case itself meritable.
Exhibit A: The crazy guy that claimed he invented the iPod but the idea was stolen by Sarah Jessica Parker.
32 GB is 29.8 GiB before formatting. Remove, say, 2.5 GiB for formatting, recovery, OS and default apps, etc., and you have about 27.3 GiB, +/- 400 MiB, listed in Settings » About.
So there are two things Apple could address, and one of them I'm surprised they haven't since they addressed it years ago in Mac OS X.
So what should Apple do to address this?
Like I said earlier... should Apple start calling it a 12GB iPhone or 28GB iPhone?
No but they should be forced to advertise as per below:
Apple iPad Air 2 16GB[SIZE=8px]1[/SIZE]
[SIZE=8px]1. Available user storage will be less than quoted figure due to installation of Operating System. Please take this nto account when purchasing.[/SIZE]
Like I said earlier... should Apple start calling it a 12GB iPhone or 28GB iPhone?
The opposite of that. Just change iOS to refer to sizes in decimal, like in Mac OS X. Humans can't crunch binary notation easily and there is simply no reason for us to do so. Let the OS handle all that.
They should also start using the clear language when there are cases that binary notation should be required.
They do, but it requires some consideration by the reader to understand that 1GB is 1 billion bytes, not ? 1.074 billion bytes, and that formatting referring to the HW capacity before the OS and other things are installed. The problem with [@]hentaiboy[/@]'s suggestion is that it still doesn't state how much the OS will take up and it still excluded other aspects of device before formatting and the default space available to the user.
Of course, my suggestions doesn't address that directly either, so maybe having a minimum available space available for user files under the Tech Specs page for each device would be a way to go.
Of course this has merit. That's why lawyers took the case. It's an easy payout in a settlement. Lawyers will make their many many bucks, the plaintiffs will get a few bucks back for the cost of their devices, other iOS 8 users may get a $5 Apple gift card, and those of us sitting on iOS 6 devices with 4 gigabytes of space stolen by unwanted iOS 7 upgrade installers will get nothing (whatever became of that lawsuit anyway?).
Business as usual.
Lawyers take cases regardless of merit. Lawyers take class action cases for cash.
The opposite of that. Just change iOS to refer to sizes in decimal, like in Mac OS X. Humans can't crunch binary notation easily and there is simply no reason for us to do so. Let the OS handle all that.
They should also start using the clear language when there are cases that binary notation should be required.
They do, but it requires some consideration by the reader to understand that 1GB is 1 billion bytes, not ? 1.074 billion bytes, and that formatting referring to the HW capacity before the OS and other things are installed. The problem with [@]hentaiboy[/@]'s suggestion is that it still doesn't state how much the OS will take up and it still excluded other aspects of device before formatting and the default space available to the user.
Of course, my suggestions doesn't address that directly either, so maybe having a minimum available space available for user files under the Tech Specs page for each device would be a way to go.
Ok... so if they publish a paragraph or whatever on the website... would that be enough?
Or will they have to actually change they way they refer to their products?
I have a 32GB iPhone 5S. Although it will never allow me to save 32GB of my own files on it... I still call it a 32GB iPhone.
Will Apple have to alter the descriptions of their products?
Right now Apple lists the total amount of storage in the product... not the customer-usable space. If you go to the iPhone page on the Apple Store it simply says 16GB, 64GB, 128GB.
Yes but some of these devices feature removeable storage making this a non issue.
But what can you store on that removable storage? Can you store apps there? Can you store music and video? Is it the same quality as flash storage on the device?
Ok... so if they publish a paragraph or whatever on the website... would that be enough?
Or will they have to actually change they way they refer to their products?
Will Apple have to alter the descriptions of their products?
I don't understand this question because I stated that I don't think any change needs to be done on that end, and that the change should be in measurement within the OS, like with Mac OS X.
What will it have to say if this lawsuit wins?
To me, it will say that that's one fucked up verdict.
But that won't stop this argument... because a 32GB iPhone still only has about 28GB of user-addressable storage space.
The lawsuit claims Apple is "misrepresenting" iPhone storage. They say the storage advertised is not how much storage the user can actually use.
I think it's a silly lawsuit... because Apple is simply saying how much storage is in the device. And why wouldn't they? A 16GB iPhone has 16GB of storage in it. A 32GB iPhone has 32GB of storage in it. Seems logical to me.
