03-11-14 03:34 PM
32 12
tools
  1. Playbookjoe's Avatar
    I think the spec race could be avoided by just stuffing a ton of storage as standard on a phone.
    Instead of an octacore, I would rather 128gb on my phone any day.
    I know it's possible upgrade the storage with SD cards and that, but for people just buying a phone I think this would grab attention.

    More of a pr thing than anything, but would the average person notice a megapixel on the camera, extra ram, or more memory?
    Anybody know the cost of having a lesser chip and more memory vs big chip and less memory?

    Posted via CB10
    Last edited by Playbookjoe; 03-08-14 at 02:20 PM.
    Mecca EL and Anthony Roberts5 like this.
    03-08-14 12:16 PM
  2. Troy Tiscareno's Avatar
    You're talking about STORAGE (flash memory) and not RAM (random access memory). But you could expect the retail price of a 128GB of storage phone to be up around $900. Right now, only Apple sells a phone with this much storage, and as popular as the iPhone is, they don't sell very many of them with this capacity.

    BB has too many SKUs as it is, and since the SD card slot exists already, there's really no reason for this at all.
    03-08-14 12:42 PM
  3. thurask's Avatar
    You're talking about STORAGE (flash memory) and not RAM (random access memory). But you could expect the retail price of a 128GB of storage phone to be up around $900. Right now, only Apple sells a phone with this much storage, and as popular as the iPhone is, they don't sell very many of them with this capacity.

    BB has too many SKUs as it is, and since the SD card slot exists already, there's really no reason for this at all.
    I thought only Chinese OEMs has 128GB phones. http://www.engadget.com/2013/11/18/m...3-128gb-china/

    And, as you said, the SD card invalidates much of the case for larger phone storage. Still, moving from only 16GB SKUs to only 32 GB SKUs for apps/data would be nice, but anything higher is pointless.

    Posted via CB10
    Mecca EL likes this.
    03-08-14 12:54 PM
  4. Rello's Avatar
    No and for 2 reasons

    Like Troy above said, manufacturers are going to charge u a arm and a leg for 128GB of storage on a phone. No thanks. If I'm going to spend that kind of money, I'duch rather get a SD card that I can take anywhere with me

    Secondly, I do believe BlackBerry needs to keep up with specs. People have been complaining for a long time now that BlackBerry is giving less specs and charging the same as the competition. I want BlackBerry to really future my phone. A octo-core processor is overkill lol but its something that will help ensure people get updates for the 2 year period of their contract.

    A lot of people have been asking for a powerhouse BlackBerry. I would love to see this as well

    Posted via CB10
    03-08-14 04:08 PM
  5. Playbookjoe's Avatar
    I guess I wasn't being clear.
    What I was basically asking was:

    What would lure a customer more, (assuming the price is the same as we know manufacturers don't pay what they charge us for the storage)
    1. An octacore with 16/32gb storage, or
    2. A quadcore with 128gb of storage .



    Posted via CB10
    Mecca EL likes this.
    03-08-14 05:22 PM
  6. Rello's Avatar
    Lol I don't see the point though cause them both being the same price would never happen lol...

    But ok, if I had to pick one I think I would still have to go with a faster processor. People can always get a SD card but they can't just upgrade their processor. I would think a better processor carriers more benefits than more storage....imo

    Edit: sorry I didn't read your whole second post. If it was between those two options, I would pick the quad core with 128GB of storage. I would definitely accept a octo-core processor, but I do think it's overkill at the his point in time.
    Posted via CB10
    Grumblegrumble likes this.
    03-08-14 05:42 PM
  7. BCITMike's Avatar
    I think the spec race could be avoided by just stuffing a ton of storage as standard on a phone.
    Instead of an octacore, I would rather 128gb on my phone any day.
    I know it's possible upgrade the storage with SD cards and that, but for people just buying a phone I think this would grab attention.

    More of a pr thing than anything, but would the average person notice a megapixel on the camera, extra ram, or more memory?
    Anybody know the cost of having a lesser chip and more memory vs big chip and less memory?

    Posted via CB10
    The experience is best with more cpu, not more onboard flash. 128gb does nothing for me using 10gb. More cpu benefits every one, all the time.

