Linked by Howard Fosdick on Fri 16th Nov 2012 07:43 UTC
Windows A California man is suing Microsoft, alledging that his Surface tablet did not provide the advertised amount of disk space. The 32G device has 16G of space for users, as the operating system uses the other 16G. The 64G Surface leaves 45G free for users. The case will turn on whether Microsoft has clearly explained to customers how much free space the Surface leaves for their use outside of the OS. How much disk space does your OS consume?
Order by: Score:
Ubuntu 32-bit needs about 5 GB
by kateline on Fri 16th Nov 2012 07:51 UTC
kateline
Member since:
2011-05-19

Ubuntu 11.04 32-bit here. Uses under 4 GB installed, now up to 5.4 GB with lots of apps.

I can't imagine using 19 GB for Win 8 on the bigger Surface.
BBBLLLOOOAAATTTT !!!

Reply Score: 7

RE: Ubuntu 32-bit needs about 5 GB
by Moredhas on Fri 16th Nov 2012 08:03 UTC in reply to "Ubuntu 32-bit needs about 5 GB"
Moredhas Member since:
2008-04-10

And wait until you start installing apps! Where the hell do you put your music?

Reply Score: 6

marcp Member since:
2007-11-23

I'm amazed that people don't know the good practice of separating your personal data from an OS data. I do it for years and it never let me down. If something is wrong I can safely restore the OS, but the configurations and my stuff [music, docs, etc] are safe and untouched on other mount point ...
I won't even mention creating backups. Most people probobly don't do backups anyway.

Reply Score: 3

banatibor Member since:
2012-07-02

So after you divided the 32Gb disk into 2 partitions and installed all the necessary apps, where do you will put your music?

Reply Score: 3

Moredhas Member since:
2008-04-10

Well, for the past five years, Windows has had this crazy feature called Libraries, which I think was designed to emulate the behavior of Linux's home folder. The downside of libraries on Windows RT is that they are the only place you can put things you want to show up in your photo viewer or music player. Anyone with half a wit can add more folders, on different drives or SD cards, to a library, but 90% of users don't have that, and won't be able to figure out why. Also, for music downloads from whatever service Microsoft is using, I doubt you'd be able to choose a destination, in Windows RT.

Reply Score: 4

Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Until you have a connexion loss...

Kochise

Reply Score: 8

mistersoft Member since:
2011-01-05

Lucas I can only hope you're being very ironic there.

You know full well that mobile connection costs dwarf local storage costs long term

don't be silly

Reply Score: 6

ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

Shillus Maximus strongly believes that concerns about $your_needs are outweighed by $product_features.

Reply Score: 1

Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

You're speaking about 1st world's connectivity, but what about 3rd world ? Can they use a Surface tablet if they do not benefit from the cloud ?

Kochise

Reply Score: 5

3rd World Surface Use
by shotsman on Fri 16th Nov 2012 13:01 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Ubuntu 32-bit needs about 5 GB"
shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

I sat in an airport in the Middle East yesterday watching someone with a surface really struggle with the lack of bandwidth. Yet, I was able to connect my Windows 7 PC plus my Android Tablet and download all my emails, browse web pages etc without problem. We were sitting less than 10ft apart so it wasn't as if we were in different wifi areas.
Ok, so this was one of the more advanced ME states but they did have free WiFi all over the terminal.

If the surface device is so dependent upon an 'always on' connection to the mothership then I forsee a lot of unhappy people returning their devices especially once they start seeing their 3g data bills.

Reply Score: 5

Kochise Member since:
2006-03-03

Poor countries and cities with hardly any internet connection, if any.

Kochise

Reply Score: 2

Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

No actually, its much more of a problem in the third world where the networks are that much more of a problem. My company had three different internet providers and still had sustained outages.

Reply Score: 3

UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Because I care that I have control and possibly more importantly ownership of my data, and very little of my shit is up there on some random server that is not under my control. Anything I do have in the cloud is simply a backup (primarily pictures to be able to access on my phone without having to get a 32GB microSD card), and I have all the originals on my hard drive where they are going to stay. If I delete any copy, no doubt it will be the one stored on server machines far, far away.

Reply Score: 8

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Also why do people care these days, when everything is in the "cloud"


Because not everyone has 100Mbps Internet connections?

or you have terabytes of space.


Did you miss the fact that Microsoft is being sued exactly because of LACK of said space?

Reply Score: 12

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Nope, seriously are people really going to use these devices without another piece of kit that has plenty of space?


What's the point with a highly-mobile device if you're going to be lugging all kinds of extras along just to make it useable? I think you're missing the point.

Reply Score: 5

adkilla Member since:
2005-07-07

Seriously, where do you store all your music and videos on the go? You have make space in some way for it. Even if you are constantly connected to the cloud, imagine how that is going to make your data caps suffer when you are constantly streaming.

Reply Score: 8

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I think all my music albums I have come (in flac) to about 1 gig. At 720p I think I can get about a 10 hours of video on the thing depending on the codec being used.

The device probably can't play more than a few hours of video on a charge.

Reply Score: 1

aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Seriously. How can you afford all that music anyway?

JK.

Reply Score: 3

aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Suggestion: Buy a device with the specs you want and need (if available. If not don't buy it or accept that it's not all you wanted.)

Edited 2012-11-17 10:35 UTC

Reply Score: 3

ggeldenhuys Member since:
2006-11-13

Nope, seriously are people really going to use these devices without another piece of kit that has plenty of space?

But isn't it these tablet manufactures that keep saying the PC era is over, and a tablet is the only device you really need? In that case, give us terabytes of space of those devices too please!

Reply Score: 7

Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

Maybe, just maybe the reasoning is ?:

the cloud provides that terabytes of space.

But I have to admit, when I put stuff in the cloud. I do that encrypted.

Edited 2012-11-16 13:16 UTC

Reply Score: 2

ggeldenhuys Member since:
2006-11-13

I will NEVER trust my private and business data in a Cloud service. I have no idea how protected they are, do they scrub my data and sell it off to others etc. No thank you!!

Reply Score: 4

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

It is in the Terms and Conditions.

Reply Score: 2

Flatland_Spider Member since:
2006-09-01

seriously are people really going to use these devices without another piece of kit that has plenty of space?


Yes, because no one wants to hold a tablet and an external HD at the same time. ;)

That would be a good Apple commercial.
"Hi, I'm an iPad."
"And I'm Surface."
"What are you attached to, Surface?"
"That's my external hard drive. I don't have enough space to store stuff and have an operating system."
"That's too bad. There's pizza over there." (iPad walks away.)
"Hey, where are you going? Hold on, wait for me. My hard drive is still plugged in. Could you bring some pizza?"
;)

The lack of space is going to be a hassle for people because it's supposed to be a laptop replacement, and people are gong to expect it to be able to do everything a laptop can do, which includes storing lots of their junk.

Edited 2012-11-16 14:19 UTC

Reply Score: 4

Brendan Member since:
2005-11-16

Hi,

Did you miss the fact that Microsoft is being sued exactly because of LACK of said space?


They're not being sued because of lack of space; they're being sued for misrepresenting the amount of space. E.g. being sued because they're (allegedly) giving consumers the impression that there's X GiB of space when in practice users are only able to use Y GiB of space and X != Y (and not being sued because X < K or because Y < K).

Imagine if you're buying a car, and the adverts for the car say "space for 8 people!". You buy the car, but after buying the car you find out that half of that space is used for the engine, fuel tank, etc and there's only space for 4 people. Did the advert lie?

- Brendan

Reply Score: 5

aliquis Member since:
2005-07-23

Pretty retarded to sue them for it. Maybe he should had looked it up before.

On topic: My OS takes about 5/5+ GB I suppose. 16 GB flash USB-drive, 6.5 GB partition with about 500 MB free but then it also holds my $HOME.

OpenSUSE 12.2 with KDE, Razor-Qt, gstreamer and VLC, Firefox, Kate, Clementine, Flash, Dolphin, Krusader, kMail and a little such.

Edited 2012-11-17 08:45 UTC

Reply Score: 2

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

USB flash drive, seriously?

Reply Score: 2

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Also why do people care these days, when everything is in the "cloud" or you have terabytes of space.


Because it is my data, and I try to have control to whatever I give to 3rd parties.

Reply Score: 9

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Then don't buy a device that pretty much needs to be connected to the cloud.

I don't see people making the same argument against ChromeBooks.

