Yeah, it would have taken it out of my consideration as well. But even at the time, the conclusion didn't sit well with me. There was no way that the system took that much space.
An entire damning article was written about this and went viral merely from the reporting of space from the Settings app in the phone. No other attempt was made to verify this information or even confirm what was using that space if it turned out be true.
And this "correction" posting on HN will likely not make it to the front page or have nearly the discussion the original article had.
What ever happened to using GiB to avoid confusion?
Also, I don't buy it being a bug with that, that'd mean the app is doing its space calculations in gigabytes internally, instead of in bytes. Who does that?
"Our software isn't bloated, it just can't do maths!" isn't the great defence one may think it is.
It's perfectly understandable that the used space can be indicated in GB instead of GiB, but the total size also shows GB. The phone claims 512GB of total space, not the 476GiB this article would suggest.
In other words: the phone lies. It claims 512GB on the box but when you try to use that, you end up with less actual usable space. Samsung, of course, doesn't want to label their phone as 476GiB when their boxes say 512GB so I doubt they'll fix it with accurate numbers.
Sure, you can fix the correction, but the progress bar and the section of unusable space is still just as big.
For those like me who wanted to know the actual OS size:
> So how much storage space does the Android system actually use on the Galaxy S23 series? The answer is about 20GB, which is still a lot but not nearly as much as the 60GB that the system settings report.
Most of this looks right, but they completely screwed up the math for 512GB. I think they took the correct number for 256 gigs and then added 256 instead of doubling it. And also rounded something slightly wrong. So it was only 3.5% off.
But the numbers for 128, 256, and 1TB are all fine.
12 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 39.5 ms ] threadhttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34682225
A reminder that extraordinary claims should require extraordinary evidence.
Probably was an interesting meeting about this at some point.
An entire damning article was written about this and went viral merely from the reporting of space from the Settings app in the phone. No other attempt was made to verify this information or even confirm what was using that space if it turned out be true.
And this "correction" posting on HN will likely not make it to the front page or have nearly the discussion the original article had.
Also, I don't buy it being a bug with that, that'd mean the app is doing its space calculations in gigabytes internally, instead of in bytes. Who does that?
It's probably empty storage over-provisioning space.
It's perfectly understandable that the used space can be indicated in GB instead of GiB, but the total size also shows GB. The phone claims 512GB of total space, not the 476GiB this article would suggest.
In other words: the phone lies. It claims 512GB on the box but when you try to use that, you end up with less actual usable space. Samsung, of course, doesn't want to label their phone as 476GiB when their boxes say 512GB so I doubt they'll fix it with accurate numbers.
Sure, you can fix the correction, but the progress bar and the section of unusable space is still just as big.
People call support asking why their speeds aren’t as advertised and ISPs have the audacity to go “well ackchyually”.
What is this weird excuse, as if it’s some kind of mobile technical limitation that the device has to lie about available space?
> So how much storage space does the Android system actually use on the Galaxy S23 series? The answer is about 20GB, which is still a lot but not nearly as much as the 60GB that the system settings report.
I suppose in Samsungs defence, they probably put it in "System" to avoid creating another excuse to put it in an "Other" category.
The problem here was with tech articles just assuming things and creating news out of it.
But the numbers for 128, 256, and 1TB are all fine.