Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

16GB Is a Bad User Experience

david-smith.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 92 posts

Re: 16GB Is a Bad User Experience

#51

Post by bakabaka9 »

humanrebar wrote: post #39
bakabaka9 wrote: post #37

Bad user experience depends on the user. Personally I very much enjoy the somewhat lower price of less-beefy models of smartphones and tablets — as I'm not obsessed with taking pictures, don't play blockbuster video games on mobile, and prefer my books as text, instead of audio files. The title of the post is similar to saying e.g. "ARM CPU is bad UX", and complain that you can't mine Bitcoin effectively on ARM.

The counterargument would be that your usage patterns are the niche ones. I suppose that's an empirical question. Does anyone have any numbers either way?

Presently there is no additional cost to choosing a smartphone with the right amount of memory for one's specific usage pattern, so who's being "niche" makes no difference. Linux on desktop is arguably also niche, yet no one is hurt by the fact that PCs actually support it.

If Apple were producing just the 16GB model, then usage numbers would probably be in order. As of now, things are just at their optimal state, where everyone can get what they want.

Re: 16GB Is a Bad User Experience

#52

Post by blisterpeanuts »

matthewmacleod wrote: post #46
jarcane wrote: post #19

This would all be trivially solved if Apple would just put a goddamn SD card slot in it. Storage size as sole model differentiation is sooo 2001. At this point it genuinely makes Apple look out of touch in a market where every other flagship quality model doesn't bother with it and includes an SD slot, partly I suspect because it's just saner from a production and inventory standpoint even besides the consumer benefi…

No it wouldn't. 1. Flagship models don't all include an SD slot. Galaxy S6, Moto X, Nexus 6 for example. It's clearly a common decision. 2. I doubt that even if they iPhone did include such a slot the problem would be solved. Removable storage is complicated.

Yes, I hate that. Sdxc cards are up to 512 gb now, and a terabyte card is probably not too far off. People are putting 64gb and 128gb chips in their point-and-shoot cameras. Smartphones are increasingly seeming crippled and artificially limited by comparison.

Re: 16GB Is a Bad User Experience

#53

Post by _ph_ »

An interesting article which raises a good point: the problem with Apple products isn't the price, there is a place for good high priced products, but that some of them are really bad products because of memory limitations. At 16gb you can not use all of its advertised features, unless you rely on streaming/cloud storage only.

And it is not only the iPhone hit by this. I have a 64g iPad, the biggest configuration they offered at that time. For years now, its usage has been limited by the storage filling up. For this reason alone, I will not be buying this release of the iPad pro. A machine which is supposed to partially replace a laptop needs 256g at minimum, possibly 512g. Even if such configurations were more expensive than the currently offered ones, they would still be more interesting as those which just have no way of getting the desired storage sizes.

Re: 16GB Is a Bad User Experience

#55

Post by _ph_ »

rasz_pl wrote: post #54

just plug bigged SD card like normal people do ..oh wait

There are points to be made why a SD card in a phone would be a bad idea - some of them are low quality and cause data issues (just search camera forums for card issues), storage management gets more complex etc. This should be a mood point considering that it does not cost phone manufacturers much to put a decent amount of memory into their devices. But that they offer neither a card slot nor decent amounts of memory, is the issue.

Re: 16GB Is a Bad User Experience

#57

Post by shiven »

icebraining wrote: post #21
madaxe_again wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"because you're mucking about with a stupid phone instead of enjoying the moment with your family." This, a thousand times over. Was at the beach last week, there was a seal sunbathing on a rock 50m from shore... Around me I could hear people complaining they couldn't see it properly - because all weren't looking at it, rather at the crappy digital zoom on their phones. I just looked at the fucking thing, these eye t…

I'd rather be present and use my meat-based memory than have a "memory" on my phone of an event I viewed through a glass, darkly. I'm going to blow your mind: you are actually allowed to do both.

... you are actually allowed to do both.

Allowed, yes. Capable, not likely. Multitasking is overrated and actually counterproductive when writing to the meat-store inside your skull.

Re: 16GB Is a Bad User Experience

#58

Post by kranner »

shiven wrote: post #57
icebraining wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather be present and use my meat-based memory than have a "memory" on my phone of an event I viewed through a glass, darkly. I'm going to blow your mind: you are actually allowed to do both.

... you are actually allowed to do both. Allowed, yes. Capable, not likely. Multitasking is overrated and actually counterproductive when writing to the meat-store inside your skull.

There's a wide range of variation between being glued to a camera and using no camera. The last time I was at a scenic spot, I took four pictures in one minute and then put my phone away. The pictures do help with recalling the whole experience, such as the wind in my face (it was on top of a cliff overlooking the ocean).

Re: 16GB Is a Bad User Experience

#59

Post by meesterdude »

blisterpeanuts wrote: post #52
matthewmacleod wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it wouldn't. 1. Flagship models don't all include an SD slot. Galaxy S6, Moto X, Nexus 6 for example. It's clearly a common decision. 2. I doubt that even if they iPhone did include such a slot the problem would be solved. Removable storage is complicated.

Yes, I hate that. Sdxc cards are up to 512 gb now, and a terabyte card is probably not too far off. People are putting 64gb and 128gb chips in their point-and-shoot cameras. Smartphones are increasingly seeming crippled and artificially limited by comparison.

> People are putting 64gb and 128gb chips in their point-and-shoot cameras

That's a really good point! They tote the device as a replacement, but clearly cripple it in a way that a dedicated device would not be.

Re: 16GB Is a Bad User Experience

#60

Post by randallsquared »

shiven wrote: post #57
icebraining wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather be present and use my meat-based memory than have a "memory" on my phone of an event I viewed through a glass, darkly. I'm going to blow your mind: you are actually allowed to do both.

... you are actually allowed to do both. Allowed, yes. Capable, not likely. Multitasking is overrated and actually counterproductive when writing to the meat-store inside your skull.

This is why lifelogging is so important. I don't want to have to be distracted from my life making sure that I preserve memories in a higher-fidelity format than meat, but I do want to preserve those memories. Further, the ones that mean the most to me later are almost always spontaneous and unplanned, so a manually operated camera isn't especially useful for them, anyway.

I want full recording of everything I see and hear at qualities high enough that I can go back and look at things I missed the first time. I thought Google Glass was the start of that, but it looks like it's going to be a few more years.

Post reply on HN