Brian & Anand Hate SD Card's in Phones

[openwheel]

we should backup our data from mobile devices to the cloud or HD anyway. I don't see the need to carry more than 16gigs of storage on travel, unless phone cameras suddenly are Nokia 1020 quality.

Keeping 16/32/64 gigs of precious photo/video/docs/music on your phone is a disaster waiting to happen.

 

[Zaap]

LOL. Trying to backup or access 32/64GB of data to the cloud at a moment's notice is a disaster in progress.


Also, there goes that either/or mentality at work. (It amazes me how the tech world is rife with that.)

Having say 64GB onboard in no way keeps me from also having whatever amount in the cloud. I'd rather have access to BOTH. It's not an either/or proposition.

 

[WelshBloke]

This thread is a perfect example of a very vocal minority.

Sorry guys, but its absolutely true.

No actually reviewers are the perfect example of a very vocal minority.

But I'm not sure what either of our statements has to do with the merits of Sdcards.

 

[Megatomic]

Having say 64GB onboard in no way keeps me from also having whatever amount in the cloud. I'd rather have access to BOTH. It's not an either/or proposition.

This is the most reasonable thing I have read in this thread so far. Takes the best of both sides.

 

[waggy]

When i was looking for a phone and tab one of the things i wanted was a SD slot.

 

[WelshBloke]

This is the most reasonable thing I have read in this thread so far. Takes the best of both sides.

I don't think anyone in the thread has been arguing that built in storage amounts should go down or that the cloud is worthless. People just want the option of extra cheap storage until the time that the amount of on board storage isn't a limiting factor.

There is literally no downside to providing the card slot. Don't like it or find it too complicated (???) don't put a card in it and it's like it was never there.

 

[openwheel]

so the argument is that we want more of everything? I can understand the argument, but it's not a realistic one.

Why should I get only 128gb when I spend $100 on SSD? I want DOUBLE!!! Are we all willing to pay more? We get what we pay for. People complain about lack of quadcore, lack of X, and lack of Y.

To me, 16gig is enough (or should I say 12gig?). That's why I refuse to buy Samsung and its bloatware. I demand highest quality of music fidelity and I demand at least 720p video on mobile devices. I travel a lot and I get by with 16gig (realistically 12). That's all I am saying. I would like to have more, but I am NOT willing to pay more.

 

[TerryMathews]

so the argument is that we want more of everything? I can understand the argument, but it's not a realistic one.

Why should I get only 128gb when I spend $100 on SSD? I want DOUBLE!!! Are we all willing to pay more? We get what we pay for. People complain about lack of quadcore, lack of X, and lack of Y.

To me, 16gig is enough (or should I say 12gig?). That's why I refuse to buy Samsung and its bloatware. I demand highest quality of music fidelity and I demand at least 720p video on mobile devices. I travel a lot and I get by with 16gig (realistically 12). That's all I am saying. I would like to have more, but I am NOT willing to pay more.

The argument is that a uSD slot costs $0.27 and takes up less space than the compass sensor.

 

[openwheel]

also, why would anyone want to access "all of" 32gig/64gig data from the cloud?

Accessing a few files from the cloud is as easy as cake. Accessing/backing up large quantity of files is cumbersome either on Cloud or SD card. Especially SD card. The nightmares I've experienced with unreliable SD cards drove me away from depending on them.

 

[openwheel]

$0.27? Seriously guys?

 

[JustMe21]

Don't forget that phone providers and ISPs are moving back to having a tiered data service, so accessing everything in the cloud will eventually cost you more.

 

[ponyo]

I don't think anyone in the thread has been arguing that built in storage amounts should go down or that the cloud is worthless. People just want the option of extra cheap storage until the time that the amount of on board storage isn't a limiting factor.

There is literally no downside to providing the card slot. Don't like it or find it too complicated (???) don't put a card in it and it's like it was never there.

Think of the build quality! Anyone else amused by the phone/tablet case reviews by Brian and Anand? They love their aluminum unibody phone but cover it up with OEM plastic/rubber/leather cases. Yeah that makes perfect sense. HTC One review, various iPad reviews. Didn't they also review some ridiculous $100 phone case?

 

[openwheel]

The day people stop selling kidneys to pay for extra storage, is the day they will start including SD card slots.

 

[dawheat]

Regarding the 'vocal minority' comments - what pray tell is the majority asking for then? More beautifully crafted phones?

I'd put forward that what most people today (considering how good phones have gotten) would ask for is value.

 

[TerryMathews]

$0.27? Seriously guys?

Are you claiming I'm wrong?

http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.view&id=331055580134 here's a fully assembled unit for $0.94, shipped. If anything I might've estimated high.

 

[fuzzybabybunny]

Think of the build quality! Anyone else amused by the phone/tablet case reviews by Brian and Anand? They love their aluminum unibody phone but cover it up with OEM plastic/rubber/leather cases. Yeah that makes perfect sense. HTC One review, various iPad reviews. Didn't they also review some ridiculous $100 phone case?

Pretty much. All the people I know with iPhones either:

1. Put a case on the phone.

2. Put a fat battery case on the phone, making it way more chunky than my Galaxy S4.

3. Use it without a case and constantly worry about dropped it and breaking the glass.

4. Use it without a case and have broken glass all over the phone.

 

[openwheel]

Are you claiming I'm wrong?

http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.view&id=331055580134 here's a fully assembled unit for $0.94, shipped. If anything I might've estimated high.

LOL yeah you are way off.

 

[TerryMathews]

LOL yeah you are way off.

Care to cite something as to why?

Ive stated my opinion, and cited proof to back it. This is one of the tech forms, "You're wrong, nana nana boo boo" doesn't exactly cut it here.

