LA lawyer files suit against Microsoft over Surface storage capacity

I think this is hilarious...

Why doesnt he sue Apple, for not allowing MicroSD on any of their devices.. Apple's ecosystem of DRM is actually monopolistic. This guy is in collusion with Apple.. cuz the glaring fact is it has moAr than 32Gb of storage.. it has more than 64GB of storage.. if that is your need.


Iluustration:
Two albums one bought @ store, the other thru apple store. I can use the bought copy on anything, the Apple copy only on Apple devices.. & only a few copies. DRM is a scam to protect

Apple's own ecosystem.. all illegal per Federal Law.
All media.. has the same rights. No copy of medium, will have different rules based on point of purchase.
 
Denooon said:
I would agree with a lawyer, 50% of your HDD it is a way to much to get away with, 10% 20% it is acceptable. MS should change it to 16 Gb in my opinion.
Click to expand...
The "Surface Tablet", probably doesn't use any more default storage space than a typical desktop. The trouble is people are used to HDD, rather than SSD. The average desktop ships with maybe a 500GB HDD. 16GB used, is a drop in the bucket.

Now, in the case of a tablet, you're paying for flash memory, in a specialty item. So, how "cool" you want to be, depends on your ability to pay for it.

Nowadays, this seems to have become a cost vs. how badly you feel the need to brag about your boot times issue. (Which is getting tedious people). Plus the fact, everybody thinks it's Windows 8 giving you the fast boots, and generally ignoring the 90% of the credit that the SSD deserves.

The simple fact of the matter is, like so many other lawyers who initiate this type of suit, this guy is a parasite. As for getting this turned into a "class action suite", that would be success beyond his wildest dreams. He'll stands the chance of pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees, and the people who sign on with him, (such as yourself(?)), will get a check cut for fifty cents, provided that he wins. I wouldn't be surprised if this is a personal moonlight project, from an RIAA / MPAA leech. Or at the very least, someone who has studied their methods.
 
ReederOnTheRun said:
I really hope Microsoft losses this one. I love Windows 8, and the Surface is really cool to use, but this isn't okay.
Click to expand...

lol, you love windows 8 but you want microsoft to loss?

did you know that windows 8 consumes ~16gb or more drive space?
(windows installation + hiberfil.sys + pagefile.sys + swapfile.sys)

drive space consumed by surface should also be similar.
 
ReederOnTheRun said:
I really hope Microsoft losses this one. I love Windows 8, and the Surface is really cool to use, but this isn't okay.
Click to expand...
Why don't you just do what you're supposed to do in the first place, quit complaining, and buy the damned 64GB version?

The "Surface" has at least one USB port, that's not quite where I think this lawyer should stick his external hard drive, but it would be a start.
 
ReederOnTheRun said:
I really hope Microsoft losses this one. I love Windows 8, and the Surface is really cool to use, but this isn't okay.
Click to expand...
If MS loses this I see more lawsuits coming against every single computer (phone, tablet, mp3, camera, camcorder, etc) company and HDD maker there is and that is not a good thing. The only difference here is the amount lost is more visible but it is not new and has been the case since almost the beginning of computers.
 
In fairness, if I bought a 32GB device I'd expect about 20GB of space or at least more than half to be available. But, as space is expandable via microsd card then I don't see what the problem.
 
Its not about legality or software design, its about advertising what the customers will actually be getting. Its a moral issue. They came up with a great product, it'd just be a shame if they lost their customer's confidence in them just to cover up the actual storage capacity.
 
Microsoft is not the source of this issue. I don't see the law-suit gaining any ground, but then I could be wrong once again.
 
ReederOnTheRun said:
Its not about legality or software design, its about advertising what the customers will actually be getting. Its a moral issue. They came up with a great product, it'd just be a shame if they lost their customer's confidence in them just to cover up the actual storage capacity.
Click to expand...
So, maybe if the lawsuit is a success, M$ will be forced to ship the "Surface" with the SSD unformatted, and no OS installed. YOU WIN!

Or, as an alternative, M$ could be forced to put a patent statement of the blatantly obvious warning label on the side of the package..."Cigarettes are known to cause lug cancer" .

You really don't have to have a degree in computer science to know that add-in SD storage has been a mainstay of extra cell phone storage capacity for many years (*). Nor do you have to be an IT specialist to know that there hasn't been a computer sold with the full amount of the HDD's rated capacity available. That's pretty much one of the first, primal questions a customer asks the salesman.

But you're absolutely correct, this is a moral issue. IMHO, this lawyer is a typical sociopath, shyster, and a parasite. And you don't have to go much deeper into the morality issue than that. And I don't picture this particular solicitor being above suing his coke dealer for damage to his septum.....:eek:

(*) And even with no OS on a 4GB card, you don't get 4GB of storage.
 
Not all people are techy... if they saw 32GB on the box they assume it has 32gb of free space... this might apply to tablet or phone only?
 
dennis777 said:
Not all people are techy... if they saw 32GB on the box they assume it has 32gb of free space... this might apply to tablet or phone only?
Click to expand...
I expect that a least a decent percentage of people buying these tablets will have experience with storage measurements as they apply to the family desktop.