But there are some people who think Apple is lying to them... saying the available storage is much less than the advertised storage.
Well duh... it's been like that for years... from every manufacturer. The operating system has always taken up some space.
I'm really curious to see how this lawsuit turns out. Will Apple be forced to show available storage space instead of total storage space?
Will we see 12GB iPhones and 96GB Macbook Airs?
Ugh.
Oh I agree that's not what this lawsuit is about. But upping the base stoeage makes sense and would make lawsuits like this even more of a joke. But mostly I think it's just the right thing to do when your focus is on making the best products and providing the best consumer experiences.
Oh I agree that's not what this lawsuit is about. But upping the base stoeage makes sense and would make lawsuits like this even more of a joke. But mostly I think it's just the right thing to do when your focus is on making the best products and providing the best consumer experiences.
1) It will make these lawsuits even more common as the disparity between decimal and binary notation increases.
2) There is absolutely no loss of user experience for the vast number of people that fit well into the 16GB category. If you don't fit into it then get the capacity that does fit your particulate needs but stop trying to say that your needs are everyone else's needs.
I have always got the max storage model when getting a new phone. It's a simple rule. Get the max you can afford. Don't scrimp on it.
i don't understand that rule. Why would I get 128GB on my iPhone when 64GB would be adequate for my current and projected needs. In fact, 32GB would have been adequate but that wasn't an option so I bought the 64GB at the same price point I was expecting to buy the 32GB which should benefit me in a year when I sell it.
I don't believe the GB versus GiB issue is at all relevant to this discussion. Apple advertises a 16 GB device but only 12-13 GB is available for end-user storage. That's the complaint.
To clarify, Apple advertise 16 GB on the packaging.
iOS reports 12.6 or 12.2 GB free (using the figures from the Which? image), but is actually using the GiB (1024^3 bytes) unit.
12.6 * 1024^3 = 13.53 GB (in proper GB, meaning 10^9 bytes)
12.2 * 1024^3 = 13.10 GB
So, in comparison with advertised capacity, the two iPhones from the Which article are presenting between 2.37 and 2.90 GB (or 2.2 and 2.7 GiB) less user-accessible storage.
So it's a little bit better than your figures say, but not a great deal. Hopefully that helps get past the BASE2 BASE10 tangent.
As a separate comment, I think blaming the complaint for not including this detail is a bit spurious. Apple use GB on both, and if that lack of precision is contributing to a lack of understanding then that should be criticised too.
And also, just because Apple are not alone in doing this doesn't mean they shouldn't be in the firing line. If the case is won, the precedent is set, and other companies fall in line. In contrast, it's very hard to bring consumer action against an entire industry.
Comments
But that won't stop this argument... because a 32GB iPhone still only has about 28GB of user-addressable storage space.
The lawsuit claims Apple is "misrepresenting" iPhone storage. They say the storage advertised is not how much storage the user can actually use.
I think it's a silly lawsuit... because Apple is simply saying how much storage is in the device. And why wouldn't they? A 16GB iPhone has 16GB of storage in it. A 32GB iPhone has 32GB of storage in it. Seems logical to me.
But there are some people who think Apple is lying to them... saying the available storage is much less than the advertised storage.
Well duh... it's been like that for years... from every manufacturer. The operating system has always taken up some space.
I'm really curious to see how this lawsuit turns out. Will Apple be forced to show available storage space instead of total storage space?
Will we see 12GB iPhones and 96GB Macbook Airs?
Ugh.
32 GB is 29.8 GiB before formatting. Remove, say, 2.5 GiB for formatting, recovery, OS and default apps, etc., and you have about 27.3 GiB, +/- 400 MiB, listed in Settings » About.
So there are two things Apple could address, and one of them I'm surprised they haven't since they addressed it years ago in Mac OS X.
Business as usual.
Where are they getting their figures from? Why would iOS take up more space on an iPod than an iPhone? And are these people going to sue every other manufacturer since they're even worse than Apple in this regard?
Yes but some of these devices feature removeable storage making this a non issue.
Chip makers aren't going to make odd sized chips to accommodate how large a given OS might be, or grow to. Adding an additional drive or chip for the OS to live on adds extra complexity and cost, therefore I don't see this situation ever changing.
You will always get less than the full capacity.
So all cases that are dismissed by the courts as being frivolous have merit because a lawyer decided to represent a plaintiff? :???: If they are getting paid by the plaintiff directly then I guess it's merit for the lawyer(s) because it's revenue, but I wouldn't call the case itself meritable.
