True. I've had 2 years of iPhone 5 now, with 16 GB, and not only am running iOS 8, and have over 100 pictures, plus a handful of apps, but still have almost 8 GB of open space on the thing. I just don't need more storage, and am glad I didn't have to pay for it.
I was talking to [@]PhilBoogie[/@] last week about this. Most of the people I helped get into a new iPhone were perfect candidates for the 16GB model. Of course, I'm not helping those that would frequent this site (or even know it exists). These are typically the more basic users that still listen to the radio in their car, and likely AM talk radio stations.
The first thing I do or ask (and have to walk them through it) is about how much capacity they are currently using. if they are using less than 8GiB I say a 16GB iPhone will likely be fine, although I do talk about the merits of the 64GB model since it's 48GB for only $100 which I think will help with the resale in 2 years. These are people that likely wouldn't update for at least 2 years and not understand why it's cost effective to trade-in their old device instead of paying their carrier that additional subsidized fee that just goes into their carrier's pocket. Most were also on Verizon and still prefer voice calls and voicemails over a text-based message, if that's any indication of the family and friends I was assisting.
Finally, I do recall one person who has a 16GB iPhone 5 that I had to assist because it would not update to iOS 8 because it didn't have enough room. She is a surgeon and knows well enough, but she had the iOS bug which causes space to be erroneously filled (or at least reserved) and iTunes on her Mac wouldn't even mount it. After I resolved the issue with some special actions and a restore she did have about 4GiB of space free, but I recommended that when she update she definitely spend the extra $100 for the 64GB model.
* I was able to save everything but her PDFs in iBooks. I thought those were saved to iCloud. Is there an easy solution to do this in the future or will each PDF in iBooks have to be forwarded to another service individually?
iBooks has buggered up PDFs. They have never been synced through iCloud, and probably never will be. I now use Preview via iCloud Drive and a third party app to sync my PDFs. It was bad of Apple to neglect this aspect of iBooks. In fact, the whole app is a mess and needs a complete rethink, both on iOS and OS X.
I was able to save everything but her PDFs in iBooks. I thought those were saved to iCloud. Is there an easy solution to do this in the future or will each PDF in iBooks have to be forwarded to another service individually?
When dealing with a rollout of over 200 million units in a single year, you have to take into consideration if manufacturers can actually give you all the parts you need.
That's a valid point. Something Ikea does as well.
I don't understand why people think Apple is 'sort of ripping us off' with their new 16/64/128 lineup: as long as they also sell a 8GB iPhone we cannot possibly expect them to start the other models with 32GB. Besides, 16GB is just fine for many, if not most people; do some really think Apple hasn't figured this out all along? Dropping the 32GB model was a kind gesture, as you get 48GB for $100 price increase (which used to get you 16GB). The 5s has a $50 price increase to go from 16GB to 32GB.
Perhaps this helps: http://imazing.com
That's a valid point. Something Ikea does as well.
I don't understand why people think Apple is 'sort of ripping us off' with their new 16/64/128 lineup: as long as they also sell a 8GB iPhone we cannot possibly expect them to start the other models with 32GB. Besides, 16GB is just fine for many, if not most people; do some really think Apple hasn't figured this out all along? Dropping the 32GB model was a kind gesture, as you get 48GB for $100 price increase (which used to get you 16GB). The 5s has a $50 price increase to go from 16GB to 32GB.
Apple shouldn't be selling 8GB phones either. And as I've said before I won't be surprised at all if 8 becomes 16 and 16 becomes 32 this year. All those saying 16GB is just fine were probably the same ones saying 1GB RAM is more than enough when any Air 2 owner can tell you that is certainly not the case. With my Air, Safari tab reloads were constant. With my Air 2 reloads are incredibly rare. And diagnostics on Air had low memory warnings and Safari crashes all over the place. With the Air 2 I don't see any of that. So increasing RAM to 2GB certainly made a difference and it makes you wonder what took Apple so long to do it (and why they didn't do it with the new iPhones).