 

[openwheel]

the linked part does not represent the quality and implimentation of an SD card slot in a modern smart phone.

It may be relatively cheap for manufacturers to include SD card slot, but it costs way more than $0.27 to get it properly implimented. Even at $1.08, that's still 4X of your cost estimate. Now imagine selling 10 million units and go tell your program manager that you need to slash 50 engineers because you want to include SD card slot.

I am not saying that I don't want SD card slot. I am just being realistic here. As long as people continue to pay $100 for extra onboard storage, then we will NEVER see SD card slot again.

 

[TerryMathews]

the linked part does not represent the quality and implimentation of an SD card slot in a modern smart phone.

True. It's simpler to implement than what I linked. These are often driven by dedicated lines from the SOC whether its GPIO or not. Also, since its a fixed device they dont have to mess around with abstracting the interface or complying with the USB Mass Storage driver specification.

So what if it is a whole dollar? That in no way negates my point that its a negligible cost considering other parts costs in phones.

uSD card slots are NOT being left out over cost. 4 color printing on the box costs more.

At the end of your post, you touched on my point but you got it backwards. Its not a cost thing, its a profit thing. They know upsell %s go up if there is no expansion path, Apple proved that in the 80s.

You'd have to have a screw loose to support that position.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Keeping 16/32/64 gigs of precious photo/video/docs/music on your phone is a disaster waiting to happen.

It is not precious data, its all backed-up up to my server when I am home. The issue is having a nice chuck of my server's data available when data access isn't an option. Honestly this is why phone storage space is more important than tablet storage space as I use the tablet at home.

I have by far the best cell phone provider in my region but on my ride to my parent's place tomorrow there are some dead spots. If I only leave my music/audiobooks in the cloud then on my 5 hour drive I will have an hour of silence in total. That simply is ridiculous when I have options.

As long as people continue to pay $100 for extra onboard storage, then we will NEVER see SD card slot again.

You say that, but HTC just put one in the One Max, and Samsung (the most popular Android OEM) has them on both their flagships. Seems to me reports of their death are greatly exaggerated.


To me this whole debate shifts if/when we see 128GB cards that are backwards compatible (aka work in current Note 3's/S4's) BEFORE we see say a reasonably priced 128GB iPhone. Suddenly then phones can get a real upgrade to put them near laptop territory and all those people who clung to now-dying 120GB iPods are suddenly clamoring for phones with S4 card slots.

 

[openwheel]

..........

At the end of your post, you touched on my point but you got it backwards. Its not a cost thing, its a profit thing. They know upsell %s go up if there is no expansion path, Apple proved that in the 80s.

You'd have to have a screw loose to support that position.

I agree it is mostly profit driven.

However, cost is still an issue. Material is not the only cost of such implimentation. Labor, fringe/benefit, O/H all go into every part of the finished product. $0.27 is simply fantasy especially for a modern smart phone. The difference between $1.00 and $0.27 is a lot for manufacturers, especially if they can overcharge internal storage.

So why should they include SD card slot? They have no incentive to do so because people are willing to pay extra $100-$200 for extra storage.

 

[Brian Stirling]

My preference is for maximum onboard storage to minimize the amount of data I eat per month. If you do everything or most everything from the cloud you will eat more data ... a lot more data.

The other thing is the data mining and privacy issues with cloud based computing. Mind you, I do use the cloud but you have to accept the fact that it will be looked at for data mining and ad serving purposes and is also, apparently, a pretty common target of government (NSA, GCHQ, etc.) and rouge hacking efforts.

The cost to include and the amount of space required for a uSD card is pretty small particularly with 5" class smartphones and since you still need a SIM slot there no good reason not to have an uSD slot. The phone makers can offer a cheaper phone with 16GB onboard storage for those that don't need or want any more and still allow their customers that want or need more to add it -- win-win...


Brian

 

[TerryMathews]

I agree it is mostly profit driven.

However, cost is still an issue. Material is not the only cost of such implimentation. Labor, fringe/benefit, O/H all go into every part of the finished product. $0.27 is simply fantasy especially for a modern smart phone. The difference between $1.00 and $0.27 is a lot for manufacturers, especially if they can overcharge internal storage.

So why should they include SD card slot? They have no incentive to do so because people are willing to pay extra $100-$200 for extra storage.

I strongly disagree with your analysis on cost. Labor? Either your phone is built by robot or Foxconn slave but either way labor is practically a non-concern. How many points are soldered in on a smartphone now? 1000? What's another 8? Especially for a company like Samsung that manufactures so much in house, the total cost is going to remain very close to the raw component cost. I threw $0.27 out tongue-in-cheek but I still maintain its a reasonable cost estimate for an established manufacturer.

You're shifting the argument in order to make it winnable for yourself. Go back and look at the thread topic. We are discussing whether or not there are justifiable reasons to exclude uSD slots.

I dont consider corporate profit margins to be a compelling reason.

I stated that cost is not a realistic concern. I stand behind that.

Cost is not driving this decision. Profit is.

There are lots of things companies could to in order to drastically increase profits, that we as a community have railed against and mostly successfully.

Why should Google and Apple get a pass on blatant profiteering when we dont let Microsoft? Last I checked, no one here ever said "Oh, its OK for Microsoft to switch to single use activations. Those activations cost a little bit because of the internet data used, but more importantly they could make more money."

 

[openwheel]

........

You say that, but HTC just put one in the One Max, and Samsung (the most popular Android OEM) has them on both their flagships. Seems to me reports of their death are greatly exaggerated.

....

One Max is the perfect example. You gained an SD card slot, but you lose a whole lot more everywhere else.

Samsung Galaxies too. You gained an SD card slot, but you must suffer through bloatware and cheap plastic.