    Posted via CB10
    03-08-14 07:59 PM
  8. BCITMike's Avatar
    I guess I wasn't being clear.
    What I was basically asking was:

    What would lure a customer more, (assuming the price is the same as we know manufacturers don't pay what they charge us for the storage)
    1. An octacore with 16/32gb storage, or
    2. A quadcore with 128gb of storage .



    Posted via CB10
    1.

    I paid $35 for a 64gb SD card and I keep it and it's transferable. Paying for it onboard drives up price dramatically, like $50-$100 increments for 32gb.

    Posted via CB10
    03-08-14 08:03 PM
  9. Dave Bourque's Avatar
    1.

    I paid $35 for a 64gb SD card and I keep it and it's transferable. Paying for it onboard drives up price dramatically, like $50-$100 increments for 32gb.

    Posted via CB10
    I'd pay the extra 50. On board storage is getting cheaper anyway. 16 to 32 is good enough for the next high-end BlackBerry.

    Z10STL100-3/10.2.1.2141
    Mecca EL likes this.
    03-08-14 08:06 PM
  10. sentimentGX4's Avatar
    I think users that require more than 16 GB are a niche. Even 8 GB is enough for most users. The overwhelming majority of smartphone users don't install many apps and many older folk don't even have a huge digital library or use their phone as a MP3.

    You're appealing to a very tiny segment of tech enthusiasts with 128 GB onboard flash.
    03-08-14 10:53 PM
  11. Dave Bourque's Avatar
    I think users that require more than 16 GB are a niche. Even 8 GB is enough for most users. The overwhelming majority of smartphone users don't install many apps and many older folk don't even have a huge digital library or use their phone as a MP3.

    You're appealing to a very tiny segment of tech enthusiasts with 128 GB onboard flash.
    Hmm.... we should be looking at 32 not 128... lol

    Z10STL100-3/10.2.1.2141
    03-08-14 11:23 PM
  12. leojzueg's Avatar
    I would like to see a BlackBerry that would have 2 expansion slots so could have 2 64 gigs of music and movies. Why? Just because

    Posted via CB10
    03-08-14 11:59 PM
  13. LoganSix's Avatar
    Secondly, I do believe BlackBerry needs to keep up with specs. People have been complaining for a long time now that BlackBerry is giving less specs and charging the same as the competition. I want BlackBerry to really future my phone. A octo-core processor is overkill lol but its something that will help ensure people get updates for the 2 year period of their contract.

    A lot of people have been asking for a powerhouse BlackBerry. I would love to see this as well

    Posted via CB10
    I think BlackBerry should do a commercial showing them shoving an engine into a Yugo and also the same engine into a sports car. Then they could explain that bigger doesn't always mean better if the foundation is flawed.



    Posted from my Z30 using CB10
    Mecca EL likes this.
    03-09-14 09:16 AM
  14. ronfc's Avatar
    Phones with 8 cores? I just find it overkill.

    Z10STL100-1/10.2.1.2141
    Mecca EL likes this.
    03-09-14 10:01 AM
  15. byex's Avatar
    What's the main difference between the on board memory and sd Card memory?

    Apple charges an arm and a leg when you jump to 16 or 32 GB memory size.

    Is there anything special about onboard memory.

    Posted via CB10
    03-09-14 10:13 AM
  16. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    Only because you have no idea whatsoever how higher specs affect device performance and capabilities.

    I think the spec race could be avoided by just stuffing a ton of storage as standard on a phone.
    Instead of an octacore, I would rather 128gb on my phone any day.
    Storage Size has almost no impact on device performance or capabilities - except if they used a super fast chip (which you need better hardware in the phone cause the older chips don't support it... Lol). It only affects the storage capacity in the device. That's all.

    Those Quad-Octa processors have massively improved ISP for Imaging. Their GPUs are incredible. Their CPUs are incredible. Their Integrated Radios are better (LTE-A, Wi-Fi/LTE Bonding for Downloads, Wi-Fi ac, etc.). Camera Sensors are better. Screens are better. Better Power Management. etc.

    Look what happened with the Z10. It had to pass on useful features because the hardware didn't support it. Do you think consumers want to skip on useful capabilities just for some storage that they (90% of them) won't even need, which ends up costing just as much as the higher spec'd/more capable devices?

    My Video Analysis App imports Video 3-4x faster on my Note 3 than it did on my GS3 (which uses an SoC similar or identical to the Z10). Putting in 128GB Storage in the device won't make it import or process any faster. It will just give it more storage.