Exhibit A: The crazy guy that claimed he invented the iPod but the idea was stolen by Sarah Jessica Parker.
That gives users an option, but it doesn't make it a non-issue.
I'm really curious to see how this lawsuit turns out. Will Apple be forced to show available storage space instead of total storage space?
Will we see 12GB iPhones and 96GB Macbook Airs?
Ugh.
No but they should be forced to advertise as per below:
Apple iPad Air 2 16GB1
1. Available user storage will be less than quoted figure due to installation of Operating System. Please take this into account when purchasing.
So what should Apple do to address this?
Like I said earlier... should Apple start calling it a 12GB iPhone or 28GB iPhone?
That seems simple enough.
They don't do this already?
The opposite of that. Just change iOS to refer to sizes in decimal, like in Mac OS X. Humans can't crunch binary notation easily and there is simply no reason for us to do so. Let the OS handle all that.
They should also start using the clear language when there are cases that binary notation should be required.
They do, but it requires some consideration by the reader to understand that 1GB is 1 billion bytes, not ? 1.074 billion bytes, and that formatting referring to the HW capacity before the OS and other things are installed. The problem with [@]hentaiboy[/@]'s suggestion is that it still doesn't state how much the OS will take up and it still excluded other aspects of device before formatting and the default space available to the user.
Of course, my suggestions doesn't address that directly either, so maybe having a minimum available space available for user files under the Tech Specs page for each device would be a way to go.
Lawyers take cases regardless of merit. Lawyers take class action cases for cash.
Ok... so if they publish a paragraph or whatever on the website... would that be enough?
Or will they have to actually change they way they refer to their products?
I have a 32GB iPhone 5S. Although it will never allow me to save 32GB of my own files on it... I still call it a 32GB iPhone.
Will Apple have to alter the descriptions of their products?
Right now Apple lists the total amount of storage in the product... not the customer-usable space. If you go to the iPhone page on the Apple Store it simply says 16GB, 64GB, 128GB.
What will it have to say if this lawsuit wins?
But what can you store on that removable storage? Can you store apps there? Can you store music and video? Is it the same quality as flash storage on the device?
I don't understand this question because I stated that I don't think any change needs to be done on that end, and that the change should be in measurement within the OS, like with Mac OS X.
To me, it will say that that's one fucked up verdict.
Oh I agree that's not what this lawsuit is about. But upping the base stoeage makes sense and would make lawsuits like this even more of a joke. But mostly I think it's just the right thing to do when your focus is on making the best products and providing the best consumer experiences.
1) It will make these lawsuits even more common as the disparity between decimal and binary notation increases.
2) There is absolutely no loss of user experience for the vast number of people that fit well into the 16GB category. If you don't fit into it then get the capacity that does fit your particulate needs but stop trying to say that your needs are everyone else's needs.
i don't understand that rule. Why would I get 128GB on my iPhone when 64GB would be adequate for my current and projected needs. In fact, 32GB would have been adequate but that wasn't an option so I bought the 64GB at the same price point I was expecting to buy the 32GB which should benefit me in a year when I sell it.
So how would you state it?
I don't believe the GB versus GiB issue is at all relevant to this discussion. Apple advertises a 16 GB device but only 12-13 GB is available for end-user storage. That's the complaint.
To clarify, Apple advertise 16 GB on the packaging.
iOS reports 12.6 or 12.2 GB free (using the figures from the Which? image), but is actually using the GiB (1024^3 bytes) unit.
12.6 * 1024^3 = 13.53 GB (in proper GB, meaning 10^9 bytes)
12.2 * 1024^3 = 13.10 GB
So, in comparison with advertised capacity, the two iPhones from the Which article are presenting between 2.37 and 2.90 GB (or 2.2 and 2.7 GiB) less user-accessible storage.
So it's a little bit better than your figures say, but not a great deal. Hopefully that helps get past the BASE2 BASE10 tangent.
As a separate comment, I think blaming the complaint for not including this detail is a bit spurious. Apple use GB on both, and if that lack of precision is contributing to a lack of understanding then that should be criticised too.
And also, just because Apple are not alone in doing this doesn't mean they shouldn't be in the firing line. If the case is won, the precedent is set, and other companies fall in line. In contrast, it's very hard to bring consumer action against an entire industry.