Reply Score: 2

nej_simon Member since:
2011-02-11

Then don't buy a device that pretty much needs to be connected to the cloud.

I don't see people making the same argument against ChromeBooks.


That's because the chromebooks are marketed as pure cloud devices. The Surface however is marketed as a direct competitior to the iPad and Android tablets.

Besides, ChromeOS wants 4 Gb but actually uses only < 1Gb for the OS last time I checked.

Edited 2012-11-16 15:56 UTC

Reply Score: 5

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Then don't buy a device that pretty much needs to be connected to the cloud.

I don't see people making the same argument against ChromeBooks.



I do. That is why Google is never going to see my money from a ChromeBook.

Reply Score: 2

kragil Member since:
2006-01-04

You and Windows are piles of shit.

Great argument, eh?

Reply Score: 9

0brad0 Member since:
2007-05-05

Except Ubuntu is a pile of shit.


Everything is a pile of shit, especially Windows.

Edited 2012-11-16 09:15 UTC

Reply Score: 6

freebsd Member since:
2010-08-26

people got more than text files to store

Reply Score: 1

UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

I'm running openSUSE, which has a reputation for being bloated (I even would consider it so), but its root partition is actually only taking ~4.9GB. And that is with a few additional packages installed. So apparently, "bloat" here is more in terms of memory usage than disk space, and I've noticed that as being true for almost all of the "heavy" distros.

Meanwhile... I sit here looking at my Windows 8 enterprise edition evaluation partition from afar, and it is taking around 17GB. I haven't even installed all of the programs I would likely use if I were to use the OS regularly, and I've even uninstalled some of the garbage Metro "apps" that serve no purpose other than serving ads for shampoo and laundry detergent (a few hundred megs right there, for "apps" that are about as useful as a paperweight).

It would probably be around 22-25GB if I were to install all of my typical programs, before installing such understandably huge programs as Flight Simulator 2004 and Flight Simulator X, as well as other games, by which point I would no longer have any free space (I only gave Windows 8 about 30GB).

Reply Score: 6

UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Bloated ... it is called features.

Last I checked, the version of KDE4 that openSUSE comes with now doesn't exactly blow away the KDE3 that came in older versions of SuSE. Meanwhile, it does eclipse its predecessor when it comes to sucking up resources (especially memory). And it's even managed to add some incredibly annoying and downright resource-hogging services in the process. Don't even get me started with the joke that is GNOME 3 that it comes with.

That said, while I am using KDE (mostly because I haven't yet decided upon another distro to use and so far most stuff working as I want it), bloat is bloat, and not all of it is just simple, useful features. Some of it is pure garbage. And that goes for certain aspects of many operating systems these days, unfortunately. I'm not convinced that a modern desktop environment or other piece of software *must* be a resource hogging pig in order to do what we have come to expect in years past with far fewer resources.

GNOME 3 is especially hilarious; it's more feature-free than ever before and probably getting worse by the week, yet Debian is dropping it for Xfce because the damn thing can no longer even fit on a single CD-ROM. What's ironic is that Metro almost fits perfectly with this description of GNOME 3... yikes.

Get you little dig in about the fact there is 1 add if you spend five minutes scrolling to the end.

Five minutes? Those apps are so worthless, I never even spent much more than a minute in them. And the only reason I was even in there that long because I figured, there just has to be *something* worthwhile here. But nope; just an ad at the end of the tunnel.

We live in an age where even SSD disks for Desktops/Laptops is about 1/4 of a gig. Who cares?

I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Are you drunk or something? I thought this article and discussion was about a *lack* of free space due to the OS hogging it up (specifically, Windows 8), and you go on about... 256GB drives? What? Can you put one of those things in a Surface? And should we really be expected to throw away even more money on yet another product because the original product itself is inadequate right off the shelf? Sounds like an unnecessary waste to me, and an unnecessary pat on the back to all the bloatware producers of the world.

Edited 2012-11-16 09:08 UTC

Reply Score: 6

UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

2 million albums? Wow, I have a few hundred, and even in Ogg Vorbis at quality level 2 they end up taking a total of around 9-10 gigs.A halfway decent quality (which level 2 is not) would be more like 12-14GB (don't remember the exacts, it's been a while since I tested myself). And I personally wouldn't even put HD videos on a portable device, lower res is fine with me, but with videos the sizes add up fast.

I struggle to keep even my favorite albums on the 2GB microSD card that came with my phone.

Edited 2012-11-16 09:26 UTC

Reply Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

It's called exaggeration

Reply Score: 1

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

It's called exaggeration


Exaggeration: to regard or represent as larger or greater, more important or more successful, etc, than is true.

What you're doing there clearly does not fit that definition. What you're doing is latching on to a meme without knowing how to use it properly and therefore just making yourself look like an ass -- not that that argument of yours didn't do that already all by itself!

Edited 2012-11-16 09:49 UTC

Reply Score: 9

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Ogg Vorbis at quality level 2 [...] A halfway decent quality (which level 2 is not)

I'd say q2 can be easily called "halfway decent" (I'm using that for portable and/or space-constrained situations; well, aoTuV Vorbis builds to be exact, but it's not really much of a difference). For higher levels it would be something like "good" or "very good" and so on.

Generally, it's slightly weird - exactly when psychoacoustic compression nicely improved, can obtain quite respectable quality at very low bitrates ...people go more often for higher ones.

Reply Score: 2

0brad0 Member since:
2007-05-05


Oh yeah because on a portable device I am going to take more than 10 1080p movies (on a 720p screen) and 2million albums and 4 zillion word documents.

It stinks of first world problems.


Jesus christ are you ever retarded.

Reply Score: 5

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

It stinks of first world problems.


I think someone has been reading memes too much and doesn't anymore know what the meaning of this particular one is.

Reply Score: 6

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

The point is that someone is making a class action lawsuit on the fact they can't quite have as many films sitting in their hardrive.

Reply Score: 2

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

The point is that someone is making a class action lawsuit on the fact they can't quite have as many films sitting in their hardrive.


No, the point is that people believe they are paying for ~30GB useable storage but get much less than what they're paying for. There's nothing wrong with suing over that.

Reply Score: 6

znby Member since:
2012-02-03

Agreed. Besides, given that this is a tech forum, I think everything discussed here by definition is going to be a first world problem.

Reply Score: 2

Flatland_Spider Member since:
2006-09-01

Oh yeah because on a portable device I am going to take more than 10 1080p movies (on a 720p screen) and 2million albums and 4 zillion word documents.


I know you're being sarcastic, but this is exactly what people do with laptops. You did forget the mountains of cat pics, though.

It stinks of first world problems.


I think we all know we're very fortunate that our biggest problems are arguing about computers.

Reply Score: 3

r_a_trip Member since:
2005-07-06

Oh yeah because on a portable device I am going to take more than 10 1080p movies (on a 720p screen) and 2million albums and 4 zillion word documents.

It stinks of first world problems.


So in essence you are saying the Surface is an OLPC...

Reply Score: 4

UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

I thought this article and discussion was about a *lack* of free space due to the OS hogging it up (specifically, Windows 8), and you go on about... 256GB drives?

Note that if anyone notices that glaring screw-up, yes, I did mean 256MB. I think in the context it was said it should be an obvious mistake, but in case anyone is confused this is the clarification. 256MB really ain't shit these days, honestly... and for normal use, even a 2GB drive is too small as I pointed out in other replies. Even for acceptable-but-low-quality audio and video files files.

Reply Score: 2

Finalzone Member since:
2005-07-06

GNOME 3 is especially hilarious; it's more feature-free than ever before and probably getting worse by the week, yet Debian is dropping it for Xfce because the damn thing can no longer even fit on a single CD-ROM.


Before speculating, better ask Debian committee themselves:
https://plus.google.com/110356875332222535709/posts/46wiyitnqpJ

Gnome is still the default in Debian and its packages are rebuilt in xz format to fit in CD-ROM.

Reply Score: 4

segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

They had switched to XFCE, and then switched back:

http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=tasksel/tasksel.git;a=commitdif...

Phoronix was right, so it looks like Jeremy Bicha didn't know what was going on.

GNOME is the default today and could still be the default for release.

Very reassuring.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Ubuntu 32-bit needs about 5 GB
by kaiwai on Fri 16th Nov 2012 16:16 UTC in reply to "Ubuntu 32-bit needs about 5 GB"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Ubuntu 11.04 32-bit here. Uses under 4 GB installed, now up to 5.4 GB with lots of apps.