    I know it's possible upgrade the storage with SD cards and that, but for people just buying a phone I think this would grab attention.

    More of a pr thing than anything, but would the average person notice a megapixel on the camera, extra ram, or more memory?
    Anybody know the cost of having a lesser chip and more memory vs big chip and less memory?

    Posted via CB10
    Yes, because this stuff affects the performance and capabilities of the phone.

    You cannot have some of the tech the better hardware has with worse hardware. You cannot do 1080p 60fps with a worse camera sensor/ISP/CPU. You cannot do 4k Video (which serves as a source to allow you to create amazing 1080p footage better than the native 1080p output of these devices) with worse hardware. Things like HDR video are out of range for older hardware. Higher RAM sizes are useful for maintaining performance level over long periods of heavy use, and improves Multi-Tasking (BB10 would be able to probably expand from 8 to 10 running Apps or more with an extra 1GB RAM)..

    In none of those ways will more internal storage storage help deliver benefits to customers other than... increased internal storage size.

    And with Class 10/Ultra SD Cards on platforms that allow the use of SD Cards the benefits of storage beyond 32 GB is just not there. Those devices do not sell well because the prices become too high for consumers to consider. Apple does not sell many 128GB iDevices. Even the 64GB devices don't sell a ton of units. The 16GB is the best seller due to price and the 32GB sells quite a lot, and there's a huge drop-off beyond that.

    Additionally, the company in question would have to to price extremely aggressively, and even then the disparity in performance and capabilities would not bold well to that device. Competitors like Samsung would simply counter by offering better specs with 32-64GB Storage for a lower price (with the Note Series they are already there compared to Apple).
    Grumblegrumble likes this.
    03-09-14 10:45 AM
  17. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    Phones with 8 cores? I just find it overkill.

    Z10STL100-1/10.2.1.2141
    Only cause you don't seem to be factoring in how it works...

    The Octa Core phones have 4 High Power Processors and 4 Lower Power Processors.

    Octa Core is the future. Being able to run basically the whole phone on lower power CPUs when the higher power CPUs aren't needed, while still having the available for demanding tasks like media manipulation, gaming, etc. makes sense.

    To ignore advances in tech and opt for worse hardware, no company would do that as it is insulting to their users who pay top dollar for these products.

    The current quad core processors curb stomp older hardware like the Snap 4 series. It isn't even a contest. The benefit of 128 GB Storage when you can get phones with 32GB + MicroSD Slot is virtually non-existent.
    03-09-14 12:22 PM
  18. Rello's Avatar
    Only cause you don't seem to be factoring in how it works...

    The Octa Core phones have 4 High Power Processors and 4 Lower Power Processors.

    Octa Core is the future. Being able to run basically the whole phone on lower power CPUs when the higher power CPUs aren't needed, while still having the available for demanding tasks like media manipulation, gaming, etc. makes sense.

    To ignore advances in tech and opt for worse hardware, no company would do that as it is insulting to their users who pay top dollar for these products.

    The current quad core processors curb stomp older hardware like the Snap 4 series. It isn't even a contest. The benefit of 128 GB Storage when you can get phones with 32GB + MicroSD Slot is virtually non-existent.
    Agree. Many people here seem to think that these newer processor will just kill a battery quicker and that's simply not the case. They should really help battery life as u stated.

    I said I would take a quad core with 128GB but that's because I consume a ton a content. My 64GB sd card is nearly full now lol...for people like me, a 128GB phone would be be lovely but with that being said, I'm not paying the price they would charge for it lol. I look forward to the octo-core BlackBerry that is supposedly coming

    Posted via CB10
    Grumblegrumble likes this.
    03-09-14 12:36 PM
  19. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    What's the main difference between the on board memory and sd Card memory?

    Apple charges an arm and a leg when you jump to 16 or 32 GB memory size.

    Is there anything special about onboard memory.

    Posted via CB10
    On Board NAND Flash are faster and have more consistent R/W Speeds, as well as faster random access times for the storage. It is far more reliable (SD Cards can fail, and often do in spectacular ways).

    OEMs do not know what speed card will be inserted into a phone unless they give the card themselves (Pre-Installed like a lot of phones with low internal storage came with back in the day). They don't know if you're going to use a Class 4, 6, 8, or 10 Card. They don't know if it will be run of the mill or one of those 25MB/Sec+ Ultra Read Speed Sandisk cards.

