7" iPad, the rumor that won't go away... (1 Viewer)

[Sam Posten]

It's not how Apple rolls.

 

[Hanson]

Quite a zombie answer!

"Don't you want to pay less?"

"No. I want to pay Apple more."

 

[Sam Posten]

It's all about tradeoffs. Frame the question differently: Would you rather have apps loaded on slower memory that Apple hasn't vetted, introducing the possibility of malware attack vectors, or would you like to have the complete iOS experience?
To be clear: Yes Apple makes a nice profit on selling sealed, non upgrade-able memory, but that choice has user facing tradeoffs that are not immediately obvious to a lay person.
Again, if that is important to you Android is what you want and you are welcome to it.

 

[Hanson]

My SD card is used for media. It is not used for apps. That's what my onboard memory is for. There's no reason Apple could not do the same thing.

And is there some mobile SD card sourced malware explosion I haven't caught wind of? Come on, that's FUD machine set to 8.



Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam Posten /t/322021/7-ipad-the-rumor-that-wont-go-away/30#post_3970867
Again, if that is important to you Android is what you want and you are welcome to it.

Ah yes, the "tough titties" policy.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Originally Posted by Sam Posten /t/322021/7-ipad-the-rumor-that-wont-go-away/30#post_3970867
It's all about tradeoffs. Frame the question differently: Would you rather have apps loaded on slower memory that Apple hasn't vetted, introducing the possibility of malware attack vectors, or would you like to have the complete iOS experience?
To be clear: Yes Apple makes a nice profit on selling sealed, non upgrade-able memory, but that choice has user facing tradeoffs that are not immediately obvious to a lay person.
Again, if that is important to you Android is what you want and you are welcome to it.

Thing is even if all that is true and for the best... why not offer the option to upgrade at a reasonable price post-sale? They basically offer that for battery refresh, if needed, although their asking price is a little steep, which is unfortunately the norm it seems when it comes to original brand batteries, add-ons and such. Of course, you'd still be limited to 64GB unless they start offering higher options.

I wonder though if iOS doesn't have certain limitations baked in that makes some of these things a tad problematic to do. For instance, the whole iTunes synch thing seems pretty crappy in terms of performance/efficiency... and since it's been that way forever (and seemingly indefinitely) now, I can imagine that whole aspect could be part of the problem... Then again, if they can pull off the whole iCloud thing (and obviously has the resources to do a whole lot these days, if they bothered), then I guess whatever limitations I'm imagining probably wouldn't be too big for them to tackle... if they only cared to...

RE: the SD card thing, they can probably just encrypt the whole darned thing, etc. to effectively minimize any potential malware problems, no? Sure, that would make transfering data/files to/from the card less convenient, but that's how it works w/ the internal storage anyway, but it'd allow upgrading to larger capacity.

Yeah, if I had the choice, I'd rather just upgrade the internal storage (and also have easier/freer access to it to boot) because internal storage will almost certainly work better than externals at runtime (vs merely being more flexible beyond runtime) -- would be nice though if iTunes isn't such a hog and work so inefficiently for synching stuff, etc...

_Man_

 

[Sam Posten]

Because it is designed as a sealed non-user modifiable system. That has pros and cons. And yes, if you don't like that, tough titties, choose another vendor cause Apple has not and will not veer from that central tenet of iOS.
Or jailbreak and use a dongle. That has its own trade offs.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Sam,

You're doing precisely what Hanson's talking about, which is merely towing the Apple line on this matter again. But like I said, it shouldn't have to be that way even if it's truly best to not offer external storage via flash cards. They should be able to offer internal storage upgrades for instance, if they actually cared to, among other possibilities. Sure, that *might* hurt their margins somewhat, but that might also be offset by the potential increase in revenues too. And that would not change what your talking about philosophically.

I don't know, but maybe there's a rather unhealthy dose of elitist attitude involved here w/ Apple's (or perhaps, rather, Steve Jobs') adamant adherence to how they've been doing this. It's all "my way or the highway"...

_Man_

 

[Sam Posten]

Listen, this is not towing to Apple's line. Either you believe in the advantages of a sealed system or not.
You can't even move files around if you want to.
There is no user facing file management system on iOS. This is by design. It is not an accident. It is not a bug. It is a feature.
That decision by Apple has far reaching impacts. Not all of them are good or easy to swallow, especially for power users. Apple decided it was worth those tradeoffs to make something that is simple, elegant and approachable.
If you don't like that decision, and this is the second biggest reason to not like iOS behind the curation (if you are kind, draconian big brother dictatorship if you are not) of the App Store, then you need to choose a different path. Because this is FUNDAMENTAL to the iOS reason for being.
With iOS you have a choice, you can be reasonable and do it Apple's way, or you can go to a different ecosystem and live with their choices. If you choose to stay and fight you are either going to lose or drive yourself crazy with the impacts of that decision. For tweakers and engineers this is a bitter bitter pill to swallow but it is easy to see the positive side of it: regular people can have a humane computing environment with very little effort.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

Sam,

You have not actually read what I wrote (or have simply ignored the point). I am *NOT* arguing that they need to offer expandability in that sort of way (nor the issue about their closed ecosystem either). I understand the pros and cons of that, and that's not what I'm arguing against.