I can't imagine using 19 GB for Win 8 on the bigger Surface.
BBBLLLOOOAAATTTT !!!


Unfortunately it is the side effect of hauling around 20 years of backwards compatibility because Steve didn't want the Office team in on the Surface details. The result? we have a grafted win32 application on Surface rather than a well integrated surface version. With every 5 steps Microsoft take forward they have a habit of taking two steps back.

Reply Score: 3

zima Member since:
2005-07-06

3 forward still seems OK, and probably better than average...

Reply Score: 2

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

3 forward still seems OK, and probably better than average...


Agreed; Microsoft is making progress but it is unfortunate that the haters come out of the wood works to bash them when a sacred cow is being offended. Windows Phone IMHO marks a massive improvement over previous versions and they've finally got something competitive especially when it comes to the future of portable gaming given the underpinning technology being provided. The parallel I always give for Microsoft is Intel when it released the P4 and caught off guard yet here we are with Intel back in shape. It will take Microsoft a few years to purge the old guard before we start seeing some of the bad ways of things being done replaced - end of the day Microsoft is a huge organisation spanning many markets so it takes time.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Fri 16th Nov 2012 08:11 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08
Comment by Drumhellar
by Drumhellar on Fri 16th Nov 2012 08:47 UTC
Drumhellar
Member since:
2005-07-12

Considering nearly device sold in the past at 30 years or so has less than the advertised storage amount, due to things such as file system overhead, OS and other included software, this should be more of a "buyer beware" situation.

It's shitty that Windows RT needs 12-16GB of space on a 32GB device, but it is easily discoverable either on the internet, or spending a few minutes with the device in a store, which is something you should probably do if you're going to spend $500+ on it.

My iPod advertised 8GB, but there was 7GB free (Now even less after I updated to the latest iOS available for this model).
Same applies to my Nokia Lumia.
Same applies to my laptop. Or the previous laptop.
People should realize that yes, included software takes up space. It's not difficult to find out how much.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by Drumhellar
by UltraZelda64 on Fri 16th Nov 2012 10:26 UTC in reply to "Comment by Drumhellar"
UltraZelda64 Member since:
2006-12-05

Considering nearly device sold in the past at 30 years or so has less than the advertised storage amount, due to things such as file system overhead, OS and other included software, this should be more of a "buyer beware" situation.

File system overhead (unless you're using FAT on something like a 1TB drive) is nothing. The real lie normally comes in the form of being told sizes in decimal units by the hard drive manufacturers to make their drives look bigger than they actually are on those hard drives and computer specs in the store, instead of binary units that virtually all operating systems have used and people expect. In this case, it's the operating system itself hogging half of the disk.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by Drumhellar
by Lorin on Fri 16th Nov 2012 13:46 UTC in reply to "Comment by Drumhellar"
Lorin Member since:
2010-04-06

Considering nearly device sold in the past at 30 years or so has less than the advertised storage amount, due to things such as file system overhead, OS and other included software, this should be more of a "buyer beware" situation.

It's shitty that Windows RT needs 12-16GB of space on a 32GB device, but it is easily discoverable either on the internet, or spending a few minutes with the device in a store, which is something you should probably do if you're going to spend $500+ on it.

My iPod advertised 8GB, but there was 7GB free (Now even less after I updated to the latest iOS available for this model).
Same applies to my Nokia Lumia.
Same applies to my laptop. Or the previous laptop.
People should realize that yes, included software takes up space. It's not difficult to find out how much.


Except that they state "32GB of Storage Space" a big difference from what everyone else says

Reply Score: 6

RE: Comment by Drumhellar
by bert64 on Sat 17th Nov 2012 12:16 UTC in reply to "Comment by Drumhellar"
bert64 Member since:
2007-04-23

There is also some level of expectation, based on competing products...

Android tablets use about 1GB of space for the OS overhead, iOS tablets are fairly similar... The surface uses 16 times more space! You don't expect such a massive difference between products which target the same market, advertise a similar level of specification and cost roughly the same.

Reply Score: 5

Not to defend Microsoft but...
by Morgan on Fri 16th Nov 2012 09:46 UTC
Morgan
Member since:
2005-06-29

When I buy a computer with, say, a 500GB drive, I fully expect to see something more like 465GB due to GB/GiB shenanigans. On top of that, I know that the Microsoft OS du jour will take anywhere from 15-20GB by itself, and the restore partition (hidden or not) will take up another 10-20GB. At the worst extreme, that leaves me with 415GB when I paid for 500GB. That's 85GB of "missing" space, which as early as five years ago was a realistic size for an entire system drive.

That said, when you're dealing with disk sizes around 32GB and the mobile OS has an installed size of 16GB, there is indeed a problem. I think Microsoft should have advertised these devices based on the free space, and used a minimum of 64GB in the base model to avoid confusion and lost sales.

Reply Score: 13

RE: Not to defend Microsoft but...
by Lion on Fri 16th Nov 2012 10:23 UTC in reply to "Not to defend Microsoft but..."
Lion Member since:
2007-03-22

I wouldn't call windows RT a mobile OS, it's a full Windows on a different CPU architecture.

I have a Surface RT, I knew how much free space I would have when I got it because I read the damned website before I pressed the button to place my order.

For comparison, my Windows 8 install on my home desktop is using 29.7GB including the program files folders. 21.5GB if I exclude those.

Reply Score: 2

Morgan Member since:
2005-06-29

I wouldn't call windows RT a mobile OS, it's a full Windows on a different CPU architecture.


Nonsense, even Microsoft doesn't claim it's a full desktop OS. Otherwise Windows 8 proper wouldn't exist at all and we'd just have RT for x86 and RT for ARM.

Besides, I can put Android x86 on my desktop PC, does that mean it's a desktop OS? In fact, I ran MeeGo for nearly a year on an x86 netbook, and it was more capable than the XP installation it replaced. It could compile and run full desktop GNU/Linux programs. Yet it is still considered a mobile OS. I think it should be based on how you use it; if it's on a desktop PC it's a desktop OS. If it's on a tablet or phone it's a mobile OS. If it's on a laptop it's entirely debatable. ;)

I have a Surface RT, I knew how much free space I would have when I got it because I read the damned website before I pressed the button to place my order.


That was pretty much my point with the 500GB/GiB hard drive example. I think we agree that an informed user will know what they are getting into. The problem is that many people don't read reviews or packaging, then they get the device home and find that their entire Law and Order 1080p Blu-Ray collection won't fit. They are the ones Microsoft should have planned ahead for, and either adjusted their packaging and advertisements or bumped up the base model's storage to compensate.

Reply Score: 4

Lion Member since:
2007-03-22

The free space comment wasn't meant as an argument against your point, just general commentary following from the article.

But I still think Windows RT is much more a desktop style OS than it is a mobile OS.
As far as I can tell it's not missing anything that is in Windows 8 so far as content that's actually on the disk. It's missing capabilities, sure, but then so is a corporate desktop with a bunch of restrictive policies applied, and that's how I see Windows RT: a full windows installation with some restrictions applied, and on a CPU architecture that's new for the platform, which limits application and driver availability

Reply Score: 2

ze_jerkface Member since:
2012-06-22

I wouldn't call windows RT a mobile OS, it's a full Windows on a different CPU architecture.


Heh? So Android isn't a full OS and yet it lets you actually treat the micro-sd card like a drive? Oddly enough Android also has drive encryption while RT does not despite Microsoft fanboys telling us that it is enterprise friendly.

Windows RT is a bad joke, it's Office and IE on a tablet for $500 and without any of the basic enterprise features that were on Windows 2000. Supposedly Office on RT runs like crap as well.

But I will be buying a few of them to carry in case a surface dance party breaks out in the streets.

Reply Score: 1

Lion Member since:
2007-03-22

So Android isn't a full OS and yet it lets you actually treat the micro-sd card like a drive?
I don't know if you are insinuating that this isn't the case in Windows RT, but my MicroSD currently has a drive letter and is mounted to an NTFS folder location to make it part of a library. As a user of an Android phone, it's a less complete OS than windows RT insofar as exposed userland tools for manipulating the device and content on it, especially graphically. But the two platforms are fairly equivalent when it comes to providing a platform to run user-installed applications. Android just has a larger pool of available apps at this point.
I don't have good definitions for where to draw the line between a traditional desktop OS and a mobile OS, but in using it; Windows RT does not feel like a mobile OS, it feels like Windows.

