Can anyone logically explain why Samsung and others scrimp on native memory?

[bigoldthor]

I see this kicked around all over the place, with petitions, wish lists, b&m threads, etc. Some people complain about it (like me) and other people don't think it's a big deal if you use a bigger SD card. But I have YET to hear a rational, logical, reasonable explanation from Samsung as to why they would put so little memory into such an otherwise magnificent, flagship device. (Same for most other manufacturers.) It's like putting a 4-cylinder 150hp engine in a 2013 Ford Raptor SVT. It defies logic.

Memory is pretty darn cheap now, isn't it? And I would think *onboard memory* for a company the size of Samsung would be even cheaper. What would it cost them...a couple of bucks to bump it from 16gb to 64gb? Moreover, I would think Google and app developers would be lobbying hard for more native memory so that people don't hesitate to install a larger app (or simply more apps). As it stands, some people, especially gamers, are forced to make choices about what not to install more than they should.

Honestly, this is not just another complaint thread. It's a simple question. How do Google and the manufacturers explain this?

 

[Ry]

I see this kicked around all over the place, with petitions, wish lists, b&m threads, etc. Some people complain about it (like me) and other people don't think it's a big deal if you use a bigger SD card. But I have YET to hear a rational, logical, reasonable explanation from Samsung as to why they would put so little memory into such an otherwise magnificent, flagship device. (Same for most other manufacturers.) It's like putting a 4-cylinder 150hp engine in a 2013 Ford Raptor SVT. It defies logic.

Memory is pretty darn cheap now, isn't it? And I would think *onboard memory* for a company the size of Samsung would be even cheaper. What would it cost them...a couple of bucks to bump it from 16gb to 64gb? Moreover, I would think Google and app developers would be lobbying hard for more native memory so that people don't hesitate to install a larger app (or simply more apps). As it stands, some people, especially gamers, are forced to make choices about what not to install more than they should.

Honestly, this is not just another complaint thread. It's a simple question. How do Google and the manufacturers explain this?

Maybe higher profit margin?

Or their normal isn't what you think is the new normal?

Or someone told them if they build out 16/32/64GB versions of the same phone, most people would just buy the smallest version?

 

[SenseMonkey]

Apparently 16Gb is the "standard". Many other devices have been crippled by the same reason imo. I had the htc one x, and the sgs3 and didnt enjoy'em too much cause of having 16Gb only. The DROID Dna imo is crippled too. The htc one x+ was a great device when i had it. 64Gb at only 199? Hell yea. My only fitt about it was the extreme heat it produced so i jumped on the gn2 boat and love it. Yes i would love it even more if apps where allowed to the sd card cause i am a gamer and love playing games on my phone and would of loved it even more cause of the size of the n2. But its all good now, i only have the games i play alot. Do not get mw wrong tho, having a 64Gb n2 would be kickin' and would of made the device the best handset of 2012 IMO. But whatever, Samsung is Samsung lol. :thumbup:

Sent from my Behemoth of a phone, the Galaxy Note 2

 

[snookasnoo]

The carriers want them to have small memory sizes so we use "the cloud" and as much data as possible. Apparently Apple is the only one willing to tell the carriers NO on things like memory size, bloatware, plastering their logo all over the phone etc.

- - - Updated - - -

Or someone told them if they build out 16/32/64GB versions of the same phone, most people would just buy the smallest version?

Apple does it.

 

[bigoldthor]

The carriers want them to have small memory sizes so we use "the cloud" and as much data as possible. Apparently Apple is the only one willing to tell the carriers NO on things like memory size, bloatware, plastering their logo all over the phone etc.

- - - Updated - - -



Apple does it.

I thought about your "cloud" explanation. I guess I could agree with that if they didn't give us expandable SD storage (well, most of them - cough, cough - DNA - cough, cough - One X.). So if we can get a 16gb device and expand it with a 64gb card, how does that help the carrier with increased cloud data usage? It would have little to no impact.

Again, I would think (and maybe I'm all wet here) that there is VERY little added cost for the manufacturers. Add to that lots of incentive from Google and app developers to increase native memory, and it just doesn't make sense.

 

[alamarco]

Very little added cost per device adds up when you're talking about millions of devices sold. Even if it just happens to be a dime, that adds up quite quickly when looking at the entire picture.

Expanded card slots also fits in with the cost because now the devices can have large storage at the cost of the end user. You want more? Buy a memory card. 16 GB is a lot for application installations and manufacturers rely on developers to make use of the card slot so any data should be saved to the card slot. No need to put money into internal storage.

While I'm sure they have other reasons, cost definitely is a factor.

 

[jdub1981]

Realistically it could be as simple simpke as watching the iphones sales numbers. If iphone sells mostly 16gb devices then why make anything different.

Sent via Tapatalk

 

[scott750]

Realistically it could be as simple simpke as watching the iphones sales numbers. If iphone sells mostly 16gb devices then why make anything different.

Sent via Tapatalk

But when the difference between the 16GB to 32 GB to 64 GB is like $100 for each step up, that's price gouging, especially when 16GB of flash is like $10. Nice profit margin. And you can't tell me it costs that much to add more surface mounted chips when MFGs like SAmsung are stacking the chips with a single package to obtain the GB amount desired. Spometimes they are stacking 8 die inside of a single flash package.

That's why people buy the small 16GB phone. It's much esaier paying $499 than $599 or $699.

