It's not the phone maker's fault, nor the phone company's fault. It was a decision made by the OS creator, and word is that Google did that on account of copyright infringement and bug issues. Even before they made that change, an app couldn't be moved to an SD card unless the app developer had enabled that option within the app.
Android always has work-arounds, and there are work-arounds for this issue, too. It generally requires rooting the phone, then installing a third-party app that enables app transfers to the SD card. If you don't want to screw around with that, you can uninstall the apps you seldom use. They'll remain in your Google Play account, ready to be reinstalled at any time. Install them when you need them, then uninstall them again. Clunky, but it'll work.
The problem is, you bought a very basic and limited-storage phone. Heck, OS upgrades and a single mapping app alone would probably fill the available onboard free space within a year or so. In the future, you'll know you need to make onboard storage a priority when selecting a new phone.
I had read the reviews, and, what I *now* know is that they're apparently mostly shills for the manufacturer, and not really a detailed phone review.
That is, they're a "review" only in name, but not in function.
It was a rare review that even mentioned that they *downloaded* a *single* app onto the phone. I suspect most didn't even create a Google Play account, before they published the shill/review.
It seems, based on my read of the reviews, that they didn't even *mention* how much usable memory was on the phone.
What kind of review, for a 4GB phone with only 600MB of memory, doesn't tell the user that information? Especially when the 32GB sdcard can't be used to store the apps that a user would want to add.
That error of omission is, perhaps, excusable for a phone with a lot of usable memory; but for a phone where the usable memory is a paltry 600MB, it's a very important spec that, if a reviewer omits it, I have to suspect the review as a mere shill.
I am, I agree, an uninformed consumer. Sure, I had read the reviews; but I had not known, at the time, that the reviewers hadn't actually *used* the phone to store any apps!
Thinking back, I don't think a single reviewer knew (or even tried) that you couldn't use the SD card to store apps.
Realizing the reviewers failed on the most basic of specs, I am tentatively concluding they're all just shills for advertising.
Even after having realized that sad fact, and, after learning (the hard way) that there was only 600MB of usable storage for apps on the hone, I *still* couldn't get T-Mobile to admit that, until *after* I told them that I filed a complaint against them (and, more importantly, that I included their employee ID numbers!)
So, in the end, you *can* get T-Mobile to tell the truth! (it just takes reporting their employee ID to the FCC/FTC first).
Did the reviewers actually test the Tmobile version of the phone? IMO, it's very possible that Tmobile's software load is the problem, that for some reason their software load is unusually large. My similar 4GB Android still has 1.3GB free. If they tested the phone from a carrier other than Tmobile, the memory might be a lot more.
I don't know if that makes them a shill or not, but I agree you would think including how much usable memory the phone had and that a Flash card can't be used for apps would be in the review.
Moe DeLoughan wrote in news:li0vhr$p9b$ snipped-for-privacy@dont-email.me:
Exactly. He had a list of 48+ apps that he wanted to install, which is way to many for the cheap piece of junk device that he purchased. What he needs to do is man-up to the fact that he jumpted on a low price that was too good to be true without doing his homework on what he was buying. He bought a Vega and is pissed that it doesn't perform like a Corvette, so he wants to blame the manufacturer.
More likely they, as experienced smartphone users, know but don't consider it as important as you do.
I doubt it. I expect reviewers are more interested in comparing how well a phone runs apps compared to similarly-specked models, not how many you can install before filling it up.
Which? warns over mobile phone memory on Tuesday 08 April 2014
Mobile phones have much less storage than advertised, according to consumer watchdogs.
formatting link
14 Comments
A Which? study found that mobile phones claiming to provide 16GB of data storage actually had memory as low as 9GB.
The worst offender was the Samsung Galaxy S4 was found to have just 9GB instead of the 16GB claimed on the box.
Next to bottom was the Sony XperialZ which had 10GB, followed by the Blackberry Z10 with 11GB. The Google Nexus4 had 13GB while the best of the bunch was HTC Windows 8X with 15GB.
Rory Boland, Which? deputy tech editor and digital producer, said that every smartphone has an operating system - such as Google's Android or iOS for iPhone - and this takes up a certain amount of storage.
The phone therefore has much less space for actual storage. "Throw in some built in apps - and most manufacturers do - and your storage size can be reduced to a shoebox.
"We found some are far worse than others in hogging storage space - put your hand up the Samsung Galaxy S4,? he said.
Mr Boland said all phones have lower storage than advertised.
"It's a poor performance from the Samsung Galaxy S4 but all phones are guilty of advertising more space than is actually available.
"An operating system needs to take up some of the storage space on your phone - a better, more powerful operating system may - may - need to take up a little more room.
"The problem is that manufacturers aren't making people aware of how much space they're really getting when they buy the phone. And it's a bit of a lottery.?
Mr Boland urged manufacturers to be more honest so that consumers can make better choices. The actual storage is sometimes in the small print but may be hard to find.
According to online forums the Apple iPhone 16GB phone has only 13.5GB storage space.
