16gb iphone only has 13.09 gb capacity on itunes?

Thanks for helping, Rysz, that's an interesting point of view, but can be "fixed" quite easy:

1) don't count and advertise the memory used for the OS. That should be charged as any other part of the product, i.e. the screen, or antenna, etc.

2) that should be planned accordingly, and I have a feeling that Apple is really good in planning such things.

Thanks all for your answers, I am also done here.

2992 wrote:

Michael, this is having nothing to do with the 10 or 2 base of calculation.

It's all about the OS ocupying space which is never available for the end user, as it should be (as per an average user understanding. Example: my gf which is a non-teck educated user, was asking me why her brand new laptop is not having 250 GB free space available so she can store the music, pics and the movies she wants. My answer was: because several GB are ocupied by the OS and the rest of the software. Her answer, and I am not joking: well, then just delete that stuff as I don't need it. I only want to have my music, pics and movies on my laptop!. Go figure...).

Actually, it does have to do with how the math is calculated. As advertised in base 10, the 16 Gb device has exactly 16Gb of raw storage space. The OS is never going to "see" 16 anythings, ever. It will see and be able to use 15.2587891Gb of useable space for system files. NOW start subtracting space for iOS, cache and temp files. No matter how you slice it, the advertised capacity will always be larger then the available system useable capacity, even with nothing on it whatsoever.

(I have to answer one more time, even if I wrote I'm done here.)

Michael, this is exactly what makes me unhappy about: "subtracting space for iOS, cache and temp files".

One more example: still cameras or some mp3 players (iRiver for example as I have one, not iPods). They have their OS (maybe it's SoC, I don't know as I am not that educated), and they have the storage for pictures/music, which is as big as the SD card (or internal memory) tells it is (regardless how it is calculated: in base 10 or 2). This is what I'll like to see from phones, laptops, and so on. On those products it says 8 GB, and you get that specs for pics/music. (well, it may be 15.25 GB due to calculation method instead of the advertised 16GB, which is again, out of my scope when initially replying to this topic).

Dah•veed, am I still a (potential) troll here?

Message was edited by: 2992

There are issues with having separate storage just for the OS and default apps and another storage for the user items. There is very limited space in a smart phone, so two sets of VRAM chips is less efficient use of space than one single integrated storage unit. There is also the issue of added cost of making a device with two sets of VRAM chips versus a device with one. The design has to make choices on how much space to put in for the OS portion (based on cost, power use of the extra chips, space available inside the enclosure), and that in turn may restrict the developers options for updates/upgrades and such in the future.

It might be a good payoff in a digital camera to have a dedicated flash storage for the OS, since cameras typically only get minor firmware updates during their lifespan, and the user storage is typically removeable anyway.

Other devices like smart phones and tablets are very different though. There are far more plusses then minuses to using a single storage system for OS and user files then making them separate, espeically in devices like these with very small interior space and with very tight restrictions on power availability and use. It also gives the developer(s) the maximum options for future upgrades, additional tools and features, new built in apps and so on.

Thats a good point to add: cost to produce versus price to sell (and related margins 😉).

Well, I am still waiting for when I will know exactly how much storage space I will have for to use for myself when buying a new device, because as of now, it's always a surprize: one actually never knows how much storage space it has on its device as the OS is always changing its size (let alone the XX GB marked on the product which gives wrong understanding to many people - see the initiator of this thread).

Have a nice evening you all!

I am having an iPhone memory problem.

I update my 3GS to 5.1 softaware, but the reported memory is off. The iPhone itself reports 5.1 gig available, but the iTune software is reporting short 452MB of memory to sync...so what can I do in this situation???

Thanks for considering my help request.

GerryLP

yup something unacceptable. ios use almost 3g of iphone memory. it just a smartphone not a laptop or pc. for user like me that using iphone 16g, 3g loss is a huge amount.

iOS does not occupy 3GB of memory. Read the thread.

Your computer is even worse. If you have a 1TB drive, your computer reports that you have only about 940GB that you can use.

As reported in this thread, there is a difference in the way HD manufaturers advertise the space on a drive and what the OS reports is on the drive. You still get the 1TB but it's all in the way bits and bytes are reported.

Common practice. The new Surface with WIndows RT ships with 9 GB of the 16 GB (advertised) in use by the OS out of the box.

Actually I think she had a very valid point!

Only 10 minutes ago a work colleague of mine asked the very same question. I advised her I "thought" it was because the operating system takes up some of the memory and I came on here to check if I was right.

Its something I didn't know either when I first bought my iPhone and was quite put out that the naff 8gb I paid for was actually more around the 6gb mark.

I think its a fair point to tell the consumer that capacity is X amount but the actual available space is x amount, so you can have an idea if you're new to the iphone world which GB is better for your usage. As stated, it's an age old thing that's probably never going to change, but a little consumer warning for those not technically minded, wouldn't go amiss.

So I dont see how this person can be marked as a troll for asking a perfectly legitimate question and then questioning the reasons behind the answer - whether they are technically minded or not.

Her post hardly sparked any "controversy" did it now?

First off, you have resurrected a thread that has been dead for over a year. Second, you obviously don't understand how to read a thread. We don't know the gender of the person to whom my comment was directed, but I was not responding to the OP of this thread.

First off I think you'll find that by looking at the comment before mine it is clear I did not resurrect this thread the person who commented in Jan 2013 resurrected this year old thread.

Secondly the thread is not closed for comment therefore I am quite within my rights to reply to an open thread.

Now pardon me for not seeing you we're replying to 2992, I was at work and rushing my response, but given that you also didnt read the thread properly to see that i was not the one who resurrected it from a year ago, maybe you shoukd practice what you preach.

There really is no need to be so rude and patronising and regardless of your reply to the poster in question, they still make a valid point and do not warrant being called a troll when all they were doing was posting a valid opinion.

We're all on here for the same thing, which is to get help and discuss apple products, not to be talked down to.

Actually I did see that someone made a comment 6 months ago to a dead thread. So if you need the real technical aspect, you have brought about the second resurrection of a long dead thread to lecture me about my opinion of who is and isn't a troll. The custom here in the ASC is that dead threads are left for dead. So now you've become the concern troll of the ASC. There isn't anything here, move along.

Oh noooo! I've become the concern troll of the ASC? Really? For disagreeing with you? How pathetic.

You really do have delusions of grandeur don't you. So basically people can't post an opinion on anything unless you agree with them or you like it otherwise you put them in your troll list?

No other forum works in that way and regardless of how long a thread has been dormant if it's open it's up for discussion. The 'custom' is not the 'rules'.

Stop being so downright rude. You speak to me in that tone then I will not move along. The only 'troll' I see here is you, hiding under your bridge waiting to shout at people. Grow up.