Oddly enough Android also has drive encryption while RT does not despite Microsoft fanboys telling us that it is enterprise friendly.
You've been misinformed here... BitLocker is on by default for the built in storage, and while it can't enable bitlocker on removable devices, it prompts for the password and can read drives that have been encrypted with it. The mail client can connect to certain types of exchange server and cause the device to enact security policies too.

Windows RT is a bad joke, it's Office and IE on a tablet for $500 and without any of the basic enterprise features that were on Windows 2000. Supposedly Office on RT runs like crap as well.
I can't say I've seen Surface RT pushed as an enterprise platform. The message as I received it was that RT was the Home-Edition/iPad-competitor version, while Pro/8 was the version that businesses should consider. Also office doesn't run like crap, the performance is fine but its touch integration is not very good. Many of the buttons are too small for a finger to work well, so I depend on the trackpad portion of my touch cover (which hasn't split yet, btw ;) ) - but the pieces I use (word and excel) run fine.

But I will be buying a few of them to carry in case a surface dance party breaks out in the streets.
This has happened more than I'd like to admit since getting mine ;)

Reply Score: 4

quackalist Member since:
2007-08-27

Is it really a full windows on a different architecture or something else.....seems more like iOS to OSX in practice though technically I suppose it is.

Buyer beware is true enough but in this case it beggars belief MS thought 32Gb storage with all that bloat was a practicality, cloud notwithstanding, and RT should never have been offered without 64Gb minimum.

Wonder how many buyers of RT realised this beforehand?

Reply Score: 2

Comment by Luminair
by Luminair on Fri 16th Nov 2012 09:57 UTC
Luminair
Member since:
2007-03-30

there is no merit to this. people have wasted a lot of energy over nothing

Reply Score: 3

Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by Thom_Holwerda on Fri 16th Nov 2012 10:14 UTC
Thom_Holwerda
Member since:
2005-06-29

Non-story. Other computers do the same thing. Sucky, yes, but as old as the night.

http://www.edbott.com/weblog/2012/11/lawyer-files-frivolous-lawsuit...

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by galvanash on Fri 16th Nov 2012 21:00 UTC in reply to "Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

Non-story. Other computers do the same thing. Sucky, yes, but as old as the night.


It is a story the same reason that the stupid non-issue with the iphone antenna was a story, or the location tracking fiasco was a story...

Some loon files a lawsuit, and its Microsofts turn to get kicked by the media. It doesn't matter that this is a tired old issue that goes back decades and affects virtually every computer on earth. It doesn't matter that the number of people genuinely surprised by the issue could fit in a thimble.

Its Microsoft's turn - it has to be somebody's turn and the internet is bored with kicking Apple.

That said, Microsoft could have avoided this easily. They should have just reported free space - i.e. 32BG storage (16GB available to user). They used to do exactly this on Windows CE devices - don't know why they stopped.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by Luminair on Sat 17th Nov 2012 00:15 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
Luminair Member since:
2007-03-30

don't be so stupid please. This case has no merit because the amount of memory is accurately advertised.

The iPhone antenna not working was abnormal and was definitely news. Just like illegally and immorally and unsecurely tracking users without their knowlesge woukd be, if that is what you are referring to


These stories share nothing in common

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by galvanash on Sat 17th Nov 2012 08:08 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

don't be so stupid please. This case has no merit because the amount of memory is accurately advertised.


I didn't say the case had merit. It has just as much merit as the lawsuit over the iphone 4 antenna or the lawsuit over a stupid bug in location tracking - i.e. none of these case had any merit... They are all the result of stupid, attention seeking, whiny consumers making mountains out of molehills. The media just likes to pile on when the opportunity arises.

You say this is a non-issue, but "antenagate" was somehow a serious problem? Or a innocuous bug in location caching that accidentally kept data longer than it should have - that was worth the amount of coverage it got?

I don't know what to say. Did someone get hurt or killed? Is losing 24db of signal when you touch a specific point on the corner of the phone going to cause someone bodily injury? Did some guy get caught cheating on his wife because she hacked her husbands iphone backup and found out where he was last night?

Im sorry but ALL of this kind of shit is pointless media masterbation.

Get some perspective...

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by WereCatf on Sat 17th Nov 2012 08:35 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

You say this is a non-issue, but "antenagate" was somehow a serious problem? Or a innocuous bug in location caching that accidentally kept data longer than it should have - that was worth the amount of coverage it got?

I don't know what to say. Did someone get hurt or killed? Is losing 24db of signal when you touch a specific point on the corner of the phone going to cause someone bodily injury? Did some guy get caught cheating on his wife because she hacked her husbands iphone backup and found out where he was last night?

Im sorry but ALL of this kind of shit is pointless media masterbation.


Well, to put things into another kind of perspective: are things only worth paying attention to if they cause physical injuries, all else be damned?

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by galvanash on Sat 17th Nov 2012 08:46 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

Well, to put things into another kind of perspective: are things only worth paying attention to if they cause physical injuries, all else be damned?


No. But SOME kind of injury (physical or otherwise) would seem to me to be necessary. What kind of injury did any of these things cause anyone?

Edited 2012-11-17 08:47 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by WereCatf on Sat 17th Nov 2012 08:56 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

No. But SOME kind of injury (physical or otherwise) would seem to me to be necessary. What kind of injury did any of these things cause anyone?


I, personally, do not agree with that view. Not allowing women to vote, for example, never caused any injury to anyone, yet it was still certainly wrong, ie. things may certainly be unjustified and/or unfair without necessarily causing an injury of any kind.

Reply Score: 3

RE[7]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by galvanash on Sat 17th Nov 2012 09:08 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

I, personally, do not agree with that view. Not allowing women to vote, for example, never caused any injury to anyone, yet it was still certainly wrong, ie. things may certainly be unjustified and/or unfair without necessarily causing an injury of any kind.


Not allowing a person the same rights as another because of their sex is most certainly injuring them, severely actually. I don't understand your analogy at all.

On the other hand, having to move your finger 3mm to the left when you talk on your phone (IF you have an already weak signal) certainly doesn't seem to me to be particularly bothersome... Certainly not worthy of a lawsuit.

Reply Score: 1

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

They have to copy files backwards and forwards sometimes.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by terrahwk on Fri 16th Nov 2012 21:21 UTC in reply to "Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
terrahwk Member since:
2011-01-05

I've been meaning to sue Commodore over my C64. I mean, it has 64K RAM. Why only 38911 bytes free to BASIC??! 20K used by the O/S? Unacceptable!

(By which I mean 20K of ROM which masked 20K of RAM. Detail is an elephant. Or irrelevant. Or whatever)

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by MOS6510 on Sat 17th Nov 2012 05:05 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
MOS6510 Member since:
2011-05-12

Using ML you can use up to 60 kB.

For me the 38911 bytes never were a wall I'd hit.

You can also say the OS only uses 20 kB, so it beats Windows RT, iOS and Android in smallness.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by zima on Sun 18th Nov 2012 11:27 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

You can also say it uses almost 1/3rd of total RAM ...what bloat! ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by izomiac on Sat 17th Nov 2012 05:17 UTC in reply to "Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
izomiac Member since:
2006-07-26

For personal computers, you're right. People expect a Windows to take 5-10% of a 320 GB harddrive. For portable devices, people are accustomed to the advertised storage being available for media (e.g. 10,000 songs on your 32 GB MP3 player).

This trend has changed somewhat with smartphones, as Android might take 512 MB of the 32 GB available, but it's generally trivial. Phones which don't advertise the space might use more (e.g. 1.5 GB of 8 GB), but nowhere near 50%. People see "32 GB" and expect to be able to put ~5,000 pictures, ~2,000 MP3s and ~25 movies on the device simultaneously. That's why they bought a device with many gigabytes of storage -- to store media on it.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by segedunum on Sat 17th Nov 2012 16:08 UTC in reply to "Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Errrr, no Thom. No other device advertises storage and then leaves you with half of the advertised storage. It's a joke.

Reply Score: 4

Comment by marcp
by marcp on Fri 16th Nov 2012 10:57 UTC
marcp
Member since:
2007-11-23

They were clearly deceiving their clients.

Now, 16 gigs of used OS space is a tragedy. I don't know what they are holding there, but it's unbelievably big. It's even more funny whene you think it's mostly an OS, and few little Microsoft apps ...