They can offer upgradability w/out going down that route of compromise. Sure, just about any kind of expandability/upgradability necessitates some sort of compromise, but I'm fairly certain it's not the kind you're talking about here.

You are towing the line because you are merely regurgitating something that does not actually respond to what I'm talking about. Basically, you're just agreeing w/ Apple's way no matter what in this instance.

_Man_

 

[Sam Posten]

You are going to have to be more specific, cause I can't see a way to do what you want without jeopardizing the whole. It's a train of trust that once broken, ala jailbreak, brings down the whole.

 

[ManW_TheUncool]

The simplest way for them to allow/offer internal storage upgrades would probably be to allow trade-in upgrades for that purpose. They already basically do that for battery refreshes and other damages under their AppleCare protection plan. And if they stick w/ their existing approach, they can just offer "reconditioned" units for that purpose and charge the upgrade diff -- they can probably even offer 2 different upgrade prices depending on whether the owner has AppleCare on the product, if that makes sense for their bottomline, and/or maybe only allow such upgrades to bump up to the next capacity level, eg. from say 32GB to 64GB, and nothing more than that (to help protect both their margins and revenues).

I don't know what kind of true upper-limit they have for internal storage size, but presumably, 64GB is not really the limit, except for the possibility that they might have maxed out the physical layout of everything so that it's difficult to go beyond 64GB w/out significant redesign of the layout. But I gotta think they can compromise slightly somewhere to bump the design to allow 128GB (or more). Of course, maybe they don't want the iPad to get any closer to the MacBook Air than it already can be for some folks, so that could also be partly why they haven't done that already.

I'm really not looking for them to turn iOS into Android or the like nor do I necessarily want SD card expandability -- there are probably more cons to that than merely the concern you have about malware and such, eg. power consumption, overall performance, other hardware design compromises.

As I've said in the past, if Apple would just offer reasonable ways to upgrade/refresh the hardware if/when the need arises, that would be good enough for me. I don't really need the upgrades/refreshes to be quick-and-easy like hot-swappable SD card port or easily swappable battery. I'd just like some reasonable options, eg. take it to an Apple Store to get it done w/ no more than a 3-day turnaround perhaps.

Consider this too. They've already made the SIM card easily swappable now w/ the iPad 3, so maybe it's time for them to consider offering an internal storage upgrade option or two as well. It's not like Apple never wants people to buy more add-ons/upgrades, if they can retain full control, afterall...

_Man_

 

[andrew markworthy]

I seem to have set off something of a debate with my previous comment. Just to clarify - I don't want to be able to read cards or have any add-ons. I just want a larger memory than 64 GB built into the machine. And I don't want to swap from Apple.
As regards the proposed 'improvements' in the iPad that might arrive in the next generation, I frankly don't need them. What I especially find amusing is the idea of another improvement in screen resolution. The idea in principle is fine, but what's the first thing we are encouraged to do with this new, even better definition screen? Wipe our greasy fingers all over it. It kinda negates the whole object of the exercise.

 

[Sam Posten]

Andrew: We all want that. At reasonable prices. The simple truth is there isn't a manufacturer of those sized memory chips out there yet. Apple is pushing the economies of scale with these chips as is, Apple is Samsung's biggest client for just this reason. Like I said, nobody else has them either because they don't exist.
Man: That's a tradeoff of the 'disposable' nature of a sealed system. It isn't in Apple's best interest to spend resources creating a viable tradeup program when there already exists a WILDLY SUCCESSFUL secondary market. Apple DOES have a recycle program which will net you 90% of what Gazelle gets which nets you 90% of what Ebay / Craigslist gets. That seems pretty fair to me. You give up a certain percentage of value for convenience and reliability. If you are resourceful you can make more dough. If you value your time you can trade in instantly.
http://www.apple.com/recycling/
http://www.gazelle.com/
You can remove your personal data from the device securely and reliably with 4 button presses prior to using any of those 4 options. What more do you want? What other manufacturers are doing what you want? What incentive is there for anyone to do that? What profit?

 

[andrew markworthy]

Sam, dumb question - could more memory devices be installed in tandem? And in any case, I don't care about price, I want more memory!

 

[Hanson]

They could, but then they would have to design a whole new chassis to accommodate a second SD card, and it's not worth it for a niche product like a 128GB iPad.

 

[Sam Posten]

Yes but then you start to compromise on battery space. And as much as you want incrementally more storage the hordes of people using iPad want EXCEPTIONALLY more active use time.

