• Great articles on other sites
  • RSS Great articles on other sites

  • Blog, Gadgets - Written by on Thursday, January 24, 2013 14:13 - 38 Comments

    Surface storage misleading? Choice files complaint

    blog You may have noticed, if you’ve bought one of Microsoft’s new Surface tablets, that you haven’t actually gotten the storage you paid for. If you buy a 32GB Surface, you only get 16GB of usable space, with the rest taken up by Windows 8 RT and its associated apps. A similar situation applies with the 64GB model, where you only get 45GB of space.

    Consumer watchdog Choice objects to this kind of behaviour, and has referred Microsoft to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission over the situation. Choice writes (we recommend you click here for the full article):

    “According [to] Microsoft’s own website, the 32GB version has only 16GB of available hard disk space and the 64GB version has only 45GB of available hard disk space. However, this information does not appear on the actual Surface packaging, so it’s unlikely consumers will be aware of it when making their purchasing decision.”

    To be honest, while Microsoft’s storage use is a little extreme in this case, we can’t say we think this is a huge deal. If you buy almost any smartphone, tablet, PC or Mac or, basically, any device which has a hard disk and some form of operating system, you’re likely to find the same situation, and many reviews state explicitly that only a certain percentage of the advertised space is actually usable. After two decades of buying computing devices en-masse, we think most people understand this. However, the Surface example is a little bit more extreme than most, so there may be a case for the ACCC to step in here. Just don’t hold your breath waiting for Microsoft to comply.

    Image credit: Microsoft

    submit to reddit

    38 Comments

    You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

    1. Ausgnome
      Posted 24/01/2013 at 4:00 pm | Permalink |

      I can happily say there is not one Microsoft product in my home
      so I don’t care

      sorry my bias is showing ;)

      • PointZeroOne
        Posted 24/01/2013 at 4:02 pm | Permalink |

        Then why even comment?

      • Posted 24/01/2013 at 4:04 pm | Permalink |

        -Hotmail/Windows Live for your kids email?
        -Xbox?
        -MS Office for your Mac?
        -No Windows Phones?

        • Nobby6
          Posted 24/01/2013 at 5:39 pm | Permalink |

          -Hotmail/Windows Live for your kids email?
          I have my own domain and VPS, so my own mail server

          -Xbox?
          nup

          -MS Office for your Mac?
          wash your mouth out with a good burbon, I use opensuse and fedora linux, there also Apache’s OpenOffice for those poor souls forced to use windaz

          -No Windows Phones?
          ewww Android all hte way

          As to the story, always knew windaz was bloatware, but wholly $#%$^ng $##!@ that usage is ridiculous

          • Posted 25/01/2013 at 10:30 am | Permalink |

            let me guess: you’ve never even tried a windows phone?

            seriously, it’s like being on the whirlpool forums when you see posts like this…

          • Woolfe
            Posted 25/01/2013 at 2:04 pm | Permalink |

            Bourbon is for fence sitters…. Those who can’t decide between Scotch and Rum ;-)

    2. BrownieBoy
      Posted 24/01/2013 at 4:48 pm | Permalink |

      Sorry, Renai, but this *is* a big deal.

      5% of the advertised disk space being unavailable is one thing, but 50%? That’s a rort!

      Microsoft is taking the piss out of consumers with this one and good on Choice for pulling them up on it. Their defence that consumers can always check the store catalogs to see actual specs beggars belief.

      Proud to be a Choice subscriber!

      • Posted 24/01/2013 at 5:17 pm | Permalink |

        I strongly disagree with you.

        By this own logic, you could argue that ALL storage sizes are misleading.

        SD cards, Phone storage, Hard disks once formatted.

        The logic behind Choice’s reasoning is very poor. I agree that Microsoft’s OS is very bloated for a tablet, I’m certain they’ll begin trimming it down as the service updates arrive (so far its had one update a week since launch of Windows 8), but now – its just mass panic.