My OS [+ all - hundreds - of my installed apps are in it] takes 5.3 GB of hard disk space.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Comment by marcp
by lucas_maximus on Sat 17th Nov 2012 16:34 UTC in reply to "Comment by marcp"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Unfortunately they are all linked dependant on a certain set of libraries and every package must change if any of those libraries change.

This isn't the case with Windows.

Reply Score: 0

My operating systems occupy...
by bosco_bearbank on Fri 16th Nov 2012 12:06 UTC
bosco_bearbank
Member since:
2005-10-12

My operating systems occupy 3-4 GB each for Ubuntu 12.10, Fedora 17, Fedora 18 (beta), and Linux Mint 14 RC. Looks like about 30GB for Win7

Reply Score: 5

M.Onty
Member since:
2009-10-23

According to this informative article;

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/11/surface-disk-space-a-bit-bet...

... Office + OS + pagefiles = 7.86 GB. That's fat, but not obese.

The problem is a combination of GB vs. GiB and on-disc recovery partitions (why not provide it on a cheap SD card?). Of course, the operating system does have its own problems with bloat; specifically with updates not removing previous versions and installation files.

Edited 2012-11-16 13:19 UTC

Reply Score: 5

OS sizes
by M.Onty on Fri 16th Nov 2012 13:40 UTC
M.Onty
Member since:
2009-10-23

Three main OS':

Linux Mint 14 XFCE: ~3GiB

Windows 7: ~17GiB

OpenPandora Angstrom: ~400MiB

Edit: On of the comments on that article asks whether CCleaner has released a Windows 8 version yet. Looks like this might have just become even more necessary than for XP/Vista/7.

Edited 2012-11-16 13:48 UTC

Reply Score: 4

Information Missing
by Lorin on Fri 16th Nov 2012 13:43 UTC
Lorin
Member since:
2010-04-06

A California man is really a California Lawyer so this one knows what he's doing.

Reply Score: 2

Windows 8
by jollix on Fri 16th Nov 2012 13:43 UTC
jollix
Member since:
2010-10-27

Well, I installed Windows 8 on a 10GB VirualBox hard disk drive and there was 1,5GB of space left. Did not uninstall nothing. So, if you give it more it will consume more.

Reply Score: 2

32 gig Surface is too small
by benali72 on Fri 16th Nov 2012 15:10 UTC
benali72
Member since:
2008-05-03

16 gig is fine for a laptop or desktop OS. The problem here is that the cheaper Surface has only 32 gig total, leaving only 16 gig for user data (music, videos, Office files, etc).

Of course, the customer should have read the specs before he bought it. As far as I can tell from reading other articles on this lawsuit, the guy is a lawyer known for consumer rights activities. That's what his suit is really about... and he's suing on the basis of product misrepresentation in advertising.

Reply Score: 3

Don't feed trolls, people
by helf on Fri 16th Nov 2012 15:55 UTC
helf
Member since:
2005-07-06

Really? I loaded up this article expecting some actual conversing (insane, right?) and all I get is nested comment after nested comment of people arguing with a known troll.

Please stop. It isn't hard.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Don't feed trolls, people
by lucas_maximus on Sat 17th Nov 2012 09:10 UTC in reply to "Don't feed trolls, people"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

The article itself is a troll.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/11/why-the-8gb-wii-u-can-only-st...

Nobody has mentioned Nintendo doing exactly the same thing.

Edited 2012-11-17 09:10 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Don't feed trolls, people
by segedunum on Sat 17th Nov 2012 16:22 UTC in reply to "RE: Don't feed trolls, people"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Regardless of who it is it's still wrong I'm afraid. Advertising storage space and then leaving a user with half of the advertised storage space is plain ridiculous.

Oh, and you're still a troll who frankly doesn't know what he's arguing half the time when he loses arguments. Hint: It's at that point that you stop typing.

Reply Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Regardless of who it is it's still wrong I'm afraid. Advertising storage space and then leaving a user with half of the advertised storage space is plain ridiculous.


But people are more likely to raeg at Microsoft.

Oh, and you're still a troll who frankly doesn't know what he's arguing half the time when he loses arguments. Hint: It's at that point that you stop typing.


Oh yes, last time if I remember correctly you were doing the old "I am going delibrately mis-interpret simple words like 'we' to make my argument work".

Unlike a lot of people on here, I have don't hide my real identity.

The very first comment on here was a troll, the article itself is a troll. I obvious troll back to make a point and everyone gets their nickers in a twist.

Edited 2012-11-17 16:31 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Don't feed trolls, people
by segedunum on Sun 18th Nov 2012 13:32 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Don't feed trolls, people"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

But people are more likely to raeg at Microsoft.

Your argument, whatever it was, is still null and void on that basis.

Oh yes, last time if I remember correctly you were doing the old "I am going delibrately mis-interpret simple words like 'we' to make my argument work".

Errr, no. You made assertions you simply couldn't back up with examples, couldn't answer the question 'why'?, were out-argued, got your ass handed to you and you then eventually shut up. People who have that happen to them quite often then claim they were misinterpreted in order to try and salvage some pride.

Unlike a lot of people on here, I have don't hide my real identity.

Good for you. If you want to have your identity public, if I were you, I'd shut up.

The very first comment on here was a troll, the article itself is a troll. I obvious troll back to make a point and everyone gets their nickers in a twist.

Errrr, no. I'm afraid you can't just say what you like and have it be true - a flaw in your reasoning you haven't picked up yet. It's been explained why the article is relevant and why this simply wouldn't happen with any non-computer product. For some reason if it's computer related advertisers can get away with whatever they want.

You then trolled with a lot of nonsensical crap about the size of hard drives. You have no line of reasoning or argument. It's a case of throwing out random crap to have something to say.

Reply Score: 3

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18


Your argument, whatever it was, is still null and void on that basis.


No it isn't


Errr, no. You made assertions you simply couldn't back up with examples, couldn't answer the question 'why'?, were out-argued, got your ass handed to you and you then eventually shut up. People who have that happen to them quite often then claim they were misinterpreted in order to try and salvage some pride.


Actually that didn't happen. I kept on asking the same question and you didn't answer it and deliberately missed the point.

At no point did I have my arse handed to me.

Good for you. If you want to have your identity public, if I were you, I'd shut up.


Unfortunately you don't get to tell me anything.

Errrr, no. I'm afraid you can't just say what you like and have it be true - a flaw in your reasoning you haven't picked up yet. It's been explained why the article is relevant and why this simply wouldn't happen with any non-computer product. For some reason if it's computer related advertisers can get away with whatever they want.


The guy is a lawyer trying to make a name for himself. Sorry if you plonking down what is a quarter of my monthly earnings it best to check the fact first that can be found on the website of the supplier of said product.

There is no black and white on this, even if you claim there is to be.

It is called a matter of opinion. I don't agree with your conclusion. The fact we are having this argument proves that.

You then trolled with a lot of nonsensical crap about the size of hard drives. You have no line of reasoning or argument. It's a case of throwing out random crap to have something to say.


Keep on throwing that word around ... doesn't make you right.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Don't feed trolls, people
by segedunum on Mon 19th Nov 2012 13:11 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Don't feed trolls, people"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

No it isn't

Yes it is. See where you're going here?

Unfortunately you don't get to tell me anything.

You're replying..... Shut up about your pointless public identity then.

The guy is a lawyer trying to make a name for himself.

Your opinion, something you don't back up and cannot argue and where you consistently try and argue that it's all an anti-Microsoft conspiracy.

That's clearly just ad-hominem nonsense.

Reply Score: 2

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

I think you would disagree with me about whether the sky was blue.

Edited 2012-11-19 19:27 UTC

Reply Score: 2

Does intelligent conversation exist?
by kateline on Mon 19th Nov 2012 18:04 UTC in reply to "Don't feed trolls, people"
kateline Member since:
2011-05-19

This is the problem I have with OSNews. You get some excellent articles and intelligent conversation, interrupted by a bunch of idiots who ruin it for everyone. Too bad.

Reply Score: 1

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

You were the one that did the original troll ... pot and kettle Kateline.