 

[Ry]

But when the difference between the 16GB to 32 GB to 64 GB is like $100 for each step up, that's price gouging, especially when 16GB of flash is like $10. Nice profit margin. And you can't tell me it costs that much to add more surface mounted chips when MFGs like SAmsung are stacking the chips with a single package to obtain the GB amount desired. Spometimes they are stacking 8 die inside of a single flash package.

That's why people buy the small 16GB phone. It's much esaier paying $499 than $599 or $699.

Nothing wrong with these manufacturers looking for a nice profit margin.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[roberte1342]

We are not the primary customer, the carrier is.

Sent from my SG Note 2 [Tapatalk]

 

[universeand]

Nothing wrong with these manufacturers looking for a nice profit margin.

When profit seeking harms, or conflicts with people's needs or reasonable desires there's a definite problem.

I think the main reason for the limited memory is that the carriers and or Samsung don't want it to cut into their tablet sales. I suspect in general they make more profit off of tablets.

 

[nrm5110]

When profit seeking harms, or conflicts with people's needs or reasonable desires there's a definite problem.

We are the 1% the other 99% are fine with the memory limits in place.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Ry]

When profit seeking harms, or conflicts with people's needs or reasonable desires there's a definite problem.

I think the main reason for the limited memory is that the carriers and or Samsung don't want it to cut into their tablet sales. I suspect in general they make more profit off of tablets.

Needs and desires?

lol.

When these manufacturers switch to 32GB being norm, there will still be that insignificant minority that will whine and complain about it, clamoring for 128GB/256GB to be the norm.

Oh and full-retail price for tablets are usually cheaper than phones.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[tirith]

Needs and desires?

lol.

When these manufacturers switch to 32GB being norm, there will still be that insignificant minority that will whine and complain about it, clamoring for 128GB/256GB to be the norm.

Oh and full-retail price for tablets are usually cheaper than phones.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

Tablets generally lack one thing... radios for anything but Wi-Fi.

The cloud explanation works... for everyone except Sprint (unlimited ftw).

Basically, look at iPhone's sales figures. I've walked into numerous phone stores and asked what iPhone was most sold... the cheapest.

Anyway, basically, 16gb is the norm for now. As we progress into the android world, each app gets a bit larger... I remember when I had my g1... anything over 1mb was a huge app.

Swyped from my Galaxy Note II on the Now Network

 

[TheOtherBill]

Anyway, basically, 16gb is the norm for now. As we progress into the android world, each app gets a bit larger... I remember when I had my g1... anything over 1mb was a huge app.

We will see larger norms in the future for this reason and because memory prices always drop. Take a look at the desktop/laptop world, a few years ago 1GB RAM was normal, now it's 4GB and costs less.

The first (cheapest) iphone was 4, the iphone 3 and 4 were 8, the 5 is 16. See the trend?

When these manufacturers switch to 32GB being norm, there will still be that insignificant minority that will whine and complain about it, clamoring for 128GB/256GB to be the norm.

Exactly!

 

[SumthinNew]

With expandable memory options, I don't understand the complaints that I am reading here.
After system files etc...we have approx:10GB of internal memory left...those that are complaining; have you actually used up all 10GB or so on apps and games???
Pictures, music and files that are not restricted to be saved internally should always be saved externally to the microSDHC...makes sense to me?
I rather have standard 16GB, with expandable memory options and have the device manufacturer up the RAM!!!

 

[Ry]

With expandable memory options, I don't understand the complaints that I am reading here.
After system files etc...we have approx:10GB of internal memory left...those that are complaining; have you actually used up all 10GB or so on apps and games???
Pictures, music and files that are not restricted to be saved internally should always be saved externally to the microSDHC...makes sense to me?
I rather have standard 16GB, with expandable memory options and have the device manufacturer up the RAM!!!

Not all of these phones people are complaining about have expandable memory slots.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[rexxman]

With expandable memory options, I don't understand the complaints that I am reading here.
After system files etc...we have approx:10GB of internal memory left...those that are complaining; have you actually used up all 10GB or so on apps and games???
Pictures, music and files that are not restricted to be saved internally should always be saved externally to the microSDHC...makes sense to me?
I rather have standard 16GB, with expandable memory options and have the device manufacturer up the RAM!!!

I don't consider requesting, desiring or asking for more onboard storage to be complaining or whining. It is a reasonable wish. I don't understand the motives of those who use those labels or declare that no one needs these levels of storage. I paid $50 more for my 32gb S3. SD cards are a welcome relief but you can't run apps from there and not all apps allow you to store data there.



The vast majority of the 17+gb shown in Misc Files is from a DVR like app storing videos. The app developer says he can't (or won't) allow storage to the external 64gb SD card.

So, this is a real example of a user with more then 10gb of apps/games.

I'd have a GN2 in my pocket now, but 16gb is not enough.


Blue 32gb Galaxy S3

 

[tirith]

If it's that big a deal... get a 64gb sd and do the hack to swap the external sd to make the phone think that's internal :/

Swyped from my Galaxy Note II on the Now Network

 

[rexxman]

If it's that big a deal... get a 64gb sd and do the hack to swap the external sd to make the phone think that's internal :/

Swyped from my Galaxy Note II on the Now Network

Now that didn't take long for the first negative feedback. Why do you start with "If it's that big a deal..."?

And correct, I didn't, or can't answer the question posed in this thread's header, why do they scrimp.

I was showing a real life example from the prior question of needing > 10gb storage.

I am aware of the modification to swap internal / external storage. But thanks for mentioning it in case other's don't know and might like to try it. Kudos to the developers who created it.

I prefer to run w/o these modifications.

And if you check my screen shot you'll notice I do have a 64gb card installed.

Blue 32gb Galaxy S3