Legally, Microsoft is right.
Their devices have 32GB of flash storage.
However, with such weight of pre-installed applications leaving only 16GB of space that can be used, still advertising the device as 32GB of storage is certainly dishonorable.
(Not that corporations have a problem with that.)
Is there any kind of remedy in US courts that allows for penalties to be levied on frivolous lawsuits? No-one buys a phone, tablet or PC and expects the entire storage space to be available for their use, granted that Windows RT is far larger than Android or iOS, but it is no more misleading than any other PC maker.
Poking around a bit, Andrew Sokolowski was a Senior Attorney at the firm that filed the class action suit over Facebook's IPO, so he's not just someone trying to make a name for himself.
While I don't see the suit as having any merit (as the free space on the device is easily-obtained knowledge for anyone who read ANY review of it) I do think that, for a device intended for more serious use cases than angry birds, the Surface could certainly use more storage, especially given the tiny cost it would have added.
Besides, Microsoft could have just had it start at 128 GB, and used that as a marketing thing.
A huge chunk of the storage space is used by the recovery tools. The OS does not actually take 10+ GB of space. Imagine that it has an entire Windows 8 installation DVD image saved on the device. And even though iOS might take up less space because of a lack of the recovery tools and many, many other features, when you try to use the over wifi update process for an iDevice it wants about 2GB of free space before it can procede. It needed more than 2.2 GB for this 3rd gen iPad I am posting this comment with. So yeah, I guess you could argue that iOS needs another 2+ GB on top of what it already uses in order to fully function. So yeah, I guess I am trying to say that some people will complain about anything and anyone can find something to complain about if they look hard enough.
I for one believe that companies should advertise the FREE space available on devices (that goes for all hdd's, ssd's, phones, tablets, etc). That way consumers can make a more informed choice about how much of their own data they can fit on it. On that basis I hope Microsoft looses and that they have to change their advertising (for all companies).
Every name brand computer comes with a XXXGB HD, yet they put the recovery software on there so therefore you always end up with less HD space because of that. I don't see it as any different and if they win, then Dell, HP, and every other computer should be sued as well.
[citation][nom]alevox[/nom]Is there any kind of remedy in US courts that allows for penalties to be levied on frivolous lawsuits? No-one buys a phone, tablet or PC and expects the entire storage space to be available for their use, granted that Windows RT is far larger than Android or iOS, but it is no more misleading than any other PC maker.[/citation]
I believe that for that there would have to be a counter-suit by the defendant (MSFT). I have heard of penalties for frivolous lawsuits in the past, but don't know for sure how that goes.
But you'd be surprised by how many people buy a PC and can't fathom why there isn't as much space available as is stated on the drive. This lawyer is either trying to make an expensive point, or really shouldn't be anyone's lawyer since he can't read not-even-that-fine-print.
[citation][nom]edogawa[/nom]This is a tad ridiculous, when we buy a hard drive, we don't expect exactly 500GB, or 1TB; why would/should this be any different?[/citation]
maybe not the average computer enthusiast, but most certainly the average consumer does expect the amount advertised. i actually think OEMs should advertise what they sell based on the free space available for use. this methos of advertising more space than the available space has gone since forever, but that doesnt necesarily make it right. the average consumer that isnt a computer enthusiast is always going to be misled.
[citation][nom]wemakeourfuture[/nom]All manufacturers advertise 1GB = 1,000,000,000 byeswhen in fact the actual storage on the machine considers 1GB = 2^30 bytes. That always gets people.Plus add formatting it gets reduced even further.Then we start to add the OS and most mobile devices it takes 1-2 gigs, but MS its closer to 10+ gigs.32GB Android/iOS will get you about 28GB free, with MS you get 16GB, but MS is charging 16GB price I suppose for their 32GB model...[/citation]
That and windows says GB when it means GiB in windows explorer, confuses people more!
i have a 2TB HDD, after being formatted i get ~1.81 TB usable, so I'm getting 90% of what's advertised, which isn't bad. I think the lawyers is just making the point that with the surface you're getting only 50% of usable space than what's advertised. Average consumers aren't going to know that the surface takes up 16GB and that you're only left with 16GB to use, which I see how people can see it as misleading.
What if companies sold 2TB HDDs with 1TB of it being unusable. Do you think they should tell the consumers?
Honestly I think that this case might have merit. I don't think that this can really be equated to the difference between advertised and formatted capacities on HDDs or SSDs since on the 32GB surface we're talking about only half of that being usable as opposed to 90% of it. The average consumer buys a 32GB tablet and expects at least close to 30GB after formatting etc. It would have been a lot better for Microsoft to advertise the tablets with their respective usable capacities.
Bad decision making by MS. I agree that this lawsuit is stupid, but MS should have chosen more wisely and offered the 64GB version as their base or designed the OS to not take up so much space. I'd love to know their discussions on this "issue" while they were designing it.