Reply Score: 2

Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Fri 16th Nov 2012 16:03 UTC
ilovebeer
Member since:
2011-08-08

People are whining about the Surface being short on space and asking where do you store your music and other files. Well, if you run out of space, you add more, just like any normal person does to their computer. The Surface has 2x USB ports and a microSDXC port so no, you do NOT need a harddrive if you don't want one. Me personally, I would opt for either SDHC->USB or take advantage of that microSDXC port. If I can afford a Surface, I can easily afford another $40 or so for 64GB worth of space. Or $100ish for another 128GB of space. There's also getting a cheap usb SSD as well, which slides into your pocket with plenty of room to spare for your other crap you carry around.

Btw, what happens when you run out of space on your ipad? You either start deleting, buy another ipad with more space. Of course any device with internet connectivity can use cloud services so......

People are whining about `what if you live in the 3rd world and don't have a 100Mbit connection?`... Most people period don't have 100Mbit connections and I doubt you're seeing many Surface tablets in 3rd world countries. No saying you won't, but am saying let's keep things in perspective. Is the Surface a good choice for poor 3rd world people? Probably not so crying about it is a bit disingenuous.

People are whining about the size of the OS install, citing that it's bloated. But people also complain if they plug something into Windows and a driver isn't immediately ready, or they don't have near-full compatibility with whatever they're doing/using. And of course there's no escaping the irony that linux gets quickly & terribly bloated if you've doing more than a base install. Windows and linux both could go on a diet but considering how much more Windows supports, linux users should tread lightly when throwing criticism around.

So basically people are trying to find any stupid reason to whine about Microsoft by way of the new Surface tablet. New day, new product, same old boring & mostly pointless pissing about.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Comment by ilovebeer
by helf on Fri 16th Nov 2012 17:45 UTC in reply to "Comment by ilovebeer"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

No, the crux of the matter is that MS is advertising a tablet as having "32" gb of storage space and not specifying, clearly, that ACTUAL usable space is a LOT less.

Unless I am mistaken. No one that is sane is arguing otherwise. Just ignore the trolls.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Fri 16th Nov 2012 18:04 UTC in reply to "RE: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

No, the crux of the matter is that MS is advertising a tablet as having "32" gb of storage space and not specifying, clearly, that ACTUAL usable space is a LOT less.

Unless I am mistaken. No one that is sane is arguing otherwise. Just ignore the trolls.

Apple doesn't advertise actual usable space for their ipads. Google doesn't advertise actual usable space for their Nexus 7. Amazon doesn't advertise actual usable space for their Kindle Fire HD. Nobody says anything about it until Microsoft doesn't advertise actual usable space for their Surface. Then all of a sudden this is a huge deal and Microsoft is engaged in false advertisement.

People should easily be able to see how ridiculous it is to blow a hole in their shorts over this. The issue was a non-issue until Microsoft did it too. Then all of a sudden people are all up in arms. It's not because of their "deception" that people readily accept from other tablet makers, ..it's simply because it's Microsoft and people love to piss all over the place when it's Microsoft.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer
by majipoor on Fri 16th Nov 2012 18:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer"
majipoor Member since:
2009-01-22

A 32GB iPad has 28GB available while a 32GB Surface has 16GB. Can't you understand that at some point it becomes false advertising?

In many reviews I've read one can read that the Surface is cheaper than the iPad by $100, the 32GB Surface being priced as the 16GB iPad which is seen by many as a clear advantage. Problem is that the 32GB Surface should be compared to the 16GB iPad in which case the price advantage disappear.

If this is fair advertising for you, fine, but many won't agree.

Edited 2012-11-16 18:12 UTC

Reply Score: 7

RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Nelson on Fri 16th Nov 2012 18:30 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Surface comes bundled with Office and more preinstalled apps than an iPad.

On top of that, a Surface has microSd expandability (which the iPad lacks) and 2x USB ports (which iPad lacks) and features a full blown Office suite. (including OneNote MX)

Windows RT also includes 7GB of free SkyDrive storage (25GB if you got grandfathered like me) and unlimited streaming of music over Xbox Music for 6months.

Some people will reply to me, call cloud storage the devil, mention that its THEIR data, bring up some conspiracy theory that Microsoft will one day shut them off from their data, etc

Then someone will reply about FLAC and all their high quality albums (apparently they need to carry 50GB of albums everywhere they go, or something ridiculous like that)

Surface is not for you. There really is no device that will ever suit your needs. Especially not a Microsoft one.

To me and a majority of others, cloud storage is palatable and even desirable. I enjoy having my data automatically sync between all my devices. I enjoy freeing up storage for other things while storing documents and music and videos and photos on the cloud. It is convenient. Maybe it doesn't fit your philosophical views, but who cares?

But let's go beyond the bullshit for a minute: You cannot enter a class action lawsuit against Microsoft. You may resolve your disputes in small claims court or using binding arbitration. This entire article is a moot point.

Edited 2012-11-16 18:31 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Fri 16th Nov 2012 19:44 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

A 32GB iPad has 28GB available while a 32GB Surface has 16GB. Can't you understand that at some point it becomes false advertising?

It doesn't matter if the ipad has 28GB available or 2.8GB available. Advertising a 32GB Surface as 32GB is exactly the same as advertising a 32GB ipad as 32GB. Does the device come with 32GB? Yes. They are not advertising "32GB of free space available" therefore they are not falsely advertising their product.

I will point out, again, that Apple, Google, and Amazon don't advertise how much free space is available either. Microsoft is doing nothing more, less, or worse than any of them. Yet when they do it it's fine but when Microsoft follows their lead, certain people start crying foul. It's just dumb.

It's almost sad how quickly people throw common sense out the window just to try taking a cheap (and unjustified) jab at Microsoft.

In many reviews I've read one can read that the Surface is cheaper than the iPad by $100, the 32GB Surface being priced as the 16GB iPad which is seen by many as a clear advantage. Problem is that the 32GB Surface should be compared to the 16GB iPad in which case the price advantage disappear.

No, ...the 32GB Surface should be compared to other 32GB devices.

Moving the goal posts in an attempt to take away an advantage only means you have no real merit for your case.

If this is fair advertising for you, fine, but many won't agree.

Of course it's fair. There isn't a single company advertising how much "free space available" their device comes with. At least with the Surface you have a few expansion options -- good luck plugging a $40 64GB SDXC card into your ipad.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer
by segedunum on Sat 17th Nov 2012 16:38 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

It doesn't matter if the ipad has 28GB available or 2.8GB available.

Errrr, yes it does. Leaving someone with 50% of their advertised storage has become false advertising. It's not an absolute, as anything is with advertising, but it's got to the point where it is beyond being reasonable.

Advertising a 32GB Surface as 32GB is exactly the same as advertising a 32GB ipad as 32GB. Does the device come with 32GB? Yes. They are not advertising "32GB of free space available"

I think you need to read the article. Microsoft are marketing this on the basis of storage space and that it's better than an iPad. They're charging a premium for these devices, just to make things worse.

You're on a slippery slope when you make those claims and fall well, well short. No other device comes even close to leaving you with 50% of your storage left.

There isn't a single company advertising how much "free space available" their device comes with.

Doesn't work that way I'm afraid and you can't rephrase this as 'free space available'. If you are advertising 32GB of storage then you need to reasonably have most of that 32GB available. That's the way it's happened in other industries with misrepresentation.

If Office is taking up most of that space then you advertise that it has Office and cut down the advertised storage space.

Something has to give here. Splitting hairs and trying to redefine the argument won't wash.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer
by lucas_maximus on Sat 17th Nov 2012 18:50 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

At the end of the day, Microsoft have said it is a 32GB version with 16gb of free space. It is on their website, it is easily googled and if you ask when buying one I am sure store clerk will tell you (they are obliged to).

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by ilovebeer
by segedunum on Sun 18th Nov 2012 13:34 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

At the end of the day, Microsoft have said it is a 32GB version with 16gb of free space. It is on their website, it is easily googled and if you ask when buying one....

I'm afraid legally that's still false advertising. No one gets away with putting something up publicly and then saying "Oh well if you'd asked us then we would have told you what we really meant by 32GB of storage."

False advertising precedents. Look them up.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Sun 18th Nov 2012 01:12 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

It doesn't matter if the ipad has 28GB available or 2.8GB available.
Errrr, yes it does. Leaving someone with 50% of their advertised storage has become false advertising.

.......No. The device does have 32GB of storage. How that storage is used is something else entirely.

No other device comes even close to leaving you with 50% of your storage left.

