1) It's a capital B because it's bytes, not bits. Clearly this isn't a typo as you did it 4 times. That makes a difference by a factor of 8.
2) There is no merit unless you think there is merit to sue all such cases of marketing capacity in BASE-10 v how an OS reads capacity in BASE-2. If you think there is a merit in the foundation of that then tell me this case has merit to single out iOS 8 which doesn't nothing different than any other OS?
It does do one thing different: make insane amounts of money.
But a *much* lower percentage. iOS8 takes up 11Gb or 68% of the storage on a 16Gb device. That puts this in a whole different league.
I think you're mistaken -- a bit of Googling reveals that the available space on the 16GB iOS 8 device (iPhone 6) is around 12.2GB -- which is roughly the same as was the case with previous iOS versions.
Yes this is (obviously) a much higher percentage than on a device with a larger capacity.
Bzzzzt! Wrong again. From the article over at siliconbeat.com...
"Apple has fended off such claims before, beating back a Canadian case in 2012 that alleged the company misled consumers about the amount of storage on the iPod. Competitors such as Samsung and Microsoft have also been slapped with claims that they were not upfront about the true storage capacity of their gadgets.”
This is not new. It is not Apple only. Apple did not "drop the ball on this one.”
Try doing some basic research before making a complete fool of yourself in a public post.
LOL. Pointing out that Apple doesn't actually CYA as one would expect is hardly making a complete fool of myself. I fully expected the small print to say something like "Not all of the storage on the device is available for applications, music, etc." but it doesn't. "Actual formatted capacity less" is hardly revealing. That's the exactly language used by hard drive makers to point out that a small portion of the storage capacity is used for low-level directory information. That wouldn't cover them if, for example a 500GB hard drive could only hold 400GB (rather than 480GB or whatever).
As I said before "and it may end of costing them." I think the lawsuit is overblown, but Apple should have been/should be more forthcoming. It's the right thing to do.
We'll see what the courts decide about this - I'm generally leery of this kind of legal action. But I'm afraid as others have suggested, this directly relates to Apple's disgusting practice of still selling a 16gb iPhone model to pad their margins. This gives Phil Schiller, Tim Cook et al the appearance of used car salesmen and opens them up to stuff like this law suit.
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?
I bought the 16GB 6 Plus and filled in up with a few apps and about 600 songs. That was the first day I owned it and it gave low or no space warnings. I did own an iPhone before so I had no idea the 16'ers filled up that quickly. I tried to originally upgrade in by 14 day period, but there were no phones in Plus size. I have to live without many songs loaded on it basically. But it did irk me a few times that I couldn't take a photo or video. I'm in on the suit, if it flies.
I bought the 16GB 6 Plus and filled in up with a few apps and about 600 songs. That was the first day I owned it and it gave low or no space warnings. I did own an iPhone before so I had no idea the 16'ers filled up that quickly. I tried to originally upgrade in by 14 day period, but there were no phones in Plus size. I have to live without many songs loaded on it basically. But it did irk me a few times that I couldn't take a photo or video. I'm in on the suit, if it flies.
So, you're looking to sue because of your own ignorance.
As a shareholder I find your statement disgusting.
Where is it said that Apple has to tell them the exact percentage of space used by the OS? All smartphones have a portion of storage used by the OS. Can you show me a company that is publishing how much space is available for personal content?
Additionally the Apple Store, Apple.com and many retailers allow for free returns in a limited time period. If this was really a concern for someone they could have found it out immediately after starting their iPhone/iPad/iPod the first time or asking an employee or looking in the settings of a display model. The two options for the plantiff are that this is a cash grab or they're of subhuman intelligence.
If GM or Toyota sold a car with a 12 gallon gas tank (and also sold a more expensive model with a 20 gallon tank and made this a big part of their feature list) but you could only put 9.5 gallons of gas in it, that would be misleading, no?