    This is why while Samsung allows you to save camera data to the External SD Card, they do not allow you to save Burst Shots to the External SD Card. They cannot assume that card will be fast enough to save upwards of 10 Pictures per Second Burst to that card - those always go to the Internal Storage.

    I haven't tried, but I wonder if they'd even allow you to record 4K video to the SD Card, since the file sizes are incredibly large. 7 Seconds of 4K video is about 100MB (14.3MB/Sec), which requires write speeds faster than the theoretical max speed of a Class 10 SD Card.
    Grumblegrumble likes this.
    03-09-14 12:40 PM
  20. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    I thought only Chinese OEMs has 128GB phones. World's first 128GB phone now available from Meizu, but only works in China

    And, as you said, the SD card invalidates much of the case for larger phone storage. Still, moving from only 16GB SKUs to only 32 GB SKUs for apps/data would be nice, but anything higher is pointless.

    Posted via CB10
    Yes, I do think 32 GB is the sweet spot:

    1. 16 GB devices are really only ~14.8 GB devices - space is lost to formatting.
    2. Device Software (OS and Stock Apps, etc.) take up gigs of space

    So, in best case scenario you end up with about 11.5-12 GB of space on the device, which is quite a bit less than the 16 you thought you were getting. A 32 GB device pretty much doubles that, which makes App Space not much of an issue.

    You pop in a 16-32GB SD Card and put your Music/Documents/etc. there and tell the phone to save camera data there by default, and move on.

    I am not sure what kind of content creation people do on a smartphone. Consumption, yes. But I don't need to have a whole season of movies on my phone. I do keep about 2GB worth of music on my SD Card, though.

    I record a lot of video during training for analysis, but I can offload that to Techsmith Servers, SkyDrive, Google Drive, or other services.

    Serious Photo Manipulation, Video Editing, and even video Analysis gets done on a PC with much more powerful software.

    The only device I could use for serious work, that is mobile, would be a Surface Pro tablet because of its ability to run full Windows Software. Mobile Software is good for accomplishing specific things on the spot, but for in depth study/analysis and being able to do things that most smartphones would choke trying to accomplish - I need a real computer.
    03-09-14 01:16 PM
  21. ronfc's Avatar
    A computer with an octacore processor is good, in a phone, I think is overkill. I'm not ignoring the advancement in tech, I am just thinking of a task that will utilize that many cores that a computer cannot. There is a lot of computer tasks that can be accomplished on a quad core computer, and didn't even go to a 100%. As for gaming, having a good processor and a good video card, you can already play graphics intensive games. This whole specs thing that is over the top, it is like owning an x64 Windows PC with a 32 GB RAM that doesn't get used most of the time.

    Z10STL100-1/10.2.1.2141
    Mecca EL likes this.
    03-09-14 04:31 PM
  22. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    A computer with an octacore processor is good, in a phone, I think is overkill. I'm not ignoring the advancement in tech, I am just thinking of a task that will utilize that many cores that a computer cannot. There is a lot of computer tasks that can be accomplished on a quad core computer, and didn't even go to a 100%. As for gaming, having a good processor and a good video card, you can already play graphics intensive games. This whole specs thing that is over the top, it is like owning an x64 Windows PC with a 32 GB RAM that doesn't get used most of the time.

    Z10STL100-1/10.2.1.2141
    These are not single tasking operating systems. Many processes run at once.

    Just cause one process only uses 2 cores, doesn't mean you can't save power by putting a system process on a low power core that runs at a lower frequency and draws less power. Also means the phone will produce less heat.

    You are not even looking at the big picture.

    Harbor your opinion, if it makes sense to you. No one is forcing you to agree with them :-)

    Even in a PC this matters. Laptops run on batteries when they aren't plugged in so this is why some have hybrid graphics cards that switch from Discrete to Integrated Graphics on battery to save power, unless a game is being played that needs the extra power of the discrete card.

    None of your analogies or examples make sense. PCs have moved largely in the same direction for the same reasons - they just got there faster since their form factor allowed them to go faster and deal with some of the drawbacks without much issue, but battery life is becoming a huge selling point for Laptops now as well (as well as heat production, cause no one wants something that is going to burn their lap).