It doesn't matter what percentage of the storage space is used by other devices. That has nothing to do with anything. Not only that but there is no law stating a 32GB device must be have x% of that 32GB to be advertised as a 32GB device.

There isn't a single company advertising how much "free space available" their device comes with.
Doesn't work that way I'm afraid and you can't rephrase this as 'free space available'. If you are advertising 32GB of storage then you need to reasonably have most of that 32GB available.

Cite the exact law(s) that supports your claim. Cite ANY law that supports your claim. Or concede that you are posting nothing more than your own personal opinion and that nothing you've claimed is sourced on actual law.

If Office is taking up most of that space then you advertise that it has Office and cut down the advertised storage space.

Microsoft has no obligation to list any bundled software. Common sense says they would want to because coming with Office pre-installed is a plus. Regardless of the presence of Office, the device has a set amount of storage it comes with. How much of that is used by OS, pre-installed software, etc. is completely irrelevant. None of that changes the fact that a 32GB device literally has 32GB of storage.

Something has to give here. Splitting hairs and trying to redefine the argument won't wash.

The only thing that should give is these pathetic attempts to cry Microsoft foul and create a problem where none actually exists. You're probably so blinded by your desire to badmouth Microsoft that you likely are oblivious to the fact that you have already moved the goal posts in an attempt to support your false claims. You're the one pulling things like `there needing to be 50% of free space available` out of thin air. You're trying to split hairs where no hairs exist.

Like I said, it's all good until Microsoft does it. Once that happens then OH NO THEY DIDN'T, no matter how ridiculous, stupid, and/or non-existant the "problem" is. This case is going nowhere because there is no case. I suspect you'll still be whining about it even after the case gets thrown out or lost though.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by ilovebeer
by segedunum on Sun 18th Nov 2012 13:46 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

.......No. The device does have 32GB of storage. How that storage is used is something else entirely.

Nope. There is an implication there that is very, very clear and legally it has been proven umpteen times in false advertising cases.

It doesn't matter what percentage of the storage space is used by other devices. That has nothing to do with anything.

Yes it does, because legally it is going to be decided at what point the free space left to a user versus the advertisement goes beyond what is reasonable. Look up legal precedents for this.

How far do we go here. Advertise 32GB of storage and leave the user with 1GB? That's clearly not acceptable.

Not only that but there is no law stating a 32GB device must be have x% of that 32GB to be advertised as a 32GB device.

Crap. This is false advertising, plain and simple. Look it up.

Cite the exact law(s) that supports your claim. Cite ANY law that supports your claim. Or concede that you are posting nothing more than your own personal opinion and that nothing you've claimed is sourced on actual law.

Learn about false advertising and precedents in that area or shut your mouth. Having to resort to asking for a specific law prohibiting this means you don't know what on Earth you are talking about.

Microsoft has no obligation to list any bundled software. Common sense says they would want to because coming with Office pre-installed is a plus.

You give with one hand and take away with another. I'm afraid that legally speaking this is the view that will be taken and one way or another Microsoft will be forced into doing that.

How much of that is used by OS, pre-installed software, etc. is completely irrelevant.

No I'm afraid it isn't because there is a clear implication of storage space. A consumer has no control over how much of that 32GB they get. If there is a problem here you don't advertise any storage space at all. Simple.

The only thing that should give is these pathetic attempts to cry Microsoft foul and create a problem where none actually exists. You're probably so blinded by your desire to badmouth Microsoft...

ROTFL. What's really funny are people who have crazy ideas that the computer and technology industries are different from anything else and laws and legality don't apply to them. They do I'm afraid.

Like I said, it's all good until Microsoft does it. Once that happens then OH NO THEY DIDN'T....

Cry me a river. Boo, hoo, hoo, it's all an anti-Microsoft conspiracy.

Doesn't change the fact that this is false advertising, there are precedents for this, you don't know that and I'm afraid there is very good legal merit here.

Edited 2012-11-18 13:47 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Lorin on Sat 17th Nov 2012 01:01 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by ilovebeer"
Lorin Member since:
2010-04-06

Everyone else advertises their devices 16, 32 64 GB devices, Microsoft advertised 32GB of storage space, which means that is what is available to use. Using the words "storage space" changes everything.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Sat 17th Nov 2012 01:19 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

Everyone else advertises their devices 16, 32 64 GB devices, Microsoft advertised 32GB of storage space, which means that is what is available to use. Using the words "storage space" changes everything.

No, ...it doesn't. The device DOES have 32GB of storage. Part of it is used by the OS. Just like every other device.

Some people try to find any pathetic excuse to cry about Microsoft, I swear.

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer
by Lorin on Sat 17th Nov 2012 05:20 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer"
Lorin Member since:
2010-04-06

I have a law degree and no matter what any shill says, the law does recognize that distinction and will act on it.

Reply Score: 0

RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer
by lucas_maximus on Sat 17th Nov 2012 09:13 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Is this another one of you lies?

* Has a law degree
* Moved 200,000 desktops over to Linux.

Which is it?

Your resume is probably reading like a Character from Resident Evil.

Reply Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer
by lucas_maximus on Sat 17th Nov 2012 09:12 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/11/why-the-8gb-wii-u-can-only-st...

Nothing has been said about Nintendo doing exactly the same thing.

Reply Score: 3

RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer
by kwan_e on Sat 17th Nov 2012 14:22 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer"
kwan_e Member since:
2007-02-18

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/11/why-the-8gb-wii-u-can-only-st...

Nothing has been said about Nintendo doing exactly the same thing.


You mean that article that was written in 15 Nov 2012?

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer
by segedunum on Sat 17th Nov 2012 16:43 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't get your non-sensical argument I'm afraid. Whether it is Nintendo or anyone else that is still wrong.

I see you're trying to paint this as an anti-Microsoft thing or something now that you've lost all your (nonsensical) arguments.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by ilovebeer
by lucas_maximus on Sat 17th Nov 2012 18:42 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Lets spell it out for you.

* The "buyer" who is a lawyer, could have easily found out (it is in the small print, which you should really always read), it putting up a class law suit ... instead of buying an SD card.

* The user (ahem... lawyer) is trying to make a name for himself. This is about consumer rights, it is blatantly about himself.

* These things have been around since companies have sold PCS.

* Other companies are doing it, and that hasn't been mentioned or raeged about ... mainly because it is Microsoft.

These are the same arguments I made, earlier and will continue to make.

If you asked me if I thought it was a bit shitty, I would agree and why I won't buy a surface at this time.

If you think it is unfair they don't advertise it more honestly ... maybe. But I am sorry, unless you are a smart consumer you will get ripped off.

All the information is available at your finger tips ... sorry there is simply no excuse.

Edited 2012-11-17 18:52 UTC

Reply Score: 3

RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer
by segedunum on Sat 17th Nov 2012 16:42 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by ilovebeer"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

No, ...it doesn't. The device DOES have 32GB of storage. Part of it is used by the OS. Just like every other device.

No. If you advertise a box with five cubic metres of space and you actually get two then the law has and can act on that kind of misrepresentation. You cannot argue that you do actually get that advertised storage but the walls of the box take up over 50% of it. It simply doesn't work like that.

I hate to burst the bubble of the non-sensical arguments you people are making but there have been umpteen legal precedents for this in many, many countries. It's as old as advertising itself.

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer
by lucas_maximus on Sat 17th Nov 2012 18:46 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Actually you don't seem to understand the meaning of nonsensical.

Nonsensical means without meaning or ludicrous.

What ilovebeer, you and I have are a difference of opinion. Before throwing phrases around, actually learn what they mean.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by ilovebeer
by segedunum on Sun 18th Nov 2012 13:49 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Actually you don't seem to understand the meaning of nonsensical.

Nonsensical means without meaning or ludicrous.

Well done.

What ilovebeer, you and I have are a difference of opinion. Before throwing phrases around, actually learn what they mean.

You believe that advertising laws don't exist, don't apply to computing products and anyone who claims that they do must be anti-Microsoft.

I believe that fits my definition of nonsensical. I believe I understand it very well and knew what I meant when I typed it, thank you very much.

Edited 2012-11-18 14:00 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by ilovebeer
by allanregistos on Mon 19th Nov 2012 08:56 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer"
allanregistos Member since:
2011-02-10

Actually you don't seem to understand the meaning of nonsensical.

Nonsensical means without meaning or ludicrous.

What ilovebeer, you and I have are a difference of opinion. Before throwing phrases around, actually learn what they mean.