        Besides, its got support for external disks via USB , external wireless storage and external SD

        • Nobby6
          Posted 24/01/2013 at 5:40 pm | Permalink |

          “By this own logic, you could argue that ALL storage sizes are misleading”
          They certainly are once formatted, but 50% for the OS is, it is beyond bloat.

        • Annoying Old Fart
          Posted 25/01/2013 at 5:34 pm | Permalink |

          “ALL storage sizes are misleading. ”

          Why yes, so they are. Until we see a comment such as “Simulated facts. Objects are smaller than we say.” on each and every box, Choice has a good case. We few Delimiter readers may be aware that sales and marketing people often can’t be trusted to even understand what they’re saying, but “everyone does it” isn’t much of an excuse.

          • Posted 25/01/2013 at 5:37 pm | Permalink |

            @Annoying Old Fart

            The interesting thing is, if Microsoft just changed the way Windows calculated space, there wouldn’t be an issue. A GB would then be 1 Billion bytes TO WINDOWS and a 32GB disk would BE a 32GB disk, instead of a 29.8GiB (GB) one.

      • Posted 25/01/2013 at 10:35 am | Permalink |

        so when are choice going after EVERY laptop, netbook, phone or any other thing that runs a storage medium and software that lives on it?

        give me a break.. what a waste of time.

    3. Fenixius
      Posted 24/01/2013 at 6:26 pm | Permalink |

      And yet, there’s no complaint about the difference between Gigabytes (1024 MB) and Gibibytes (1000 MiB) on all hard drives? Choice is a bit hit-and-miss methinks. Could apply this logic to any machine with an OS on it, too, including game consoles…

      • Karl
        Posted 24/01/2013 at 7:18 pm | Permalink |

        “Gigabytes (1024 MB) and Gibibytes (1000 MiB)”
        You got those the wrong way around.
        The ones with the “bi”, so Gibi-, Mebi- etc are the larger ones which are powers of two, this is what most operating systems and so on use.
        Gigabytes and megabytes and all the ones we all use in general parlance are the powers of 10, which is what hard-drives use. Which is clearly labelled on any packaging etc. I have ever seen.

        • Posted 24/01/2013 at 7:31 pm | Permalink |

          That’s a bit misleading too.

          ALL electronic storage uses Gibibytes for storage. Not just OSs- HDD, SSD, SD, RAM everything.

          We just CALL them all Gigabytes, when they’re not.

          • Greg W
            Posted 24/01/2013 at 7:55 pm | Permalink |

            I don’t recall the last time I saw a hard drive that didn’t say 1GB = 1 000 000 000 bytes.

            • Posted 24/01/2013 at 8:01 pm | Permalink |

              I’m not talking about the packaging. I’m talking about the physical usage of the storage. It is ALL Gibibytes.

              The fact that HDDs advertise it as Gigabytes is annoying, but not what I’m talking about. I was simply stating that it isn’t because of OSes that Gibibytes are used. ALL electronic storage uses Gibibytes because all electronic storage is binary. (at the moment) OSes simply state it in Gibibytes, rather than like advertising on HDDs stating it as Gigabytes.

          • Trevor
            Posted 24/01/2013 at 8:03 pm | Permalink |

            MS, Apple & Google could do a lot to eliminate this confusion by deciding to refer to KB, MB & GB as kibi-bytes, mibi-bytes & gibi-bytes within their OS’s & file systems…

            • Posted 24/01/2013 at 8:07 pm | Permalink |

              @Trevor

              Mmmm, I don’t think so. Most people I know think of Bytes in base 10 form. (those I work with don’t, obviously, as we are tech people). Getting that to change after 40 years is gonna be pretty tough….

            • Greg W
              Posted 24/01/2013 at 8:30 pm | Permalink |

              Apple do. 10.7 uses the proper 10^9 for GB not 2^30 in their disk usage calculations.

              • Posted 24/01/2013 at 8:39 pm | Permalink |

                The OS simply uses the other algorithm for calculations. And, in fact, Apple is overestimating storage space for their customers by 24MB per Gigabyte in that case.