The best consumer protection, is self education. An educated consumer would immediately understand the discrepancy between gross and net storage capacity. After which, the intelligent way forward would be to make a decision whether or not to purchase the upgrade to the 64GB model, or establish a viable strategy regarding the tablet, and external storage devices. You can't take your entire Blu-Ray collection with you on an iPad, and you can't with a surface either.
 
captaincranky said:
So, maybe if the lawsuit is a success, M$ will be forced to ship the "Surface" with the SSD unformatted, and no OS installed. YOU WIN!

Or, as an alternative, M$ could be forced to put a patent statement of the blatantly obvious warning label on the side of the package..."Cigarettes are known to cause lug cancer" .

You really don't have to have a degree in computer science to know that add-in SD storage has been a mainstay of extra cell phone storage capacity for many years (*). Nor do you have to be an IT specialist to know that there hasn't been a computer sold with the full amount of the HDD's rated capacity available. That's pretty much one of the first, primal questions a customer asks the salesman.

But you're absolutely correct, this is a moral issue. IMHO, this lawyer is a typical sociopath, shyster, and a parasite. And you don't have to go much deeper into the morality issue than that. And I don't picture this particular solicitor being above suing his coke dealer for damage to his septum.....:eek:

(*) And even with no OS on a 4GB card, you don't get 4GB of storage.
Click to expand...

Uhhh, or they could just say how much space it actually has available on it? Crazy I know, but hey, I'm a pretty radical thinker.
 
ReederOnTheRun said:
Uhhh, or they could just say how much space it actually has available on it? Crazy I know, but hey, I'm a pretty radical thinker.
Click to expand...
Well dude, you should look this guy up, and sue because your desktop doesn't have the rated storage capacity either.

There's a purely practical side to this. The OS and apps in a Surface tablet don't take up anymore room than they would on a desktop. SSDs are way more expensive than HDDs. So, isn't this a frivolous lawsuit started simply because people really want to be cool, and have a tablet computer, but can't afford the price of admission if the storage quantity were increased? So you sue because you're broke, is pretty much how that breaks down..

The Apple iPad has the flash modules hard soldered to the mainboard. That leaves no upgrade path for a larger "drive". So, you want this thin, flat, flashy nonsense, you should concomitantly get used to its limitations and shortcomings

To the upside, the world needs more, "radical thinkers", as there must be a windmill left somewhere that hasn't been treated to a good, thorough, tilting...
 
I think the situation isn't that different on other platforms, e.g. on SGS3 I only have about 11.1GB available out of 16GB. So, why haven't anyone taken other OEMs to task as well?
 
This isn't a legal issue, just a trivial technical one - if you remove the OS & perform a low-level format, there should be loads of space ;)
PS Warning in anticipation of suit:- not entirely serious
 
Although I'm not 100% with that lawyer, I kind of see his point. The marketing of the Surface is a bit shady....LOOK for $599 you get a WHOPPING 32GB of memory BUY IT NOW!!!!....and then in tiny print hidden somewhere way down where you can't see it without a magnifying glass "but you really only get use 16GB of free storage (sucker).
 
Microsoft does NOT claim to have 32GB (or 64GB) of free space, but to have 32gb of storage.
Which it does...


So, nobody can help it, if this lawyer is a turd.


/end of story
 
Archean said:
I think the situation isn't that different on other platforms, e.g. on SGS3 I only have about 11.1GB available out of 16GB. So, why haven't anyone taken other OEMs to task as well?
Click to expand...
Why anybody is attaching any gravity or significance to an article with the caption, "LA lawyer sues", is a much more profound and perplexing question...!

LA lawyers sue large corporations, or defend Mexican drug cartels. Riddle solved.
 
Forcing ALL companies to be hones about actual capacity for user content is not a ad thing.

Yes us techies know the score but more and more clueless granny types are getting these devices and they lak this education.
 
captaincranky said:
I expect that a least a decent percentage of people buying these tablets will have experience with storage measurements as they apply to the family desktop.

The best consumer protection, is self education. An educated consumer would immediately understand the discrepancy between gross and net storage capacity. After which, the intelligent way forward would be to make a decision whether or not to purchase the upgrade to the 64GB model, or establish a viable strategy regarding the tablet, and external storage devices. You can't take your entire Blu-Ray collection with you on an iPad, and you can't with a surface either.
Click to expand...

almost 50% discrepancy on storage is a bit large not to be notice versus a few missing GB. Still a simple label in the box or advertisement would not hurt."battery not included" "each sold separately".
 
dennis777 said:
almost 50% discrepancy on storage is a bit large not to be notice versus a few missing GB. Still a simple label in the box or advertisement would not hurt."battery not included" "each sold separately".
Click to expand...
I disagree.

Consumers need to learn what it is they are paying for, labeling the box will not help. There is not enough box real-estate to define what is in each and every box.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Kioxia sent 130 TB of solid-state storage to the International Space Station
Replies
0
Views
161
Alfonso Maruccia
A
Daniel Sims
US Department of Justice files broad antitrust suit against Apple
2
Replies
29
Views
593
trparky
T
D
Microsoft's next-gen Surface laptops expected to showcase "true AI" features
Replies
11
Views
364
Bobbydpue
Bobbydpue

Latest posts

Back