Forget the hyperbole of the lawsuit and whether their return policy (or other defense) will protect them in this case. Shouldn't Apple (and all device makers) be more forthcoming about how much consumer-usable storage is available on their devices? I'm not suggesting it should be included in the public ads, but it should be easy for someone to find this information on Apple's product pages. And it isn't.
Same lawsuit happened with laptops and didn't go anywhere. Lawyers tried to get class action money from iPods and failed. They're trying to suckle from the teet, but Apple's not their mommy.
Apparently, the litigants are upset the iOS 8 uses more memory than iOS 7, my casual check says about 500 MB or 1/32 more. Since Apple did not warn them the new iOS would use this amount they felt deceived and cheated. I find this absolutely silly. If you had iOS 7 device you knew it used memory, if you failed to do minimum due diligence on memory use by an upgrade, presumably for new higher value features, then I think you must accept accountability, especially when you were using the smallest memory options, 16 GB. In addition, iCloud proves substantial free storage, 5GB or 10x what was lost.
I agree with commentators that Apple was foolish shortsighted and a bit greedy, margins, offering such a low memory option. They should have started at 32 GB although thus would have impacted the 64 GB size sales. This would have been the right thing for consumers/users.
Regarding 16 GB option, if you are primarily interested in browsing, email, phone, messaging, and a small number of apps on your device, then 16 GB is fully useful although you may be deleting and reloading music, movies, game apps, etc., from the cloud. The only massive user generated data are pictures and movies and these can be easily stored in the cloud or synched to an iTunes PC or Mac. Apple is very clear, that if you want keep lots of photos locally, you need more memory.
I think this has merit, if only because a 16Gb iPhone is nearly unusable. OK, that's a bit of hyperbole but the way any *reasonable* person would use the phone is to install apps and store photos and music. You really can't do much of that on a 16Gb iPhone running iOS8 before it runs out of space. Apple should not even be selling 16Gb models; they should start at 32Gb.
Cry me a river. Seriously. If the iOS 8 upgrade renders anyone's phone unusable they should bring it back for a refund or store credit.
If GM or Toyota sold a car with a 12 gallon gas tank (and also sold a more expensive model with a 20 gallon tank and made this a big part of their feature list) but you could only put 9.5 gallons of gas in it, that would be misleading, no?
Forget the hyperbole of the lawsuit and whether their return policy (or other defense) will protect them in this case. Shouldn't Apple (and all device makers) be more forthcoming about how much consumer-usable storage is available on their devices? I'm not suggesting it should be included in the public ads, but it should be easy for someone to find this information on Apple's product pages. And it isn't.
Any excuse for a lawsuit, eh? Crybabies and ambulance chasers everywhere.
If GM or Toyota sold a car with a 12 gallon gas tank (and also sold a more expensive model with a 20 gallon tank and made this a big part of their feature list) but you could only put 9.5 gallons of gas in it, that would be misleading, no?
Forget the hyperbole of the lawsuit and whether their return policy (or other defense) will protect them in this case. Shouldn't Apple (and all device makers) be more forthcoming about how much consumer-usable storage is available on their devices? I'm not suggesting it should be included in the public ads, but it should be easy for someone to find this information on Apple's product pages. And it isn't.
You're using a flawed analogy. A smartphone must have an OS that takes some of the space. A vehicle's fuel tank does not have any portion of its space that must be taken up by some permanent fluid. As I said in my previous post. There are ways to figure out how much space is available for personal storage, it's not an impossible secret.
Comments
That's either the most trollish or most ignorant statement I've ever read on here in 2014.
It does do one thing different: make insane amounts of money.
Right --
But a *much* lower percentage. iOS8 takes up 11Gb or 68% of the storage on a 16Gb device. That puts this in a whole different league.
I think you're mistaken -- a bit of Googling reveals that the available space on the 16GB iOS 8 device (iPhone 6) is around 12.2GB -- which is roughly the same as was the case with previous iOS versions.