I have an iPhone 5 with 16 GB capacity. Before I upgraded to IOS 8 (8.1.1), I asked Apple Support if it would take up most or all of my remaining available capacity. They told me that if I uninstalled IOS 6 before upgrading, it would not take any more capacity than the old OS. Not quite correct, as it turned out. It does take up substantially more capacity. Worse still, my phone's bluetooth capabilities in my car were affected, and I no longer have many of the features that I had with the prior OS. In Illinois, where I live, they ticket drivers for using a phone in a car without bluetooth. My car is a 2014 model and the firmware is up-to-date, and still no ability to use many bluetooth features while driving. Apple will not allow one to revert to an earlier OS (IOS 6 or 7) in order to restore the lost features. I have a pending suit against Apple because of this.
iCloud storage is seriously cheap. only 99 cents for 20 GB a month.
Pretty shortsighted, I must say. Most of us pay for data on our cell phones, and not everyone has access to free wifi for uploads to the cloud. In my case, the cellular *is* my internet source, via personal hotspot. I pay dearly for data. That 20GB you say costs only 99c/month is a bit pricier--adding $150 to my monthly phone bill. And that's for each 20GB transferred, so it doubles if I need to download that data back to my phone again.
Nope, cloud storage is not in the cards for me. That's only one of several reasons.
But I don't think making free cloud storage available is relevant to this lawsuit.
I don't understand why people think Apple is 'sort of ripping us off' with their new 16/64/128 lineup. Dropping the 32GB model was a kind gesture, as you get 48GB for $100 price increase (which used to get you 16GB). The 5s has a $50 price increase to go from 16GB to 32GB.
Yeah, if they'd kept it at 16/32/64, people might have still complained but not accused Apple of ripping them off. It's not that they downgraded the entry model, they just didn't bother upgrading it. They doubled the storage people get for the upgraded models.
If we assume the net margin on the entry $499 Air 2 is 25% then their profit is $125. Adding an extra 16GB at $1 per GB wouldn't affect profits by much so they could have done it but it's much easier to absorb on the higher models as they were $100 for 16GB ($6.25/GB) and $200 for 48GB ($4.16/GB) and are now $100 for 48GB ($2.08/GB) and $200 for 122GB ($1.63/GB).
If they'd upped the entry model, it would not only eat into the margins of the entry model and affect supplies but push more sales of the margin-hitting 32GB model than the 64GB model, which doesn't really hit margins because they way overcharged for the upgrade to begin with.
With the Air 2 I don't see any of that. So increasing RAM to 2GB certainly made a difference and it makes you wonder what took Apple so long to do it (and why they didn't do it with the new iPhones).
It's so you buy the next one. Power usage is a factor too. The iPad has a larger battery. LPDDR4 RAM cuts battery usage significantly so the iPhone 6S could get 2GB.
I agree with the lawsuit, but it doesn't go far enough. Even if iOS8 does take up a bit more space, 20% IS a problem.
Apple already forces people with cell phones to use the cloud or they get NO junk mail filtering on their incoming mail. The clever a**holes at Apple said "Hey, don't make a junk filter on the phone and we can force users onto iCloud". Yuk, Yuk.
I detest being forced by Apple to use the cloud and do not want anything I can't control put in some magic "Cloud". This practice has a way of biting folks over the long term.
I prefer keeping my data, photos and mail as private as possible although that is a virtual impossibility in this world. I store photos, docs on my computer with separate stand alone drive for backup.
Apple is not longer user friendly but rather devotes its billions to force customers who have been loyal for many years to totally lock into their system. Hey guys I found another way to jerk users around, WooHoo!!
I agree with the lawsuit, but it doesn't go far enough. Even if iOS8 does take up a bit more space, 20% IS a problem.
Apple already forces people with cell phones to use the cloud or they get NO junk mail filtering on their incoming mail. The clever a**holes at Apple said "Hey, don't make a junk filter on the phone and we can force users onto iCloud". Yuk, Yuk.
I detest being forced by Apple to use the cloud and do not want anything I can't control put in some magic "Cloud". This practice has a way of biting folks over the long term.
I prefer keeping my data, photos and mail as private as possible although that is a virtual impossibility in this world. I store photos, docs on my computer with separate stand alone drive for backup.
Apple is not longer user friendly but rather devotes its billions to force customers who have been loyal for many years to totally lock into their system. Hey guys I found another way to jerk users around, WooHoo!!
1) You're not forced to do buy an Apple product, use their OSes, or even their Mail apps.
2) Get out of your AOL mindset. Taking care of spam on the server is the way to go, not manually managing it locally.