                The information is still stored in Gibibyte form (well, Kibibyte form actually, seeing as the sectors are only KiB in size). It has to be. There’s no other way for it to be. Unless you’re suggesting Apple use something OTHER than binary computing?

                • Greg W
                  Posted 24/01/2013 at 9:31 pm | Permalink |

                  Now I’m confusing myself.

                  I remember when 10.7 came out and the reported total disk size was less than what it was under 10.6. My mind’s failing to comprehend what math is in play at this hour.

                  • Posted 24/01/2013 at 9:46 pm | Permalink |

                    @Greg

                    Indeed. It’ll do your head in.

                    That’d be right:

                    10.6 would’ve been reporting in GiB which are 1024MiB.
                    10.7 would’ve been reporting in GB which are 0.09% smaller than a GiB.

                    Seems counterintuitive, but, essentially, all Apple did was cut the 24 off the end of each 1000 and not report it. Hence, it appeared the drive had shrunk.

    4. Trevor
      Posted 24/01/2013 at 7:58 pm | Permalink |

      Maybe I’m missing something in the tablet market, but this seems like business as usual to me. The OS is installed on the only drive, which happens to not be very big, but the same rules have applied to PCs, notebooks & even phones for, well, as long as such products have existed. Yes, Win8RT is probably bigger than it needs to be, but the fact is WinRT tablets have platform & integration features that aren’t available on other tablets, so bloatware or not, if you need a Windows tablet you don’t have a great deal of options. I don’t see Choice having a hope in hell with this (and if they get anywhere with it, that will say a lot more about the legal system pandering to the abject stupidity of consumers than it will about Microsoft).

    5. Oliver Townshend
      Posted 24/01/2013 at 10:01 pm | Permalink |

      I own one. I knew it was the case. It isn’t an issue anyway (mainly only used for games at this point). And if I wanted, I could put more memory in.

    6. Paul Krueger
      Posted 25/01/2013 at 11:42 am | Permalink |

      Just because it comes with 16GB of storage does not mean that it’s available. What is next, supposed to have 4 GB of RAM but when you boot the computer you only have 2GB?

      I paid for a Telephone line from Telstra, but when someone is already using it I have zero Telephone lines?

      • Paul Thompson
        Posted 25/01/2013 at 12:42 pm | Permalink |

        Well, if you are using a 32bit OS, and you have a GPU with 2GB of ram…. then that is exactly what happens.

    7. tinman_au
      Posted 25/01/2013 at 12:55 pm | Permalink |

      wow, that’s a pretty chunky OS size for a tablet…apparently, my 16Gb Nexus would actually be a 0Gb one if it had Win8 Tablet installed?

    8. Simon Reidy
      Posted 25/01/2013 at 1:07 pm | Permalink |

      I think the ACCC has a point here. Sure we are all used to getting slightly under the advertised storage space, but with an Apple or Android device, you’re talking a few GB’s at most. 50% of avaiable storage space taken up by the OS is a whole different kettle of fish that most consumers would definitely not expect.

      Windows 8 Pro is of course different to iOS or Android as its full desktop OS, but that’s Microsoft’s problem, and they should print available storage space on the box and make it clear to customers what they are actually going to have available to use.

      I know if I didn’t know much about computers, and got a 64GB device home to find that only 32GB was actually useable, that I would feel very burnt.

      • Simon Reidy
        Posted 25/01/2013 at 1:13 pm | Permalink |

        Just to add to this, how well are salespeople being trained on this fact? It’s something that every customer should be told at time of purchase so they can make an informed decision. Given storage space is a spec that everyone is aware of, it’s one of the first numbers that will be reeled off to customers by clueless salesman just looking at the box, or specs listed in their sales system.

        • Grey Wind
          Posted 25/01/2013 at 1:43 pm | Permalink |

          In regards to salespeople, the case in Australia is that nobody is selling it yet (aren’t harvey norman supposed to be starting soon?)

          I doubt they know this anyway – but i hope microsoft have put the storage info on the box.

