5 ms·

I got a Nokia 7.1 for around $300 and it has the headphone jack and a Micro SD slot, another feature that phone makers are getting rid of... Phone memory is te

I got a Nokia 7.1 for around $300 and it has the headphone jack and a Micro SD slot, another feature that phone makers are getting rid of... Phone memory is terrible these days, I have a huge collection of Mp3s and wav files I don't want to give up, despite bluetooth stuttering at times in my car. Putting low onboard memory on modern phones should be a crime when USB sticks with 128GB plus are selling for $15... They do that to boost streaming and data charges... It's like car makers intentionally putting a smaller gas tank in a car if carmakers also owned the gas stations.

css 7y ago
1,600+ MB/s read on iPhone Xs NAND vs 90 MB/s read on an SDXC card. Of course the USB sticks and the like are cheaper, they're not comparable at all.
- basch 7y ago
  But I only need 90MB/s for music. Or if the phone can already determine unused apps to offload, it could move them to cold slow storage instead.
  - css 7y ago
    I don't disagree about offloading, but comparing the cost of SDXC to NAND does not make sense.
    - dwild 7y ago
      It does makes sense to complains about the price difference when you don't need 1,600+ MB/s speed for what you want to put on it. He want 128 GB for his MP3, it doesn't make sense he can't get it when USB stick of that size are that cheap.
- wjoe 7y ago
  Not really relevant. Obviously you want fast I/O for your OS storage, but for external storage that's mostly going to be used for music, videos, and images, it really doesn't matter how fast it is.
  - css 7y ago
    Loading my (40k+ image) library on a 90MB/s card was painfully slow. Fast I/O always matters, there is no reason to make a performance sacrifice like that in 2019.
    - dwild 7y ago
      > Loading my (40k+ image) > there is no reason to make a performance sacrifice like that in 2019. > 64 GB: $1099 > 256 GB: $1249 > 512 GB: $1449 Cost is a reason, not having 40k images to load is another one. We clearly don't have the same sacrifice to do sadly.
wjoe 7y ago
Had a Nokia 7 Plus for the same reasons, but unfortunately some other hardware issues meant that it only lasted a year and a half, then the USB port stopped working. Seems to be a common issue. Switched to a Pixel 3a XL after that, which is kind of disappointing since it's a very similar phone for a higher price (and without microSD unfortunately), but there really aren't a whole lot of options for headphone jacked phones these days, especially once you start adding in other requirements like good battery and stock Android. "Nokia"/HMD have promise, it was mostly a great phone but with some significant issues, I'll be holding out on buying another of their phones until they've improved their quality control.
schwartzworld 7y ago
Lots of budget Android phones have expandable memory
chrisseaton 7y ago
> They do that to boost streaming and data charges... Which phone manufacturers make any money from streaming and data charges?
- winternett 7y ago
  Not manufacturers specifically... Carriers are the ones who usually buy the phones form MFRs then sell to customers... So Carriers are the ones that lobby for phone storage to stay low and manufacturers follow along.
- Rebelgecko 7y ago
  Apple, when the data is hosted on iCloud Samsung, when you pay for their cloud data storage

css 7y ago

1,600+ MB/s read on iPhone Xs NAND vs 90 MB/s read on an SDXC card. Of course the USB sticks and the like are cheaper, they're not comparable at all.

basch 7y ago
But I only need 90MB/s for music. Or if the phone can already determine unused apps to offload, it could move them to cold slow storage instead.
- css 7y ago
  I don't disagree about offloading, but comparing the cost of SDXC to NAND does not make sense.
  - dwild 7y ago
    It does makes sense to complains about the price difference when you don't need 1,600+ MB/s speed for what you want to put on it. He want 128 GB for his MP3, it doesn't make sense he can't get it when USB stick of that size are that cheap.
wjoe 7y ago
Not really relevant. Obviously you want fast I/O for your OS storage, but for external storage that's mostly going to be used for music, videos, and images, it really doesn't matter how fast it is.
- css 7y ago
  Loading my (40k+ image) library on a 90MB/s card was painfully slow. Fast I/O always matters, there is no reason to make a performance sacrifice like that in 2019.
  - dwild 7y ago
    > Loading my (40k+ image) > there is no reason to make a performance sacrifice like that in 2019. > 64 GB: $1099 > 256 GB: $1249 > 512 GB: $1449 Cost is a reason, not having 40k images to load is another one. We clearly don't have the same sacrifice to do sadly.

wjoe 7y ago

Had a Nokia 7 Plus for the same reasons, but unfortunately some other hardware issues meant that it only lasted a year and a half, then the USB port stopped working. Seems to be a common issue. Switched to a Pixel 3a XL after that, which is kind of disappointing since it's a very similar phone for a higher price (and without microSD unfortunately), but there really aren't a whole lot of options for headphone jacked phones these days, especially once you start adding in other requirements like good battery and stock Android. "Nokia"/HMD have promise, it was mostly a great phone but with some significant issues, I'll be holding out on buying another of their phones until they've improved their quality control.

schwartzworld 7y ago

Lots of budget Android phones have expandable memory

chrisseaton 7y ago

> They do that to boost streaming and data charges... Which phone manufacturers make any money from streaming and data charges?

winternett 7y ago
Not manufacturers specifically... Carriers are the ones who usually buy the phones form MFRs then sell to customers... So Carriers are the ones that lobby for phone storage to stay low and manufacturers follow along.
Rebelgecko 7y ago
Apple, when the data is hosted on iCloud Samsung, when you pay for their cloud data storage