Yeah, if they'd kept it at 16/32/64, people might have still complained but not accused Apple of ripping them off. It's not that they downgraded the entry model, they just didn't bother upgrading it. They doubled the storage people get for the upgraded models.
If we assume the net margin on the entry $499 Air 2 is 25% then their profit is $125. Adding an extra 16GB at $1 per GB wouldn't affect profits by much so they could have done it but it's much easier to absorb on the higher models as they were $100 for 16GB ($6.25/GB) and $200 for 48GB ($4.16/GB) and are now $100 for 48GB ($2.08/GB) and $200 for 122GB ($1.63/GB).
If they'd upped the entry model, it would not only eat into the margins of the entry model and affect supplies but push more sales of the margin-hitting 32GB model than the 64GB model, which doesn't really hit margins because they way overcharged for the upgrade to begin with.
It's so you buy the next one. Power usage is a factor too. The iPad has a larger battery. LPDDR4 RAM cuts battery usage significantly so the iPhone 6S could get 2GB.
All good points here. Hopefully in 2015 we see more of best products/consumer experience first, profit margins second. I know Jony Ive says Apple is all about the former but some of their decisions point to the latter being utmost priority.
I agree with the lawsuit, but it doesn't go far enough. Even if iOS8 does take up a bit more space, 20% IS a problem.
Apple already forces people with cell phones to use the cloud or they get NO junk mail filtering on their incoming mail. The clever a**holes at Apple said "Hey, don't make a junk filter on the phone and we can force users onto iCloud". Yuk, Yuk.
I detest being forced by Apple to use the cloud and do not want anything I can't control put in some magic "Cloud". This practice has a way of biting folks over the long term.
I prefer keeping my data, photos and mail as private as possible although that is a virtual impossibility in this world. I store photos, docs on my computer with separate stand alone drive for backup.
Apple is not longer user friendly but rather devotes its billions to force customers who have been loyal for many years to totally lock into their system. Hey guys I found another way to jerk users around, WooHoo!!
Sorry, I don't use Apple mail so I'm not forced to go to the cloud.
I chose an iPhone. Don't like it, go use something else. Quit whining.
iCloud storage is seriously cheap. only 99 cents for 20 GB a month.
Pretty shortsighted, I must say.
I think he means just what he writes: iCloud storage is 99 cents for 20GB/m. Not including any possible extra cost or accessing Internet data. "Fees may apply' come to mind.
This case closely resembles another tech industry class action suit of about 20 years ago that was won by the class dealing with monitor size advertisements. Short version: monitors at the time advertised the size of the CRT, and did not adverstise actual viewable space. So, a 17" CRT monitor would have an actual viewable screen size of about 15.5". The suit was won and many including myself were paid cash from many monitor makers, including myself.
When I look at my iPhone 5s (64GB), I see my actual usable capacity is 56.0, 8GB less than the advertised capacity, because of formatting and maybe some for the OS. Since it is not broken down, I do not know what is due to each thing. This is not made clear which opens up the door to a lawsuit. This 12% discrepancy from formatted capacity to actual usable storage capacity is very close to the 10% discrepancy that won the monitor class action suit.
This does irk me somewhat when I noticed this a few months back, and I figured it was only a matter of time before a class action suit was filed. It doesn't matter what logic and reason say: I know and you know the technical reasons, but all the plaintiffs have to show is that an average (read "non-technical") person would expect a 16GB phone to have 16GB of available storage even if the OS were included in that tally.
This is not about slamming Apple nor defending Apple, it is about advertising claims that are not representative of actual capabilities. If this cae wins, I expect the entire industry to start advertising actual capacities, and perhaps bumping up Flash RAM so a 16GB mobile does in fact have 16GB of actual capacity, not 12GB (not including OS). And yes, I got the 64GB version because 16GB is pitiful for my intended use %u2014 which is an edge case. 8 less GB is at least hundreds of lossless music tracks I could have on my device.
Anyway, it might be for a jury to decide, not the peanut gallery of non-lawyers/non-average persons here. From the law and the precedents cited, I think they class action has a good chance of succeeding if it does go to court. I certainly wouldn%u2019t mind a 12% refund from Apple, and I seriously doubt any iOS user would.
1) Why, when 16GB is more than enough for a huge number of users? Do you really want your 64GB and 128GB models to either be more expensive or offer less as a result so that Apple can make their profit margin while a huge users are getting more space than they'll need?
