Apple's Live Photos Take Up About 2x Space of Normal Images

[Max(IT)]

It says it's on by default... so I assume we turn it off?

Most of the pictures I take are to enhance my memory (price tags... parking spaces... etc...)

I don't need to go all Harry Potter on those...

Your needs aren't universally valid, so what's the problem here? You still can disable the feature....

It would actually be great if you could change the main image in the video. Sometimes you just miss the best moment by a fraction of a second. But that would require that all images in this 'video' (jpg sequence) use the full resolution.

It would require much more than twice the space that way... And much more processing power.
What about the time between two different shoots?

Anybody still dumb enough to defend 16gb base storage?

Apple.... and for good marketing reasons.

Yep, very true. It's just a little frustrating when you consider all that BS rhetoric they give about 'making the best products in the world' and 'we only think about the user experience', and 'we don't ship junk/profits aren't important'. It's all rubbish.

When did you hear Apple say "profits aren't important" ?

Guys, can someone (maybe a developer) please explain to me why -if really not- the iPhone 6 and 6+ should not support the creation / capture of 'live photos'?
The article specifically states that they basically already capture everything up until the shot is taken but dump everything prior to that. So what's the deal?
a) insufficient specs?
or
b) this restriction makes a good reason for 6/6+ owners to upgrade.
Anyone?

Marketing choice.
I have live photos on my two years old Nokia 1520, surely less powerful than my iPhone 6.

 

[Max(IT)]

So... this is the same thing as Living Images on a Nokia Lumia phone?
That came out last year? http://lumiaconversations.microsoft...hose-moving-moments-with-nokia-living-images/

If so, it's cool to see it on a different phone.
I've been using this for about a year on my Lumia 930, just a shame that no one else has copied or licensed it yet, good to see Apple do so as it's a nice feature that more people should make use of.

Yep, it's the same, basically. Maybe a little more refined.
On Windows phones you can review living images only using the camera app, while in iOS the feature is integrated in the gallery.

You can set up Dropbox/OneDrive to copy every photo you take to your Dropbox/OneDrive account so not really a big deal if you are low on storage space.

And what about you data plan hit ?
I'm on a 2 Gb/mo plan, not exactly unlimited...

 

[Michael Scrip]

Your needs aren't universally valid, so what's the problem here? You still can disable the feature....

The problem is that it makes each picture twice as big. It's not something that is needed on every photo.

So I asked if this feature can be disabled.

You confirmed that it can be disabled.

Crisis averted.

 

[Max(IT)]

Yep lets all go on like happy little sheep and pretend its fine.

I agree with you, but people must vote with their wallets... And I strongly suspect 16 Gb model were popular on previous generation....

I for one am happy  offers a lower cost entry level iPhone.

Clearly those bitching about it haven't considered all the use cases and the customers that these phones actually make sense for. Not everyone uses these phones for things that must be stored on them.




In my case, my disabled 73 year old dad has a 16g iPhone. I'm glad we saved $100 on it. It only gets upgraded when the old version no longer works.

With his disabilities it's much easier for him to use a touch screen handheld than a real computer.

-He doesn't take pictures or video.
-He doesn't use Apple maps
-Doesn't use any apps at all really except one for the latest sports scores and the weather.


What he can do, that makes life worth living for an old disabled guy is what's important!!

-FaceTime with his grand daughter!
-View shared photo albums from the family
-See what friends and family are doing on Facebook.
-listen to his small music collection or streaming radio.
-surf the Internet
-watch YouTube
-get text messages


............for me...........I can check in on his location to keep track of him and make sure he is safe!!!! The iphone gives him an added sense of freedom thinking his caregivers aren't always checking in on him!



For many people there is a LOT an iPhone can do that doesn't require storage. Get over your cheap selves. If YOU need more then pony up and buy more. But there are people out there, lots of them, that do just fine with the cheaper phone and are thankful for it.

Your dad could have made the same things on a 32 Gb model at the same price tag.... what's your point ?

You're telling me that it takes more to store a picture that's essentially video than it does a normal picture? No way!


For those complaining about the smallest iPhone being 16GB, how has that non-stop complaining for the past couple years worked? Has Apple heard your cry on some random internet forum and changed their ways?

Surely Apple did analyze the market better than us folks....

Yep lets all go on like happy little sheep and pretend its fine.

I'd buy the 64 Gb model anyway, mate

 

[Jsameds]

I use WP, IOS and Android, I switch a lot and they all have their merits, you don't have to hate one platform unless you're a fanboi.

You don't have to be a fanboi to not like something. I've given Android a fair shot and can't stand it.

 

[oldmacs]

I agree with you, but people must vote with their wallets... And I strongly suspect 16 Gb model were popular on previous generation....

I would agree with that also, but I do think it should be up to Apple as a wealthy company, to make the leap.

