5 ms·

> "Customers understand the operating system and pre-installed applications reside on the device's internal storage thereby reducing the total free space," I t

by roc 14y ago

> "Customers understand the operating system and pre-installed applications reside on the device's internal storage thereby reducing the total free space," I think there's a reasonable disagreement to be had over whether the Surface uses an unexpected quantity of internal storage. Even knowledgeable technical people are fairly uniformly shocked at just how much space the Surface OS and bundled apps occupies. I'm not sure whether that translates into a good chance for this guy to win. But I can't say that I'm on board with laughing off or derisively dismissing such a complaint.

jrajav 14y ago
I don't think this is an entirely trivial case, either. If the Surface is meant to compete more directly in the mobile space alongside iOS and Android devices, an argument could be made that it should be advertising something close to user-available storage capacity like those are understood to.
- reddit_clone 14y ago
  Indeed. OS and crapware taking a few GB's off a 2 TB hard disk is one thing. Taking 16 GB's off of advertised 32 GB flash storage is outrageous. This is false advertising. I wouldn't laugh at this lawyer if I were Microsoft.
  - at-fates-hands 14y ago
    I think they get screwed either way. You say it has 16GB and then once you turn it on and it says 32GB in the system screen, now people are pissed your OS and apps take up too much room. Tell people its got 32GB and then they find out they only have 16GB of actual storage and they get pissed for you misrepresenting the actual storage amount. I'm sure this will be settled quietly out of court with a nice undisclosed amount for said lawyer.
  - Samuel_Michon 14y ago
    @at-fates-hands: "You say it has 16GB and then once you turn it on and it says 32GB in the system screen, now people are pissed your OS and apps take up too much room." That simply does not happen. The inverse, in which people expect to be able to store plenty of media and apps but can't, does. Most users won't even know that it's the OS that's taking up that much space, but they'll know to blame Microsoft.
- pdonis 14y ago
  This is a fine argument to make, but you don't make it with a lawsuit. You make it with publicity--negative publicity. Just telling Google and Apple should be enough; I'm sure they would be more than happy to spread the word. :-)
  - cma 14y ago
    In a competitive market there is a tragedy of the commons effect: why waste advertising dollars disparaging a competitor if it will help your other competitors. (With Apple's market share, this doesn't quite apply; it could still make sense for them to do)
    - pdonis 14y ago
      It could still make sense even for Google to do, if more of MS's potential customers would be expected to switch to Android rather than Apple. But I agree that both Google and Apple would have to look at that aspect of it, and there is something of a trade-off, the better it looks for Google the worse it is likely to look for Apple, and vice versa. From the point of view of someone who doesn't like the Surface advertising, though, that's just another reason to make sure to tell both Google and Apple. :-)
smackfu 14y ago
Can you delete the bundled Office? It seems like an included app that can be deleted shouldn't count against MSFT.
- pdonis 14y ago
  Knowing how MS works, I wouldn't be surprised if most of the space taken up by "Office" is actually taken up by libraries that have to be there for any app to work, so even if the Office apps could be deleted, it wouldn't reclaim much space.
ConstantineXVI 14y ago
I agree that this sort of advertising (physical space vs. useful space) is deceptive. However, it's practically standard practice; and a sadly reasonable argument could be made that consumers shouldn't expect all of the advertised space to be available, as it rarely is. My 32GB iPad only ever lets me see 28. The Razr M is worse; it explicitly states it has 8GB, but the same screen[0] makes it clear you're only ever going to use half (with no good apparent reason). Nintendo even made a video to explain that you won't even be able to use half of the 8GB Wii U's storage[1]. [0] https://www.dropbox.com/s/aldhpg4x6q7cbyp/2012-11-16%2013.38.37.png https://www.dropbox.com/s/aldhpg4x6q7cbyp/2012-11-16%2013.38... [1] http://kotaku.com/5960438/nintendo-explains-the-wii-us-storage-options-in-the-strangest-way-possible http://kotaku.com/5960438/nintendo-explains-the-wii-us-stora...
- ajross 14y ago
  That's true, but the numbers sorta matter. Comparable existing devices (basically iPads and Android tablets) have base OSes that are well under 1G. So comparing a 32G Surface to a 32G Nexus 10 is going to be surprising. I don't honestly know the extent to which users might have been misinformed about their Wiis and Razrs. But a very reasonable argument here is that MS released a product and advertised it as having the same amount of useful storage as a popular competitor, which it clearly does not.
  - ConstantineXVI 14y ago
    "useful storage" Like the iPad and nearly every CE product, they advertised physical storage. This doesn't make Microsoft (or Apple, Motorola, Nintendo, etc.) any less in the wrong, but they still advertised by the same conventions everyone else has.
    - ajross 14y ago
      You missed the point. It's not about "conventions", it's about expectations. Apple Computer has a popular product called "iPad" which advertises "32G" of storage. Microsoft released a new product to directly compete with iPad (I assume you agree with this part) and also advertised "32G" of storage. Yet the Surface has about half the space available. I think a very reasonable argument can be made that this was wrong in context in a way that it is not wrong for Apple to have done so.