      • Simon Reidy
        Posted 25/01/2013 at 1:17 pm | Permalink |

        Update, make that 45GB of available storage, not 32Gb. I was thinking only 50% of storage available for the 32Gb model, not 64Gb.

      • Grey Wind
        Posted 25/01/2013 at 1:41 pm | Permalink |

        To be fair…

        http://surface.microsoftstore.com/store/msstore/Content/pbpage.Surface?ESICaching=off

        (look down the bottom – “in the box”)

        http://www.microsoft.com/Surface/en-AU/storage

        Some laptops with 128GB SSD’s are loaded with 50GB of crapware, plus recovery partitions. i wish mcirosoft could have cut down a little more on the OS, but it doesnt bother me – i have a 64GB microSD card for my surface.

        • seven_tech
          Posted 25/01/2013 at 5:02 pm | Permalink |

          @Grey Wind

          1 GB = 1 billion bytes

          From Microsoft, on Microsoft’s own page. That’s annoying. Because it’s NOT 32GB in Windows. It’s about 29.8GB. (because Windows measures in GiB, not GB)

          No wonder people still get confused….

          So yeah, you’ve gotta take into account that, while the “32 GB” Surface only has “16GB” available, 2 of those are from using the wrong units in the first place….

    9. Woolfe
      Posted 25/01/2013 at 2:15 pm | Permalink |

      I agree with Choice. It should be that it defines the storage on the box. So if it is 32gb then it should have an * which then has a statement attached saying may be less due to OS usage or something.

      A fix like that is simple, and is likely just oversight on the part of MS advertising folk.

      I agree with Choice, because these things NEED to be addressed otherwise companies get away with incorrect advertising.

    10. LetsBeOpenAboutThis
      Posted 16/02/2013 at 4:16 pm | Permalink |

      I know that the old magnetic disc type hard drives all vary slightly in their capacity and that no two of them are exactly alike, But they have always had rated capacities so as to make it less confusing for the customer, As for SSD’s i don’t know enough about them to comment, But what i will say is that the capacity of the drives in question is correct, The fact it has an operating system on there is irrelevant, Where did they think it would be?

      • seven_tech
        Posted 16/02/2013 at 4:23 pm | Permalink |

        @Letsbeopenaboutthis

        I know that the old magnetic disc type hard drives all vary slightly in their capacity and that no two of them are exactly alike

        Correct, this is a function of manufacturing. However, that’s NOT the case in terms of reporting capcacity. ALL HDD’s for many years now have been made approx. 10% over capacity to ensure bad sectors won’t affect the overall capacity reported for the lifetime of the drive. In other words, although each drive has a slightly different capacity, all REPORT exactly the same capacity ie 500GB. Even if they’re 550GB. Or 548GB.”

        As for SSD’s i don’t know enough about them to comment, But what i will say is that the capacity of the drives in question is correct, The fact it has an operating system on there is irrelevant, Where did they think it would be?

        The OS is the reason the drive actually reports less than it has available. HDD and SSD manufacturers use GB (power of 10 decimals) to report capacity. Windows calculates space in GiB (power of 2 decimals) and reports it AS GB. That is why a 120GB drive actually reports as 112GB on Windows, because of the difference in reporting. Of course, as you say, the OS itself does take up alot of the space anyway.

        Personally, I think it’s a non-issue, but I know what I’m talking about. Many of those that don’t understand feel ripped off.

        • LetsBeOpenAboutThis
          Posted 16/02/2013 at 6:04 pm | Permalink |

          I diddn’t comment on GB or GiB as i thought you had already done an excellent job of it, Even though what you described is the major reason for the discrepancy in total disk capacity, there are other things that contribute as well.

          On a completely empty hard disk, the operating system will reserve some amount of space for its own use. For example, the top level directory structure, even if empty, takes some space. Security information, the recycle bin, and other information is placed on the hard disk before you ever create your first file. Exactly how much will vary, depending on how the disk is formatted.

          And of course, if this is your system drive, the operating system may also place certain hidden files that can get quite large, including your swap and hibernation files. Oh and yes I agree its a non issue.