    Mobile is doing nothing but adopting common sense improvements that have been implemented on the PC (Desktops and Servers) for years now. Servers have multiple CPUs and will put processes on low-utilized CPUs to increase performance, distribute load, conserve energy, and reduce heat production.

    All those are equally important on desktop, laptop, and mobile systems.

    None of that is worth giving up for space that basically doesn't matter for 95% of users.

    Those Chinese phones were offering 128GB space with decent hardware. They were not using 1.5 year old chipsets in those devices.
    Last edited by n8ter#AC; 03-09-14 at 04:48 PM.
    Grumblegrumble and sunjammer like this.
    03-09-14 04:35 PM
  23. Mecca EL's Avatar
    I'd rather increased storage. Maybe quad core, max! Anything higher will inherit battery consumption and heat soak performance problems. Storage is priority, based on the fact that apps can not be transferred and run via SD... On paper, all the numbers sound good. Dynamically...this dual processor unit I'm using works just fine. Wish I could get my hands on a P9982's motherboard. There's a sweet 64GB storage on that momma. Me likes mad junk in the trunk!
    03-09-14 05:16 PM
  24. sentimentGX4's Avatar
    1. 16 GB devices are really only ~14.8 GB devices - space is lost to formatting.
    The actual reason for the bulk of that storage "loss" isn't due to the formatting; but, because advertisers advertise storage space as 1 KB = 1000 bytes to make the disk drive appear larger (and because that's standard metric measurement understandable to non-techy consumers) while computer scientists and the operating system calculates the storage space in binary so 1 KB = 1024 bytes and then convert it into decimal.

    Technically, the 16 GB SD card you bought was never 16 GB. 16 GB label = 14.x GB to computers. At small numbers, there isn't really much difference; but the difference becomes more pronounced as we move to large numbers such as giga- and terra- numbers.
    03-09-14 05:24 PM
  25. n8ter#AC's Avatar
    The actual reason for the bulk of that storage loss isn't due to the formatting; but, because advertisers advertise storage space as 1 KB = 1000 bytes to make the disk drive appear larger (and because that's standard metric measurement understandable to non-techy consumers) while computer scientists and the operating system calculates the storage space in binary so 1 KB = 1024 bytes and then convert it into decimal.

    At small numbers, there isn't really much difference; but the difference becomes more pronounced as we move to large numbers such as giga- and terra- numbers.
    That doesn't really matter. I have a 16 GB SD card and it's 16GB. Once you format it, it will hold 14.8 GB of data.

    Windows counts storage correctly. It has to do with the size of the storage units on the volume and space reserved for the file table and things like that.

    If I format it NTFS instead of FAT32 and use smaller sector sizes, I can recover some space.

    Take a thumb drive and change file systems and sector sizes and see what happens.

    Space is also reserved for the MFT and other things. The drive needs a space to record file data (like the File allocation table on FAT32 file system) and this space is reserved for the OS/hardware to use.

    The 1000 vs 1024 probably loses you less space on a 128 volume than the formatting does, since by most wording (they say 1gb is 1000 mb, I have my SD card packaging and just checked) you're only losing 24 MB per GB.

    That means you only lose 768 MB on a 32 GB volume which isn't lining up with what you're saying on 32 GB devices. You lose like 4G on those to formatting.

    Also files on the file system always takes up at minimum "allocation unit size" on disk.

    That means a 1 byte file on a FAT32 volume takes up like 4kb on disk. You lose space there as well. A 5kb file will take up 8kb on disk, etc.

    Sent from my Galaxy Note 3 using Tapatalk
    03-09-14 05:29 PM
32 12

Similar Threads

  1. Research In Motion vs BlackBerry - Which name is better
    By Karan Mohal in forum General BlackBerry Discussion
    Replies: 191
    Last Post: 04-11-16, 11:57 AM
  2. Real Racing 3 'Customisation' Update
    By kennyiceberry in forum BlackBerry 10 Games
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-29-14, 11:32 AM
  3. BBM vs. Whatsapp
    By sugbo in forum General BlackBerry Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-10-14, 01:53 AM
  4. Q1o charger factory specs
    By vigorito in forum BlackBerry Q10
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-07-14, 04:55 AM
  5. Holster sleep vs lock button?
    By october88 in forum BlackBerry Q10
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-06-14, 01:59 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD