Brian & Anand Hate SD Card's in Phones

[shabby]

AP: What's your position on the SD card access situation in Android 4.4?
Koush: The SD card needs to go away. It's a nightmare for developers. There's too much variability here. SD Cards can be slow, resulting in poor app performance. They can come and go, or be swapped, and that results in unpredictable behavior if an app was expecting an SD card. One contiguous block of data needs to become the standard here (with different OEM SKUs for more/less storage), as it has been on iOS since the first iPhone.

Hey koush if your cwm app had compression like twrp or backup to usb otg perhaps i wouldn't need an external sdcard...

 

[SymphonyX7]

Stuff like this, it's usually a matter of preference. Some people don't use storage that much and/or have padding from cloud services and good mobile internet for reliable streaming. Still, I'm bothered by how convinced Brian and Anand are about not having SD cards on phones. How can you NOT put expandable storage when internal storage sizes have been stagnant for the past 3 years, and you have app data and media sizes growing at an alarming rate.

Imagine if the Note 3 only had 32 GB of non-expandable storage. How much 4K video can you store before you run on empty? That's unacceptable, especially when you're on vacation and have no way to offload those files to your main storage. Besides, switching phones is easy when you have an SD card. Just remove it, stick it onto your new phone, and all your media and files are there. You'll still need to reinstall your apps, but at least all the other stuff you had on your old phone is now on your new one without any fuss.

For some reason, I see Brian and Anand looking at the SD card situation from a developer's perspective. They shouldn't. Whatever qualms they have about performance deficits that stems from having an SD card weighs little against the inconvenience of having to constantly pay attention to the miniscule storage. Don't even get to that cloud crap which Google is pushing (and is possibly the primary motive for obsolescence). If we're talking bandwidth here, local storage > cloud storage, even if your SD card is slow.

 

[cheezy321]

Stuff like this, it's usually a matter of preference. Some people don't use storage that much and/or have padding from cloud services and good mobile internet for reliable streaming. Still, I'm bothered by how convinced Brian and Anand are about not having SD cards on phones. How can you NOT put expandable storage when internal storage sizes have been stagnant for the past 3 years, and you have app data and media sizes growing at an alarming rate.

Imagine if the Note 3 only had 32 GB of non-expandable storage. How much 4K video can you store before you run on empty? That's unacceptable, especially when you're on vacation and have no way to offload those files to your main storage. Besides, switching phones is easy when you have an SD card. Just remove it, stick it onto your new phone, and all your media and files are there. You'll still need to reinstall your apps, but at least all the other stuff you had on your old phone is now on your new one without any fuss.

For some reason, I see Brian and Anand looking at the SD card situation from a developer's perspective. They shouldn't. Whatever qualms they have about performance deficits that stems from having an SD card weighs little against the inconvenience of having to constantly pay attention to the miniscule storage. Don't even get to that cloud crap which Google is pushing (and is possibly the primary motive for obsolescence). If we're talking bandwidth here, local storage > cloud storage, even if your SD card is slow.

Serious question: How many legitimate 4K videos are out there? Are movies or TV shows even available in 4K format to download? If so, how large are the files?

 

[WelshBloke]

Serious question: How many legitimate 4K videos are out there? Are movies or TV shows even available in 4K format to download? If so, how large are the files?

They are talking about the fact that phones can record 4k video now.

 

[dawheat]

Funny I was recently looking at the 128GB Sandisk microSD card as the 64GB card I currently have on my Note 3 was filling up and I wanted to move over a couple seasons of TV shows I hadn't watched yet without deleting any existing media.

I admit it's mostly laziness on my point that I just want to dump everything I haven't watched on my phone once and then have enough stuff to watch for a month. But on the other hand, I don't think I'm asking for much compared to the multiple TBs of content I have on my home machine.

 

[bearxor]

The biggest reason I have seen people get more I cloud space is pictures. They blow past the 5gb and need photo stream to keep all the grandkids pics. These could easily be saved on a microsd card.

Storing pictures in photo stream does not use your iCloud space.
http://support.apple.com/kb/ht4486

Does My Photo Stream use my iCloud storage?

No. Photos uploaded to My Photo Stream do not count against your iCloud storage.

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5902

Does iCloud Photo Sharing use my iCloud storage?

No. Photos and videos uploaded to iCloud Photo Sharing do not count against your iCloud storage.

iTunes streaming service isn't iCloud but it is an Apple cloud service that allows you to stream music. Storing music on a MicroSD is still a viable option.

But, again, iTunes Streaming does not use your iCloud space.

That's the whole point of what I said. iCloud storage is not intended to be a replacement for a uSD card. It's not intended to "extend" your storage space on your phone at all.

iCloud storage is basically for backups.

 

[SymphonyX7]

Serious question: How many legitimate 4K videos are out there? Are movies or TV shows even available in 4K format to download? If so, how large are the files?

If you had a Note 3, the 4K video recording eats memory the same way a Hummer guzzles up gas. Around 50 Mbps bitrate. Not broadcast quality, but still very high. That's about 1 GB every 3 minutes of 4K footage.

 

[Brian Stirling]

If you had a Note 3, the 4K video recording eats memory the same way a Hummer guzzles up gas. Around 50 Mbps bitrate. Not broadcast quality, but still very high. That's about 1 GB every 3 minutes of 4K footage.

4K video on a Note 3 would be a little pointless given the screen resolution but we'll see 4K tablets within a year or so and they will be able to make use of 4K video so streaming 4K to a tablet will be possible but very costly. I think we'll see the first 4K smartphones in a couple years.

But, there are a few folks here that logic will not matter and they will continue to promote streaming and bad mouth onboard storage and particularly uSD card storage. Not much you can do about them as the facts and logic just confuse them...

Sadly, this also applies to Brian and Anand, but I suspect there motives are more financially motivated...


Brian

 

[CZroe]

4K video on a Note 3 would be a little pointless given the screen resolution ...
Brian

Srsly?! That's like saying that a 1080p GoPro "would be a little pointless" without a 1080p viewfinder.

In what world is the recording device synonymous with the consumption device?!

That said, the Note 3 has a short time limit on 4K recordings (something like 5 or 10 mins) and can only record them directly to internal memory. The internal storage is guaranteed to be fast enough and at least you can offload them to the slower SD card when you decide to keep it.

 

[Zaap]

Srsly?! That's like saying that a 1080p GoPro "would be a little pointless" without a 1080p viewfinder.

In what world is the recording device synonymous with the consumption device?!

For that matter, I highly doubt even most DSLRs have a 1080p LCD.

Reminds me of some friends' parents- they had their first digital camera for several years before finally being told they could actually view the photos full size on a computer monitor -or even print them out- rather than just view the photos on the camera's 3" LCD!

 

[randomactsoftech]

Until 64GB of built in storage costs less or the same as a 64GB micro SD..... Im all for the SD card.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Yeah, I missed the point about the Note "recording" 4K video and was addressing the idea of storing 4K video from another source. Yes, a phone with 4K recording is going to eat data like its going out of style.


Brian

 

[zerogear]

Wow, I can't believe this topic is still going after a year. Geez, lol

 

[randomactsoftech]

Wow, I can't believe this topic is still going after a year. Geez, lol

I could say the same thing about the ipad mini!

 

[StrangerGuy]

I don't think it's OK for devs to just say "doesn't work from SD" when he really means "I'm too lazy to make it work from SD."

Its not our fault for apps not working well with SD or high PPI displays on Windows, its you stupid hardware vendors who made them and consumers who bought them.

 

[evident]

Bumping this thread. What do you think 4 years after this thread was made? SD cards have managed to stick around thank God. However removable batteries are pretty much all but gone from devices. Manufacturers claim it's for thin ness of devices. But let's compare the galaxy s5 to the s9. Is it that much thinner? Not at all

 

[Muse]

My first smartphone had a battery that was switchable in under 10 seconds. I always kept a spare around. My current one, I don't even know if it's possible to replace the battery.

I wouldn't buy a smartphone that didn't:

1. take a big memory card

or

2. Have minimum 128GB storage, probably more

 

[lxskllr]

Bumping this thread. What do you think 4 years after this thread was made? SD cards have managed to stick around thank God. However removable batteries are pretty much all but gone from devices. Manufacturers claim it's for thin ness of devices. But let's compare the galaxy s5 to the s9. Is it that much thinner? Not at all

Lower end phones still have removable storage and batteries. I think it's because they want to use stupid materials like glass and metal, and it's harder to make covers for those, while hiding seams to make them look sleek. Afterall, it's better to look good than be good, right?!

 

[Zaap]

4 years later and 256GB for $75 or so is a thing ...

But I'm supposed to believe that storage should be for something else... NOT the device I carry with me all the time. For that I'm supposed to pay upwards of half the devices cost again for a piddly amount of storage and just play the shuffle files around game .

You know... because they make those cards for... for... for.... for WHAT again exactly?


No, 4 years didn't make me swallow some big company's ridiculous storage profit nonsense.