2) In 2007 the default storage was 4GB and then 8GB. 16GB for the new iPhone is fine.
So should cheap Android phones be forced to come with more than 4GB?
The suit was won and many including myself were paid cash from many monitor makers, including myself.
How much money did you receive? The only references I could find on the monitor size class action case indicated that damaged parties were given a $13 USD rebate towards the purchase of a new monitor within a 3-year window or $6 USD in cash after the rebate period. I'm not sure how you would equate any award to the amount of reduction in the memory part size vs usable memory size (the 12% you expect) unless you are claiming the reduction in usable memory alone is directly related to the total consumable utility of the device.
My point all along is that these lawsuits bring very little real value to the supposedly damaged parties while bringing a windfall to the lawyers.
I bet the lawyers in the screen size lawsuit settlement walked away with a tad bit more than a $13 rebate on a future computer purchase or 6 bucks in cold hard cash. I also seem to recall that monitors were significantly more expensive in 1997 so the proportion of the award versus the cost of the monitor was very tiny.
Comments
iBooks has buggered up PDFs. They have never been synced through iCloud, and probably never will be. I now use Preview via iCloud Drive and a third party app to sync my PDFs. It was bad of Apple to neglect this aspect of iBooks. In fact, the whole app is a mess and needs a complete rethink, both on iOS and OS X.
Perhaps this helps: http://imazing.com
That's a valid point. Something Ikea does as well.
I don't understand why people think Apple is 'sort of ripping us off' with their new 16/64/128 lineup: as long as they also sell a 8GB iPhone we cannot possibly expect them to start the other models with 32GB. Besides, 16GB is just fine for many, if not most people; do some really think Apple hasn't figured this out all along? Dropping the 32GB model was a kind gesture, as you get 48GB for $100 price increase (which used to get you 16GB). The 5s has a $50 price increase to go from 16GB to 32GB.
Apple shouldn't be selling 8GB phones either. And as I've said before I won't be surprised at all if 8 becomes 16 and 16 becomes 32 this year. All those saying 16GB is just fine were probably the same ones saying 1GB RAM is more than enough when any Air 2 owner can tell you that is certainly not the case. With my Air, Safari tab reloads were constant. With my Air 2 reloads are incredibly rare. And diagnostics on Air had low memory warnings and Safari crashes all over the place. With the Air 2 I don't see any of that. So increasing RAM to 2GB certainly made a difference and it makes you wonder what took Apple so long to do it (and why they didn't do it with the new iPhones).
The lawsuit should also apply with ALL smartphones that make the same claim. Why single Apple out?
iCloud storage is seriously cheap. only 99 cents for 20 GB a month.
Pretty shortsighted, I must say. Most of us pay for data on our cell phones, and not everyone has access to free wifi for uploads to the cloud. In my case, the cellular *is* my internet source, via personal hotspot. I pay dearly for data. That 20GB you say costs only 99c/month is a bit pricier--adding $150 to my monthly phone bill. And that's for each 20GB transferred, so it doubles if I need to download that data back to my phone again.
Nope, cloud storage is not in the cards for me. That's only one of several reasons.
But I don't think making free cloud storage available is relevant to this lawsuit.
Yeah, if they'd kept it at 16/32/64, people might have still complained but not accused Apple of ripping them off. It's not that they downgraded the entry model, they just didn't bother upgrading it. They doubled the storage people get for the upgraded models.
If we assume the net margin on the entry $499 Air 2 is 25% then their profit is $125. Adding an extra 16GB at $1 per GB wouldn't affect profits by much so they could have done it but it's much easier to absorb on the higher models as they were $100 for 16GB ($6.25/GB) and $200 for 48GB ($4.16/GB) and are now $100 for 48GB ($2.08/GB) and $200 for 122GB ($1.63/GB).
If they'd upped the entry model, it would not only eat into the margins of the entry model and affect supplies but push more sales of the margin-hitting 32GB model than the 64GB model, which doesn't really hit margins because they way overcharged for the upgrade to begin with.
It's so you buy the next one. Power usage is a factor too. The iPad has a larger battery. LPDDR4 RAM cuts battery usage significantly so the iPhone 6S could get 2GB.
