4 ms·

I agree that this sort of advertising (physical space vs. useful space) is deceptive. However, it's practically standard practice; and a sadly reasonable argume

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.

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.