Yes this is (obviously) a much higher percentage than on a device with a larger capacity.
Bzzzzt! Wrong again. From the article over at siliconbeat.com...
"Apple has fended off such claims before, beating back a Canadian case in 2012 that alleged the company misled consumers about the amount of storage on the iPod. Competitors such as Samsung and Microsoft have also been slapped with claims that they were not upfront about the true storage capacity of their gadgets.”
This is not new. It is not Apple only. Apple did not "drop the ball on this one.”
Try doing some basic research before making a complete fool of yourself in a public post.
LOL. Pointing out that Apple doesn't actually CYA as one would expect is hardly making a complete fool of myself. I fully expected the small print to say something like "Not all of the storage on the device is available for applications, music, etc." but it doesn't. "Actual formatted capacity less" is hardly revealing. That's the exactly language used by hard drive makers to point out that a small portion of the storage capacity is used for low-level directory information. That wouldn't cover them if, for example a 500GB hard drive could only hold 400GB (rather than 480GB or whatever).
As I said before "and it may end of costing them." I think the lawsuit is overblown, but Apple should have been/should be more forthcoming. It's the right thing to do.
We'll see what the courts decide about this - I'm generally leery of this kind of legal action. But I'm afraid as others have suggested, this directly relates to Apple's disgusting practice of still selling a 16gb iPhone model to pad their margins. This gives Phil Schiller, Tim Cook et al the appearance of used car salesmen and opens them up to stuff like this law suit.
iOS isn't exactly the same across all devices, but it's not that big even on the new devices running the full version.
So, you're looking to sue because of your own ignorance.
As a shareholder I find your statement disgusting.
He got it in just before the deadline.
Where is it said that Apple has to tell them the exact percentage of space used by the OS? All smartphones have a portion of storage used by the OS. Can you show me a company that is publishing how much space is available for personal content?
Additionally the Apple Store, Apple.com and many retailers allow for free returns in a limited time period. If this was really a concern for someone they could have found it out immediately after starting their iPhone/iPad/iPod the first time or asking an employee or looking in the settings of a display model. The two options for the plantiff are that this is a cash grab or they're of subhuman intelligence.
If GM or Toyota sold a car with a 12 gallon gas tank (and also sold a more expensive model with a 20 gallon tank and made this a big part of their feature list) but you could only put 9.5 gallons of gas in it, that would be misleading, no?
Forget the hyperbole of the lawsuit and whether their return policy (or other defense) will protect them in this case. Shouldn't Apple (and all device makers) be more forthcoming about how much consumer-usable storage is available on their devices? I'm not suggesting it should be included in the public ads, but it should be easy for someone to find this information on Apple's product pages. And it isn't.
I agree with commentators that Apple was foolish shortsighted and a bit greedy, margins, offering such a low memory option. They should have started at 32 GB although thus would have impacted the 64 GB size sales. This would have been the right thing for consumers/users.
Regarding 16 GB option, if you are primarily interested in browsing, email, phone, messaging, and a small number of apps on your device, then 16 GB is fully useful although you may be deleting and reloading music, movies, game apps, etc., from the cloud. The only massive user generated data are pictures and movies and these can be easily stored in the cloud or synched to an iTunes PC or Mac. Apple is very clear, that if you want keep lots of photos locally, you need more memory.
Cry me a river. Seriously. If the iOS 8 upgrade renders anyone's phone unusable they should bring it back for a refund or store credit.
There's still time for him to surpass himself this year.
Pretty sure it discusses this in the small print.
That's what I thought. But all you get is "actual formatted capacity less" in a footnote.
Any excuse for a lawsuit, eh? Crybabies and ambulance chasers everywhere.
You're using a flawed analogy. A smartphone must have an OS that takes some of the space. A vehicle's fuel tank does not have any portion of its space that must be taken up by some permanent fluid. As I said in my previous post. There are ways to figure out how much space is available for personal storage, it's not an impossible secret.