by roc 14y ago

jrajav 14y ago

I don't think this is an entirely trivial case, either. If the Surface is meant to compete more directly in the mobile space alongside iOS and Android devices, an argument could be made that it should be advertising something close to user-available storage capacity like those are understood to.

reddit_clone 14y ago
Indeed. OS and crapware taking a few GB's off a 2 TB hard disk is one thing. Taking 16 GB's off of advertised 32 GB flash storage is outrageous. This is false advertising. I wouldn't laugh at this lawyer if I were Microsoft.
- at-fates-hands 14y ago
  I think they get screwed either way. You say it has 16GB and then once you turn it on and it says 32GB in the system screen, now people are pissed your OS and apps take up too much room. Tell people its got 32GB and then they find out they only have 16GB of actual storage and they get pissed for you misrepresenting the actual storage amount. I'm sure this will be settled quietly out of court with a nice undisclosed amount for said lawyer.
- Samuel_Michon 14y ago
  @at-fates-hands: "You say it has 16GB and then once you turn it on and it says 32GB in the system screen, now people are pissed your OS and apps take up too much room." That simply does not happen. The inverse, in which people expect to be able to store plenty of media and apps but can't, does. Most users won't even know that it's the OS that's taking up that much space, but they'll know to blame Microsoft.
pdonis 14y ago
This is a fine argument to make, but you don't make it with a lawsuit. You make it with publicity--negative publicity. Just telling Google and Apple should be enough; I'm sure they would be more than happy to spread the word. :-)
- cma 14y ago
  In a competitive market there is a tragedy of the commons effect: why waste advertising dollars disparaging a competitor if it will help your other competitors. (With Apple's market share, this doesn't quite apply; it could still make sense for them to do)
  - pdonis 14y ago
    It could still make sense even for Google to do, if more of MS's potential customers would be expected to switch to Android rather than Apple. But I agree that both Google and Apple would have to look at that aspect of it, and there is something of a trade-off, the better it looks for Google the worse it is likely to look for Apple, and vice versa. From the point of view of someone who doesn't like the Surface advertising, though, that's just another reason to make sure to tell both Google and Apple. :-)

smackfu 14y ago

Can you delete the bundled Office? It seems like an included app that can be deleted shouldn't count against MSFT.

pdonis 14y ago
Knowing how MS works, I wouldn't be surprised if most of the space taken up by "Office" is actually taken up by libraries that have to be there for any app to work, so even if the Office apps could be deleted, it wouldn't reclaim much space.

ConstantineXVI 14y ago

I agree that this sort of advertising (physical space vs. useful space) is deceptive. However, it's practically standard practice; and a sadly reasonable argument could be made that consumers shouldn't expect all of the advertised space to be available, as it rarely is. My 32GB iPad only ever lets me see 28. The Razr M is worse; it explicitly states it has 8GB, but the same screen[0] makes it clear you're only ever going to use half (with no good apparent reason). Nintendo even made a video to explain that you won't even be able to use half of the 8GB Wii U's storage[1]. [0] https://www.dropbox.com/s/aldhpg4x6q7cbyp/2012-11-16%2013.38.37.png https://www.dropbox.com/s/aldhpg4x6q7cbyp/2012-11-16%2013.38... [1] http://kotaku.com/5960438/nintendo-explains-the-wii-us-storage-options-in-the-strangest-way-possible http://kotaku.com/5960438/nintendo-explains-the-wii-us-stora...

ajross 14y ago
That's true, but the numbers sorta matter. Comparable existing devices (basically iPads and Android tablets) have base OSes that are well under 1G. So comparing a 32G Surface to a 32G Nexus 10 is going to be surprising. I don't honestly know the extent to which users might have been misinformed about their Wiis and Razrs. But a very reasonable argument here is that MS released a product and advertised it as having the same amount of useful storage as a popular competitor, which it clearly does not.
- ConstantineXVI 14y ago
  "useful storage" Like the iPad and nearly every CE product, they advertised physical storage. This doesn't make Microsoft (or Apple, Motorola, Nintendo, etc.) any less in the wrong, but they still advertised by the same conventions everyone else has.
  - ajross 14y ago
    You missed the point. It's not about "conventions", it's about expectations. Apple Computer has a popular product called "iPad" which advertises "32G" of storage. Microsoft released a new product to directly compete with iPad (I assume you agree with this part) and also advertised "32G" of storage. Yet the Surface has about half the space available. I think a very reasonable argument can be made that this was wrong in context in a way that it is not wrong for Apple to have done so.