I agree with the lawsuit, but it doesn't go far enough. Even if iOS8 does take up a bit more space, 20% IS a problem.
Apple already forces people with cell phones to use the cloud or they get NO junk mail filtering on their incoming mail. The clever a**holes at Apple said "Hey, don't make a junk filter on the phone and we can force users onto iCloud". Yuk, Yuk.
I detest being forced by Apple to use the cloud and do not want anything I can't control put in some magic "Cloud". This practice has a way of biting folks over the long term.
I prefer keeping my data, photos and mail as private as possible although that is a virtual impossibility in this world. I store photos, docs on my computer with separate stand alone drive for backup.
Apple is not longer user friendly but rather devotes its billions to force customers who have been loyal for many years to totally lock into their system. Hey guys I found another way to jerk users around, WooHoo!!
1) You're not forced to do buy an Apple product, use their OSes, or even their Mail apps.
2) Get out of your AOL mindset. Taking care of spam on the server is the way to go, not manually managing it locally.
All good points here. Hopefully in 2015 we see more of best products/consumer experience first, profit margins second. I know Jony Ive says Apple is all about the former but some of their decisions point to the latter being utmost priority.
Sorry, I don't use Apple mail so I'm not forced to go to the cloud.
I chose an iPhone. Don't like it, go use something else. Quit whining.
Apple should offer a way to remove the OS, to enable storage lovers to realize the full capacity of their devices.
A win-win.
Completely and utterly wrong. You cannot agree with the lawsuit.
No.
No.
Your post in two words.
Which you are not.
Hey, same here. And yet I use all Apple products. FUNNY HOW THAT WORKS.
I think he means just what he writes: iCloud storage is 99 cents for 20GB/m. Not including any possible extra cost or accessing Internet data. "Fees may apply' come to mind.
Apple devices come with free cloud storage, obviously also making this a non issue.
When I look at my iPhone 5s (64GB), I see my actual usable capacity is 56.0, 8GB less than the advertised capacity, because of formatting and maybe some for the OS. Since it is not broken down, I do not know what is due to each thing. This is not made clear which opens up the door to a lawsuit. This 12% discrepancy from formatted capacity to actual usable storage capacity is very close to the 10% discrepancy that won the monitor class action suit.
This does irk me somewhat when I noticed this a few months back, and I figured it was only a matter of time before a class action suit was filed. It doesn't matter what logic and reason say: I know and you know the technical reasons, but all the plaintiffs have to show is that an average (read "non-technical") person would expect a 16GB phone to have 16GB of available storage even if the OS were included in that tally.
This is not about slamming Apple nor defending Apple, it is about advertising claims that are not representative of actual capabilities. If this cae wins, I expect the entire industry to start advertising actual capacities, and perhaps bumping up Flash RAM so a 16GB mobile does in fact have 16GB of actual capacity, not 12GB (not including OS). And yes, I got the 64GB version because 16GB is pitiful for my intended use %u2014 which is an edge case. 8 less GB is at least hundreds of lossless music tracks I could have on my device.
Anyway, it might be for a jury to decide, not the peanut gallery of non-lawyers/non-average persons here. From the law and the precedents cited, I think they class action has a good chance of succeeding if it does go to court. I certainly wouldn%u2019t mind a 12% refund from Apple, and I seriously doubt any iOS user would.
So should cheap Android phones be forced to come with more than 4GB?
Of course doing so would mean it's not very usable until the user formats the drive and changes the size on their own.
Then they'd end up with a rather expensive thumb drive.
How much money did you receive? The only references I could find on the monitor size class action case indicated that damaged parties were given a $13 USD rebate towards the purchase of a new monitor within a 3-year window or $6 USD in cash after the rebate period. I'm not sure how you would equate any award to the amount of reduction in the memory part size vs usable memory size (the 12% you expect) unless you are claiming the reduction in usable memory alone is directly related to the total consumable utility of the device.
My point all along is that these lawsuits bring very little real value to the supposedly damaged parties while bringing a windfall to the lawyers.
I bet the lawyers in the screen size lawsuit settlement walked away with a tad bit more than a $13 rebate on a future computer purchase or 6 bucks in cold hard cash. I also seem to recall that monitors were significantly more expensive in 1997 so the proportion of the award versus the cost of the monitor was very tiny.
Forced? Of course not, but I certainly wouldn't recommend to anyone.