 

[Sam Posten]

Woohoo Hanson and I agree =)

 

[Sam Posten]

Also, you know they could go back to hard disk based storage! That would be an interesting design decision, except every time you flop the device down on your bed or palm or table you risk losing everything =p

 

[DaveF]

Originally Posted by ManW_TheUncool /t/322021/7-ipad-the-rumor-that-wont-go-away/30#post_3970985
The simplest way for them to allow/offer internal storage upgrades would probably be to allow trade-in upgrades for that purpose. They already basically do that for battery refreshes and other damages under their AppleCare protection plan. And if they stick w/ their existing approach, they can just offer "reconditioned" units for that purpose and charge the upgrade diff -- they can probably even offer 2 different upgrade prices depending on whether the owner has AppleCare on the product, if that makes sense for their bottomline, and/or maybe only allow such upgrades to bump up to the next capacity level, eg. from say 32GB to 64GB, and nothing more than that (to help protect both their margins and revenues).

I don't know what kind of true upper-limit they have for internal storage size, but presumably, 64GB is not really the limit, except for the possibility that they might have maxed out the physical layout of everything so that it's difficult to go beyond 64GB w/out significant redesign of the layout. But I gotta think they can compromise slightly somewhere to bump the design to allow 128GB (or more). Of course, maybe they don't want the iPad to get any closer to the MacBook Air than it already can be for some folks, so that could also be partly why they haven't done that already.

I'm really not looking for them to turn iOS into Android or the like nor do I necessarily want SD card expandability -- there are probably more cons to that than merely the concern you have about malware and such, eg. power consumption, overall performance, other hardware design compromises.

As I've said in the past, if Apple would just offer reasonable ways to upgrade/refresh the hardware if/when the need arises, that would be good enough for me. I don't really need the upgrades/refreshes to be quick-and-easy like hot-swappable SD card port or easily swappable battery. I'd just like some reasonable options, eg. take it to an Apple Store to get it done w/ no more than a 3-day turnaround perhaps.

Consider this too. They've already made the SIM card easily swappable now w/ the iPad 3, so maybe it's time for them to consider offering an internal storage upgrade option or two as well. It's not like Apple never wants people to buy more add-ons/upgrades, if they can retain full control, afterall...

_Man_

Microsoft set out to do that with their first line of Metro phones, and abandoned it as unsuccessful. Recall, they were going to offer a slot for an SD card, under the battery. Put a card in, and its capacity and the built-in would be managed as a unified amount to the user. Better than both iOS and Android, allowing user expansion after purchase without the user having to manage what's stored where.

But, to my understanding, they gave up. Apparently 3rd party memory cards were too inconsistent in performance and stability to be used for main storage. Or something? But MS couldn't lick the problem that every Android enthusiast says is trivial.

Correct if I'm wrong. I've not looked into this in a while. Maybe it is an option now with WP7 phones. And I've not looked into how Android does it, and what the UX is, the cost benefits, and storage capacities available now.

 

[Hanson]

The MS solution was inherently flawed. You would install an SD card, and then the system would format the card so that it would be part of one unified memory space. But the problem was that if something went wrong with the card or it was ejected while the phone was running, everything went kablooey. It wasn't quite RAID 0 striping, but essentially the memory card was too tightly integrated into the system. And the low level formatting ruined the card -- it would no longer be able to be formatted for any other use. Oddly, the Lumia 820 has an SD card slot, but the higher end 920 does not. I do not know if WP8 treats SD cards as storage now or if it's the same formatting process.

Android's SD card was a solution to control memory costs. The user would determine how much memory they needed, and for devices in the pre-froyo days, it was the only source of storage. There was no internal storage memory in my Evo -- everything depended on the SD card. Samsung and Motorola had on board storage in their phones, typically 8GB on top of external SD storage. I suppose disk fragmentation is always an issue with FAT32 file systems and there were unscrupulous ebay sellers who palmed off cooked SD card that read as 32GB, but were actually 4GB (after the first 4GB of data got written onto it, the PC would simply write over existing data to accommodate new data, but 32GB cards were >$90, so a $35 32GB SD card was really a red flag). However, I think the real reason Google starting moving away from SD storage is because of confusion.

When they created Honeycomb, they decided to have unified internal memory, doing away with the OS/App/Data partitions used in Gingerbread and prior. Because of legacy issues, the internal storage is still dubbed "SD card". But it isn't actually the SD card. They would create a mount point for the actual SD card as a subfolder called external_sd (like Samsung did) or mount it higher up and call it MicroSD or something like that. With ICS, Google wanted to stick with a single SD card space and end the whole "SD card" confusion.

But people love removable storage. And even though it seemed everything was moving to the cloud when ICS was introduced, the end of unlimited data means that storing files locally is back in vogue. With ICS onward, SD cards are simply for storage -- you can't put program files on it like in the GB days. It's just for media now, and if you remove it, you will not cause programs to stop working, which used to happen because the Apps to SD API allowed you to move program files to the SD card to recoup space in the App partition.

Okay, so this isn't really on topic, but since I'm almost finished, my conclusion is that this kind of storage-only use for the SD card really works now. The only drawback is that it's confusing for users to understand the distinction between what the OS calls the "SD Card" and the honest to goodness MicroSD card. But for the cost per GB, it's really a bargain of an option. 64GB Micro SD cards are $50 now. That an equivalent of $200 in the iPhone world.