Lucas, I wasted a few minutes here just to respond to your arguments. Make it simple. And yes I am using my real name.

Use some common sense:

It is tolerable for Android and iOS to come up with an actual 32Gb storage space but with a few % deducted for an Operating System. If Microsoft came up with the same model (deduct a few percentage from an advertised storage capacity), there will be no suing. Else you will win for this specific case.

But here is Microsoft advertising a 32Gb storage, but with an obscure explanation that it deducted 50% of that storage space is no longer acceptable from a consumer's point of view, that is, from a consumer, NOT FROM YOUR perspective. They(consumer) don't have to pay EXTRA(BUT YOU LUCAS, you can) for an external storage if you expect something that at least you can save more than 80% of your data out from that 32Gb storage, it is a bit unusual, for this is a MOBILE device, THIS IS NOT A PC WHERE you can have terabytes of storage and yes it is tolerable on a PC, you might have >500Gb of storage, but for a mobile device, this is no longer the case if you use your common sense. But because you set your mind that you can buy extra storage because the device have these extra features that others were lacking caused you to be blinded by the fact that other people can no longer afford to pay that extra cost.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer
by ilovebeer on Sun 18th Nov 2012 06:27 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by ilovebeer"
ilovebeer Member since:
2011-08-08

No, ...it doesn't. The device DOES have 32GB of storage. Part of it is used by the OS. Just like every other device.
No. If you advertise a box with five cubic metres of space and you actually get two then the law has and can act on that kind of misrepresentation. You cannot argue that you do actually get that advertised storage but the walls of the box take up over 50% of it. It simply doesn't work like that.

You're going to have to do a lot better than that to make any kind of point. Not only is the analogy terrible, I have yet to see a single law cited to support theories like yours.

I hate to burst the bubble of the non-sensical arguments you people are making but there have been umpteen legal precedents for this in many, many countries. It's as old as advertising itself.

If that is true, it should be absolutely no problem for you to start citing laws and successful lawsuits based on false advertisement of a product because how much actual "free space" was not clearly described in the advertisement.

Now you get the chance to prove there's any shred of truth to anything you've said. I'm going to warn you though, I expect to see citations of laws and/or cases that actually address the very issue you & others are whining about -- meaning don't waste anyones time citing some irrelevant bullshit and trying to force it to fit.

You hate Microsoft, I get it. But, this case is going nowhere and anyone with any common sense knows it.

Reply Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by ilovebeer
by TM99 on Sun 18th Nov 2012 09:28 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer"
TM99 Member since:
2012-08-26

Christ on a pogo stick, fanboys can be so willfully stupid it hurts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising#Manipulation_of_meas...

Yes, there are definitely laws in the US regulated by the FTC regarding false advertising. Yes, class action lawsuits have already been settled with regards to the above link concerning hard drive space amounts. So yes, in this case, Microsoft is advertising n amount of space and in actuality there is n/50 for available use. This is false advertising. This lawsuit is valid and will proceed based on the prior precedent. And yes, it will likely be settled out of court with a financial amount paid plus precise changes to the wording in the adverts.

Is this now clear enough for you and Lucas to get?

Reply Score: 6

RE[7]: Comment by ilovebeer
by segedunum on Sun 18th Nov 2012 13:53 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by ilovebeer"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

You're going to have to do a lot better than that to make any kind of point. Not only is the analogy terrible, I have yet to see a single law cited to support theories like yours.

An awful lot better than that? What I described is false advertising and you can't get away with that. If you don't know that then you really know very, very little - to put it politely.

If that is true, it should be absolutely no problem for you to start citing laws and successful lawsuits based on false advertisement of a product because how much actual "free space" was not clearly described in the advertisement.

I'm afraid the precedents are wider than that and they are as I have described. False advertising is false advertising. You don't get away with it because you are selling people gigabytes.

You hate Microsoft, I get it. But, this case is going nowhere and anyone with any common sense knows it.

Just face it sweetheart. This is false advertising. I'm afraid standing in a court of law and telling everyone that they hate Microsoft is not any sort of legal argument.

Reply Score: 2

Stupid California people!
by jefro on Fri 16th Nov 2012 22:43 UTC
jefro
Member since:
2007-04-13

My one gig hard drive won't allow me to load 1G worth of programs either. Nothing new, just trying to sue.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Stupid California people!
by zima on Thu 22nd Nov 2012 13:26 UTC in reply to "Stupid California people!"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

"Stupid California people" give you large part of the tech & entertainment you use, consume, enjoy...

Reply Score: 2

Half gone
by 3rdalbum on Sat 17th Nov 2012 06:20 UTC
3rdalbum
Member since:
2008-05-26

We're all computer-literate people who know that an operating system takes up space, and that 32 gigabytes is the maximum capacity of the drive completely empty. (gigabytes, not gibibytes). Once you put a filesystem on it, you've lost some space. Put an operating system on it and you've lost more space.

People who are not as computer-literate as us will not know. They usually don't notice because the amount of space lost is so low when expressed as a percentage of the total capacity.

In other words, who notices 16 gigabytes lost on a 1TB hard disk?

Microsoft has released a tablet with an advertised "32 gigabyte" disk/SSD. It would be reasonable to expect maybe 25 gigabytes of usable space after the OS has been installed. However, there's only 16 gigabytes left after the OS - that's literally 50% of the advertised capacity lost!

Now, if you bought a computer with a 1TB hard disk, and found Windows taking up 500 gigs of that, you'd be pretty pissed too! You've lost half your storage space!

So no, it's not just Microsoft-hate; advertising twice as much storage space as what is actually usable is drastic misadvertising.

Reply Score: 4

chithanh
Member since:
2006-06-18

Besides the Microsoft Surface engineers spreading false information about the available disk space, they admit that you cannot install apps to a microSD card:
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/11kyja/iam_panos_panay_gm_of_...

So install a couple of games (some of which easily reach sizes of a gigabyte and more, on Android I believe MC3 is the record holder) and your storage is full.

Reply Score: 3

Great, another hot coffee in the crotch
by calden on Sat 17th Nov 2012 16:49 UTC
calden
Member since:
2012-02-02

Though I agree that a clearer statement as to how much storage the Windows 8 OS uses is needed, I hate, I hate when people sue over such tripe. In Switzerland where I live, the maxium you can win from a law suit is 200,000 CHF. Big reason why Apple has not filed here, no money to be had.

It's a silly tablet anyway, you get what you pay for.

Reply Score: 2

What does the heading means?
by subairm on Sun 18th Nov 2012 14:35 UTC
subairm
Member since:
2007-07-13

Did Microsoft Sued Over Surface Tablet's Disk Space ?

-Sa

Reply Score: 1

It's ALL bloatware!!!
by SonicMetalMan on Mon 19th Nov 2012 03:31 UTC
SonicMetalMan
Member since:
2009-05-25

It just occurred to me that it we no longer even blink when we talk about an OS occupying 10 gig or so. Does anybody remember the installed footprint of Windows 3.1? How about an Amiga 500 running Workbench 2.1 from floppies? We seem to accept all the fat from modern OS's as the new "normal". WTF?!

Innocence is lost to the ages, and boy do I miss the good old days sometimes.

Reply Score: 1

RE: It's ALL bloatware!!!
by zima on Thu 22nd Nov 2012 10:08 UTC in reply to "It's ALL bloatware!!!"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

Oh yeah, I remember those old times - and I don't miss them. You're looking at the "good old days" through rose-tinted glasses.

Operating systems from 2+ decades ago did comparatively little, were unstable, problematic to set up, insecure by design; and we tended to complain more back then about their hardware requirements - since hw resources were so scarce.

Edited 2012-11-22 10:09 UTC

Reply Score: 2

This is how its done
by Lorin on Tue 20th Nov 2012 22:01 UTC
Lorin
Member since:
2010-04-06

Samsung has managed to fit a 5.5" Super-AMOLED screen on the Note II. Preserving the unique S-Pen from the previous iteration, and complementing the old model with an extra gigabyte of RAM, and an upgraded processor, available in 16, 32 and 64 GB capacities, all with micro SD storage, the Note II is the must-have phablet (phone-tablet) of late 2012.

You will notice they say "capacities" and only use "storage" in the context of an SD card. Then they go on to list the features such as 16GB ROM and so on for different sizes.

Microsoft botched it in the way they wrote it up, examples like the one above will be what the Judge sees.

Reply Score: 2