Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Live Photos Take Up About 2x Space of Normal Images
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Tim Cook: And we called it Gif Animator!!!!!
Microsoft: I thing I already saw this thing before...
Microsoft: I thing I already saw this thing before...
Nokia / Microsoft have had this feature 'living photos' supported for a long time. TBH the novelty wears off quickly.
Why am I not surprised to see complaints about the 16GB capacity issue. Please folks stop being cheap and hoping that you can get a 32GB iPhone for the price of 16GB. This topic has been beaten to death so many times. BTW, trust me, 32GB won't even cut it if the pictures with Live Photos are 2x the size. I have the 128GB iPhone 6 and I've got 32GB left on it. If Apple gives you the 32GB model you'll then start to cry, cry, cry "Oh why can't Apple just make 64GB the entry level model? Boo hoo hoo!" It'll never end with cheapskates.
If I purchase a 6S, the first thing I will do is turn this gimicky "feature" off, and never turn it back on. In fact, I may be in a minority, but I am not happy about 12 megapixel photos, being that pictures taken with the phone will now take 50% more memory than with the old 8 MP camera. I was going to buy a 64 MB phone. I may have to consider a 128 MB phone. I currently have a 32 GB iPhone 5 that is almost maxed out storage-wise, and I am now up for a replacement. I have not ruled out getting an iPhone 6, but I will proabably still go with a 6S, just for the harder aluminum as well as the speed increase.
Sorry that the phone you want to buy is too advanced. Maybe try the iPhone 6?
P.s. if the memory options really were 64MB and 128MB we really would have an issue on our hands!
That's what I said. This and Siri jumping back 15 seconds and temporarily enabling captions got very loud reactions from me. "IT TAKES HARRY POTTER PHOTOS!!"
While I would also love to see the base storage increase and have a 128gb middle tier, I doubt your assertion that they would make more profit with this model.
To acearchie.............I am not sure "too advanced" is the right way to put it. But I indeed may end up getting a 6 instead of a 6S. I just have to weight the faster speed and harder shell and extra year of "future-proofing" for the 6S with the lower cost of the 6 and the smaller memory footprint of the photos. I am not an extreme power user, so the 6 may indeed work for me. In any case, I plan to keep the new phone for at least 3 years.
15,000+ photos and you're complaining about only having 16GB? Maybe invest on the 128GB if you intend to keep that much photos in your phone. Just sayin'
I think they'll look amazing in black and white. The reason I don't think this will be a novelty is you'll see a bit of movement every time you swipe thru your pictures (which I do a lot) and It'll be very cool to see some movement - you'll notice when a picture isn't live. Plus Facebook is supporting them.
Last edited:
NOPE! Live Photos ain't Living Pictures and vice versa. Concept IS similar, but execution is totally different.[/QUOTE]
No one really cares how its being achieved. The fact is result is the same.
My mom knows about tech as much as a seagull about quantum physics. I bought her iPhone 5S as a present when it first came out. The phone and iCloud storage were full maybe 2 months after that.
My parents live far from the city and we have goats and bees and 5 dachshundslots of land and a beautiful view anyway you look. Its a crime not to safe those moments for later generations.
So tell me exactly who the hell for is that 16 GB iPhone? Someone who has 5 contacts in the phone, doesn't take pictures or video and doesn't do basically **** with it?
I don't know who the 16GB iPhone is for, and I don't really care because I know for sure it's not for me. Clearly it's not for your parents either since they take pics and videos, too bad you didn't think of the importance of all these memories when you bough them a cheaper/lower capacity iPhone.
Pretty much this is the way I look at it... as the owner of a 16MB iPhone, 50MBs of iCloud does the trick and for $12 a year... it's a no brainer. Storage issues solved.
Cool. Full res it is. Though I can't imagine very many opportunities to see the full resolution for most people for quite some time.
They wouldn't necessarily make more profit right now, but when they inevitably do then users will have more room for pricier pro apps.
He is not suppose to pay for more space he should be getting 32GB at the price he paid for the 16GB phone. Extra space for the same price is not going to hurt anything.
By the time they FINALLY make 32GB entry level it will likely be a joke as well.
Yes, that person exists and showed how much money Apple makes with the current set up.
Somebody posted that calculation and it goes into BILLIONS.
This is very simple: If somebody has requirements for more GB, it's available. Costs more, yes, but Apple decides who spends its money, not consumers.
The "more money for more features/larger sizes" concept is everywhere in every industry.
You want a cup of coffee 8 oz. costs X 16 oz. costs more.
Let's tell Starbucks , DD etc. that it's just a little more water and a few grams of coffee which they buy in bulk and costs them very little extra.
So, they should do away with the 8 oz. size even though there may be consumers who don't want more than 8 oz. and sell the 16 oz. for the 8 oz. price.
Makes a lot of sense.
No one really cares how its being achieved. The fact is result is the same.[/QUOTE]shhhhh Apple invented it...