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?
Thread beginning with comment 542828
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by Thom_Holwerda
by galvanash on Fri 16th Nov 2012 21:00 UTC in reply to "Comment by Thom_Holwerda"
Member since:

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 Parent Score: 5

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

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 Parent Score: 4

galvanash Member since:

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 Parent Score: 1