Certainly every tablet and most phones should have a slot for the huge amounts of dirt cheap storage that's avialable.

 

[CZroe]

Wow, I can't believe this topic is still going after a year. Geez, lol

Natch.

 

[evident]

Lower end phones still have removable storage and batteries. I think it's because they want to use stupid materials like glass and metal, and it's harder to make covers for those, while hiding seams to make them look sleek. Afterall, it's better to look good than be good, right?!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/tech...-literally-catch-fire/?utm_term=.6a66e98a91fa

This article got me thinking about this thread and why i wanted to revive it.

It's more or less planned obsolescence from all of the manufacturers but the battery portion has a significant environmental impact. All of my galaxy phones are designed to last 2 years- battery wears down, internal memory starts to slow down (hell my note 4 literally bricked itself 1 month after the 2 year warranty, failed emmc), screens start to burn in, and updates keep getting pushed to the phone that slow it to a crawl. pisses me off, but what can we do. and to hell with the premium materials. i'll take a plastic body with a good looking screen. it all gets beat up anyways

 

[lxskllr]

Phones irritate in me general. It's offensive I don't have root out of the box, or at worst, with a trivial switch in dev options. You can update everything, or update nothing o/s wise. I use android cause it's the best bad option, not cause I like it that much. I'd drop $1.5k without thinking on the right phone that did what I wanted. I'd probably go higher with some consideration. For that, I expect every component to be user replaceable, I expect full control of the system, and I expect an optional full desktop environment. I also want the o/s decoupled from the hardware. I don't have to wait for dell to release a new debian dell edition 1+ years(maybe never) after release, and with bundled crapware. Not sure why a phone is any different.

 

[sweenish]

Bumping this thread. What do you think 4 years after this thread was made? SD cards have managed to stick around thank God. However removable batteries are pretty much all but gone from devices. Manufacturers claim it's for thin ness of devices. But let's compare the galaxy s5 to the s9. Is it that much thinner? Not at all

There's a MASSIVE false equivalence going on here. What are the capacities of these batteries. Would the S9 have be thicker to accommodate the larger battery and a door? How much would the S9 battery have to shrink to accommodate a door and keep its same thinness?

What are the physical dimensions of both phones? You imply that the S9 is, in fact thinner. And it's likely thinner with a larger battery, more flash storage, sensors, bigger camera, etc.. There are way too many factors (haven't even brought up screen size and increased buil-in storage and how those might affect the issue at hand).

This kind of blind hand-waving is stupid.

 

[Zaap]

Not really sure what all the fuss is about; his statement is right on.

His point was that many current devices like the S9 aren't *REALLY* all that much thinner than their removable battery predecessors- thus, highlighting one of the big "selling points" of sealed-battery devices was a lot of hot air.

Add to this, no one who owned older models of the Note line, for example, was clamoring for thinner devices at the expense of features anyway. The disaster that was the Note 5 (and S6) proved this to the point Samsung at least added back the microSD slot.

A larger sealed battery is worth a lot less in practice than a set of (smaller but still large-enough) removable batteries. When one is at 3% battery and they still need to use their phone for the next few hours without being stupidly tethered, a "larger battery" means exactly BUMPKISS- it has to actually be CHARGED to realize its capacity. Swapping in a replacement was and still is superior for a mobile device. Owning just two batteries for a device not only meant spreading battery wear and tear out over two batteries instead of one, it also meant never being but a few seconds away from 100% charge.

We all know the ship has set sail and it isn't coming back, but that doesn't negate that there were real-world benefits to removable batteries same as is logical for ANY portable device that runs on battery power.


As for the actual thread topic, with SD cards- I simply can't fathom why anyone would argue AGAINST an option to have 256GB even 512GB in the same tray as their sim card with ZERO loss of anything and only gain. A person has simply swallowed some big company's hype that loves charging up the wazoo for piddlesome amounts of overpriced internal memory to even try to mount the argument.

 

[UNCjigga]

Wow, super-old thread. Anway, I'd say that IP67/IP68 ratings would more than make up for losing a removable battery. Most phones nowadays are good to go 8-10 hours with moderate usage (more than enough) and fast charging has also negated the need for extra batteries.

As for SD cards, I think as Android evolved it became more difficult to manage SD storage securely, and memory standards/speeds weren't keeping up for a while (UFS could change that.) At best, I'd imagine future Samsung phones might only give you the option of external storage for photos and videos only, and limit its use for other apps.

iPhones now come with 512GB at nearly NVMe speeds...more than enough for most folks.