 

[RuffyYoshi]

Unfair? Go live in a third-world country and then tell me what unfair is. We're talking about iPhones, not the cure for AIDS or the solution to world hunger. If you can afford a new iPhone, 16GB or otherwise, please stop complaining.

Gotta love that good ol' Third Word card people tend to pull out in an argument.

 

[Steve121178]

And what about you data plan hit ?
I'm on a 2 Gb/mo plan, not exactly unlimited...

Wi-Fi?

 

[Max(IT)]

Wi-Fi?

Yep, but there are occasions when I can't be within WiFi coverage for hours or even days.
I can't rely on cloud storage for everything....

 

[Steve121178]

Yep, but there are occasions when I can't be within WiFi coverage for hours or even days.
I can't rely on cloud storage for everything....

Just how many photos are you going to take for this to even be an issue? It's like anything in life, plan ahead. If you are low on storage, do something about it before you travel.

 

[mdridwan47]

Here's the thing with what you said—Apple has a literal CRAPTON of money in the bank. I'm pretty sure they can afford to do away with the 16GB tier. But they won't, because they're greedy, and also because people are stupid and will buy it without thinking, because Apple is perfect and everything they do is awesome.

I'm waiting for the day this comes back to bite Apple in the ass.

I agree with your analysis except the

"because Apple is perfect and everything they do is awesome."

part.

 

[maflynn]

[MOD NOTE]
Please stop the bickering - some posts were removed as they did not add to the discussion

 

[the Rebel]

Surely Apple did analyze the market better than us folks....

Traditionally Apple does not usually do very much actual market analysis before launching products.

 

[the Rebel]

Just how many photos are you going to take for this to even be an issue?

30 minutes or less of 4K video away from a WiFi network easily makes local iPhone storage an issue for someone with a limited data plan.

 

[the Rebel]

The only possibly defendable excuse for Apple's failure to increase to the baseline iPhone 6S storage from 16GB to 32GB would be if Apple is still finishing off one of their pre-purchase contracts for raw 16GB NAND storage.

Otherwise the manufacturing costs is just simply not a valid excuse for the decision. The current market price difference for raw 16GB NAND vs raw 32GB NAND used in Apple's manufacturing of iPhones is negligible. Ergo, the accusations of Apple choosing 16GB because Apple is greedily reducing the manufacturing cost per unit makes no sense. For a company generating over $10 billion in profits per quarter while selling slightly less than 50 million total iPhones per quarter, the extra manufacturing cost of using 32GB instead of 16GB in the entry level iPhone 6S would be miniscule.

The potential up-sell of the 64GB models might offer more hypothetical profits if the consumers are given the choice of "16GB vs 64GB for $100 more" but it is naive to believe that false dichotomy is the actual question that will be contemplated by the majority of potential iPhone 6S buyers. Most of the potential iPhone 6S buyers already have an iPhone. They will not only be comparing the price and specs of one iPhone 6S to another iPhone 6S; they will also be comparing those prices and specs to the $0 cost of staying with the specs of their current 16GB, 32GB, or 64GB iPhone.

For potential buyers who currently have a 16GB iPhone, they will first be wondering if the new 16GB iPhone 6S offers enough new features to justify buying a new phone.

Since no rational person buying an entry level iPhone 6S would complain about having "too much memory" if the entry level was 32GB instead of 16GB, any current 16GB iPhone owner would be more tempted by a new 32GB iPhone 6S than a new 16GB iPhone 6S at the same price.

For potential buyers who currently have a 32GB or 64GB iPhone, the new 16GB iPhone 6S is almost certainly going to be perceived as somewhat of a step backwards unless they do feel that their current iPhone has "too much memory." Thus they are likely to completely dismiss the 16GB iPhone 6S and will be trying to justify buying a 64GB iPhone 6S vs continuing with their current 32GB or 64GB iPhone.

So, although giving consumers a choice between a 16GB iPhone 6S or 64GB iPhone 6S might sell more of the $100 more 64GB model than by giving consumers a choice between a 32GB iPhone 6S or 64GB iPhone 6S, the more important question is whether a 32GB iPhone 6S would sell better than a 16GB iPhone 6S.

 

[JamesPDX]

Their newspapers and other leaflets have videos in them.

And the photos (framed, etc) that people kept.

 

[Phoenixx]

The very fact that Apple has increased the amount of memory in both the mid models AND the higher level models of iPhones speaks volumes about more memory being neccessary. Yet they insist on an entry level model at 16gb, which is effectively useless for all but the most basic user. Seriously Apple, why bother coming up with a new phone, and then hamstring most of its features with a lack of memory?

The sad thing is that the other type of user likely to buy a 16gb model is likely to be NEW iPhone users who are unaware of what they will encounter with the lack of memory until it is too late. Is Apple trying to drive new users of their product straight back to Android?

 

[TheFrost123]

So just hi res short videos then?

RTFA. It's a bundle of 12mp jpegs. If its sent to a non-Live Photo capable device it's seen as a jpeg.