"Essentially, any phone you purchase will have less space available than the amount advertised. And there is a lot of variation. You might be buying a 16GB phone but in reality you could be getting anything from 15GB of free storage with the HTC Windows 8X to just 9GB with the S4.
" There is not even uniformity across operating systems. So the Google Nexus 4 has 13GB of available storage while the Samsung Galaxy S4 has just
9GB - yet both phones run on Android. Samsung has stuffed the device with extra apps.
"Ultimately, it's not fair. You aren't getting the space you expected and you have no easy way of knowing how much you will actually get from phone to phone."
All the mobile phone companies insisted storage for operating systems and updates is necessary and is explained in the small print.
Samsung said:"The Samsung GALAXY S4 uses part of its internal memory to bring our customers its innovative and unique features. A portion of memory is reserved for future software upgrades, such as potentially new platform updates or premium suite updates. By doing so, we are able to provide added value for GALAXY S4 owners throughout the device?s entire lifespan."
16GB Phones: What do you really get?
HTC Windows 8X 15GB
The Google Nexus4 13GB
Blackberry Z10 11GB
Sony XperialZ 10GB
Samsung Galaxy S4 9GB
Do you think mobile phone companies should be more honest about storage?
Mobile phones have much less storage than advertised, according to consumer watchdogs.
formatting link
A Which? study found that mobile phones claiming to provide 16GB of data storage actually had memory as low as 9GB.
"The problem is that manufacturers aren't making people aware of how much space they're really getting when they buy the phone. And it's a bit of a lottery.?
Mr Boland urged manufacturers to be more honest so that consumers can make better choices. The actual storage is sometimes in the small print but may be hard to find.
"Ultimately, it's not fair. You aren't getting the space you expected and you have no easy way of knowing how much you will actually get from phone to phone."
Do you think mobile phone companies should be more honest about storage?
Mobile phones have much less storage than advertised, according to consumer watchdogs.
formatting link
A Which? study found that mobile phones claiming to provide 16GB of data storage actually had memory as low as 9GB.
"The problem is that manufacturers aren't making people aware of how much space they're really getting when they buy the phone. And it's a bit of a lottery.?
Mr Boland urged manufacturers to be more honest so that consumers can make better choices. The actual storage is sometimes in the small print but may be hard to find.
"Ultimately, it's not fair. You aren't getting the space you expected and you have no easy way of knowing how much you will actually get from phone to phone."
Do you think mobile phone companies should be more honest about storage?
Mobile phones have much less storage than advertised, according to consumer watchdogs.
formatting link
A Which? study found that mobile phones claiming to provide 16GB of data storage actually had memory as low as 9GB.
"The problem is that manufacturers aren't making people aware of how much space they're really getting when they buy the phone. And it's a bit of a lottery.?
Mr Boland urged manufacturers to be more honest so that consumers can make better choices. The actual storage is sometimes in the small print but may be hard to find.
"Ultimately, it's not fair. You aren't getting the space you expected and you have no easy way of knowing how much you will actually get from phone to phone."
Do you think mobile phone companies should be more honest about storage?
Mobile phones have much less storage than advertised, according to consumer watchdogs.
formatting link
A Which? study found that mobile phones claiming to provide 16GB of data storage actually had memory as low as 9GB.
"The problem is that manufacturers aren't making people aware of how much space they're really getting when they buy the phone. And it's a bit of a lottery.?
Mr Boland urged manufacturers to be more honest so that consumers can make better choices. The actual storage is sometimes in the small print but may be hard to find.
"Ultimately, it's not fair. You aren't getting the space you expected and you have no easy way of knowing how much you will actually get from phone to phone."
Do you think mobile phone companies should be more honest about storage?
Maybe it's time to ask what your 600MB number is based on. I think most of us here are assuming it's what shows up when you look at it in the system settings, where the phone reports the free storage space. What does the phone show? And if it's based on that, then why shouldn't I believe my 1.3GB?
I glanced at that thread before. There is a lot of discussion, allegations, back and forth, but I don't see anything settled or resolved and I'm not interested in wading through all of it.
Mobile phones have much less storage than advertised, according to consumer watchdogs.
formatting link
A Which? study found that mobile phones claiming to provide 16GB of data storage actually had memory as low as 9GB.
"The problem is that manufacturers aren't making people aware of how much space they're really getting when they buy the phone. And it's a bit of a lottery.?
Mr Boland urged manufacturers to be more honest so that consumers can make better choices. The actual storage is sometimes in the small print but may be hard to find.
"Ultimately, it's not fair. You aren't getting the space you expected and you have no easy way of knowing how much you will actually get from phone to phone."
Do you think mobile phone companies should be more honest about storage?
The only way to know the answer is to get out a calculator and add up the scores of apps that take up the free space since most (but not all) Android operating system versions don't tell the true story on how much memory is actually in the phone in the first place.
Gory details here: How do we get Android to spit out the true memory & storage
"Which" magazine UK is an appalling collection of generalisations, intended to help the mostly elderly and clueless make "informed decisions" through dumbed down top 10 lists, and the non-display of specifications. It is debatable whether subscribers can learn much from the articles to make their own minds how the the important features of the products actually relate to them. The guidance of sheep....
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.