    Get our 'Best of the Week' newsletter on Fridays

    Just the most important stories, one email a week.

    Email address:


  • Enterprise IT stories

    • Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp facepalm2

      If you have even a skin deep awareness of the structure of Australia’s superannuation industry, you’ll be aware that much of the underlying infrastructure used by many of the nation’s major funds is provided by a centralised group, Superpartners. One of the group’s main projects in recent years has been to dramatically update and modernise its IT platform — its version of a core banking platform overhaul. Unfortunately, the $250 million project has not precisely been going well.

    • Qld’s Grant joins analyst firm IBRS peter-grant

      This week it emerged that Peter Grant, the two-time former Queensland Whole of Government CIO (pictured), has joined well-regarded analyst firm Intelligent Business Research Services (IBRS). We’ve long had a high regard for IBRS, and so it’s fantastic to see such an experienced executive join its ranks.

    • Westpac dumps desk phones for Samsung Android mobiles samsung-galaxy-ace-3

      The era of troublesome desk phones tied to physical locations is gradually coming to an end in many workplaces, with mobile phones becoming increasingly popular as organisations’ main method of voice telecommunications. But some groups are more advanced than others when it comes to adoption of the trend. One of those is Westpac.

    • Ministers’ cloud approval lasted just a year reverse

      Remember how twelve months ago, the Federal Government released a new cloud computing security and privacy directive which required departments and agencies to explicitly acquire the approval of the Attorney-General and the relevant portfolio minister before government data containing private information could be stored in offshore facilities? Remember how the policy was strongly criticised by Microsoft, Government CIOs and Delimiter? Well, it looks like the policy is about to be reversed.

    • WA Govt can’t fund school IT upgrades oops key

      In news from The Department of Disturbing Facts, iTNews revealed late last week that Western Australia’s Department of Education has run out of money halfway through the deployment of new fundamental IT infrastructure to the state’s schools.

    • Turnbull outlines Govt ICT vision turnbull-5

      Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull has published an extensive article arguing that the Federal Government needed to do a better job of connecting with Australians via digital channels and that public sector IT projects needn’t cost the huge amounts that some have in the past.

    • NZ Govt pushes hard into cloud zealand

      New Zealand’s national Government announced a whole of government contract this morning for what it terms ‘Office Productivity as a Service’ services. This includes email and calendaring services, as well as file-sharing, mobility, instant messaging and collaboration services. The contract complements two existing contracts — Desktop as a Service and Enterprise Content Management as a Service.

    • CommBank reveals Harte’s replacement whiteing

      The Commonwealth Bank of Australia has promoted an internal executive who joined the bank in September after a lengthy career at petroleum giant VP and IT services group Accenture to replace its outgoing chief information officer Michael Harte, who announced in early May that he would leave the bank.

    • Jeff Smith quits Suncorp for IBM jeffsmith4

      Second-tier Australian bank and financial services group Suncorp today announced that its long-serving top technology executive Jeff Smith would leave to take up a senior role with IBM in the United States, in an announcement which marks the end of an era for the nation’s banking IT sector.

    • Small business missing the mobile, social, cloud revolution iphone-stock

      Most companies that live and breathe the online revolution are not tech startups, but smart smaller firms that use online tools to run their core business better: to cut costs, reach customers and suppliers, innovate and get more control. Many others, however, are falling behind, according to a new Grattan Institute discussion paper.

  • Blog, Enterprise IT - Jul 5, 2014 13:53 - 0 Comments

    Super funds close to dumping $250m IT revamp

    More In Enterprise IT


    Blog, Telecommunications - Jul 5, 2014 12:12 - 0 Comments

    What should the ACCC’s role be in guiding infrastructure spending?

    More In Telecommunications


    Analysis, Industry, Internet - Jun 23, 2014 10:33 - 0 Comments

    ‘Google Schmoogle’ – how Yellow Pages got it so wrong

    More In Industry


    Blog, Digital Rights - Jun 30, 2014 22:24 - 0 Comments

    Will Netflix launch in Australia, or not?

    More In Digital Rights