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

Dpham00 - #46

You probably meant to say that this poll was not applicable.

If you have issues with the accuracy of the poll, take that up with Jerry Hildebrand.

As far as comparing any of this to the famous Dewey headline, it is not applicable.


Blue 32gb Galaxy S3

My apologies, I never meant to argue the integrity of Jerry's poll, that I have no doubt in. My point being that the poll that resulted in the newspaper headline was done by phone, and at the time, not many people had phones, so it wasn't representative of the USA as a whole. Similarly, the poll by Jerry, while certainly an accurate representation of those polled, is, imo, not representative of America as a whole.

Sent from my Verizon Samsung Galaxy Note II
 
No problem Dpham00.

Google the "Dewey headline" and you will find some interesting information about how/why that happened. Polls were the least of the problems.

I have heard this comment before that Jerry's poll does not represent the typical user. That might be. I originally quoted that poll in response to statements that there was little to no interest in larger storage sizes.

However, I think some mfg/carriers are listening. The new HTC One will be offered in 32/64 configurations.

And yes, I vote with my wallet. As much as I would like to acquire a SGN2, the 16gb is a non starter. And I kept my hands in my pocket on the N7 when it topped at 16. As soon as the 32 was released, I bought two!

Blue 32gb Galaxy S3
 
No problem Dpham00.

Google the "Dewey headline" and you will find some interesting information about how/why that happened. Polls were the least of the problems.

I have heard this comment before that Jerry's poll does not represent the typical user. That might be. I originally quoted that poll in response to statements that there was little to no interest in larger storage sizes.

However, I think some mfg/carriers are listening. The new HTC One will be offered in 32/64 configurations.

And yes, I vote with my wallet. As much as I would like to acquire a SGN2, the 16gb is a non starter. And I kept my hands in my pocket on the N7 when it topped at 16. As soon as the 32 was released, I bought two!

Blue 32gb Galaxy S3

Absolutely, there is an audience for larger than 16gb,just that I don't think the demand in the general population is as high as what Jerry's poll indicated. Verizon released both the 16 and 32gb s3, but now, the 32gb s3 is being eol. Which makes sense, imo. most of those who wanted the 32gb version already got it by now.

Sent from my Verizon Samsung Galaxy Note II
 
The new HTC One will be offered in 32/64 configurations.
That could very well be the start of it. We all know that eventually 32 will be the new norm. I think seeing the competition up their specs is more likely to cause a mfgr to rethink their current configurations than anything else. Especially when all the tech reviewers start screaming how wonderful it is.
Typical user sees a review stating X is a great feature even though they don't know what X is. But then they start bragging to their friends that their phone has X. Now friend thinks X is a must-have for their next phone.
How many iphones became people's first smartphone only because they were told it was cool?

Remember that those of us on forums like this are a tiny minority. While most of us wouldn't consider, for example, a phone with no SD slot, even more people couldn't even tell you what an SD slot is. We face an uphill battle to get more memory (typical user doesn't see memory when they look at the phone in the store) when companies are pulling in billions of dollars because their phone has a pretty aluminum case.
 
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?

I've been reading this thread but just figured I'd chime in with my take on why they "skimp" on internal memory.

Basically, there couldn't have been a better first reply than what Ry said. Money is the number one reason why any company skimps on anything.

Second, he's spot on in his suggestion of what is "normal" for memory needs. The fiends who need 64GB internal memory so they can load up dozens of 1GB+ games and other apps are not the normal. The normal, the average people who make up the significant percentage of customers are not hipster young people who need 64GB of app space. Samsung knows this and will use what they feel is necessary for the majority. In fact I'd bet they could probably get away with 8GB of internal memory, so be glad they didn't do that.

I'm greatly looking forward to the day when that hyper fast internal memory reaches such capacities that I won't need an SD Card slot, but for now 16GB should be plenty. It would be a lot better also if they didn't steal about 3.5GB of internal memory for what, I do not know. System ROM takes up about 1.2GB, leaving us with around 13.8GB left out of 15.5 (formatted) space. So where's the other 3.5GB going? There's over 5GB in Miscellaneous files and I know that at least 1.2GB is the System files so where's the rest? =/
 
You also have to take into account the speed of the memory as related to the price and function.

The newer processors are getting faster and with more cores. This could mean that their bus speeds could be increasing, surpassing the bus speed of the sd card. Could be another reason Google wanted to eliminate the app2sd stuff, as the apps may not read as fast off the sd card causing system crashes and hangs.

If they are using flash memory in the ddr3 or 4 class, it is not cheap. Look at how much it costs to produce ddr5 for pc video cards.

Just saying that this could be a reason behind the lower amounts of memory. 16 GB works fine for me, but I also know that there are people that need more than that. I have 80 or so apps installed on my note 2 and am barely over 500 MB.

Galaxy S4 or Note 3 for my next. Decisions, decisions.