I use a playlist that is 4GB is size. It is comprised of 256k AAC. The total play time is 1.6 days. 16GB of music would be over six days worth of music. Do you really need to carry around six days worth of music?
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.
Size of the Average iOS App Increased 16% in Six Months
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I use a playlist that is 4GB is size. It is comprised of 256k AAC. The total play time is 1.6 days. 16GB of music would be over six days worth of music. Do you really need to carry around six days worth of music?
I went from the 16 4s to the 32 5 and I'm liking not having to worry about space or having too many photos. I will for sure be doing the same with the new ipad (have the 16gb right now)
I have a 64 GB iPad 1, and it's getting close to full. All my music is in the iCloud, but I do have a lot of photos on my iPad, since PhotoStream only holds your last 1,000 photos, and I like to keep a subset of my entire photo collection, organized into albums. I'm an admitted app addict, downloading any interesting-looking free app featured in AppAdvice, so I peridocally have to delete things I don't use. A lot of the bigger things are e-magazines and books, especially those with multimedia content. One of the reasons that I got an iPad was because my library of physical books had gotten so big, and I liked the idea of having a more-or-less unlimited library of e-publications that don't take up physical space. The Cloud would be perfect if you could actually keep everything there that you want to, but a lot of e-publications are pulled by the publishers and become unavailable after a time. There's no way I know of to copy them to my Mac's hard drive, so I can swap content on and off of my iPad. Whether I need to keep all this stuff is beside the point because, let's face it, how many people need an iPad, period? I don't really need my physical book library, either, but I have it, and I like books. That's why I'm hoping that the 2013 iPad comes in a 128 GB version, so I don't have to worry about filling it up.
Well, I've paid for two iPads with 64GB and I don't think I will pay a $200 premium again. It is simply too much compared to the alternatives. I can buy other tablets and phones with SDHC/XC slots and spend far less for the same space.
I would be a 64GB iPhone 5 customer in a flash
if it wasn't a $200 premium.I can get a Galaxy S3 this weekend at BB for $99 + $50 for a 64GB SDXC card!
It's time for Apple to increase storage and stop the flash ripoff.
If it exist at all the 8GB device would be fine for schools and other "managed" locations. Well maybe not all that fine but certainly usable.
Honestly though I bought a 32GB device and that is enough either. I'm really hoping for a doubling of flash storage for iPad 4. If that happens I'd be all in for a 128 GB machine.
The thing is it isn't so much the app as it is the data that goes with it. Even photo editing, as simple as it is, doesn't use space the way the associated data does.
swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
Web pages are having the same problem. It's seems like no matter how much faster processors are, how much memory you have, the Web is what still brings computers to a crawl for me. Granted, I tend to open way too many tabs at once, but it seems like the Web is still the great challenge for my computer in terms of CPU and memory usage.
Well, I've paid for two iPads with 64GB and I don't think I will pay a $200 premium again. It is simply too much compared to the alternatives. I can buy other tablets and phones with SDHC/XC slots and spend far less for the same space.
I would be a 64GB iPhone 5 customer in a flash
I can get a Galaxy S3 this weekend at BB for $99 + $50 for a 64GB SDXC card!
It's time for Apple to increase storage and stop the flash ripoff.
I don't completely disagree with you but realize Apple isn't using SD flash. It is not cheap to implement the multi wafer flash chips, but then again it isn't worth $200. Personally I'd prefer that we get something extra for that $200 along with the flash. A faster processor perhaps.
1. Some downtime is to be expected when installing a new device.
2. Computers have far more space than an iPhone/iPad. They can easily store both versions.
3. See #1.
None of your reasons above come even close to rationalizing the poor distribution method currently employed.
As much as iCloud is cool, I don't like trusting my files to it and to get enough storage to use it the way I would like would result in me having to pay yet another fee on top of all the other fee's I already have to pay for stuff. I would much prefer if apple would release some software that would allow you to have your own personal cloud where all the data is stored at home on one of your machines and accessible anywhere. Hell, they should even write the software to run on old Power PC macs as that would be a great use for my old G5, just throw a couple 3TB drives in it and set up a time machine backup with external storage and my old mac has life in it again. Sadly, I know this will never happen though. I agree, 32GB needs to be the new baseline. That is honestly why I don't have an iPad yet, because I am not willing to pay more than the price of a 16GB and I know it isn't enough storage. But honestly, why don't iPad's have an SD slot? The phones, I understand as they are much smaller, but the iPad has so much room for an SD slot of some sort. They could just configure it so that only media goes on the SD card and apps stay on the internal flash that way if you remove the card you don't lose any app functionality, just video's or music and whatnot. That's my 2 cents.
Can you say double the capacity of the iPhone 5S?
Or at least be able to use vector, as I was told by a friend developer that you can't use vector graphics in apps.
Or at least be able to use vector, as I was told by a friend developer that you can't use vector graphics in apps.
True. And it's not at all unprecedented for Apple to produce a stripped down education model.
And THIS is why the one feature on other smartphones/tablets that I care about that iOS devices don't have is expandable storage. You're really hosed when you run out of space on an iPod.
----------
I'm sure this also has to do with new, big apps (not graphics-wise). Office, iWork, iLife, and other PC apps are all coming or have come to iOS.
Ideally there would be some new property that would identify an app that was suitable to be stripped to fit the device when loaded (and would have to conform to additional rules probably). The purchasing or syncing process should then be modified to check for that property, and if present, strip the app appropriately.
Let's see: there's now original iPhone format, iPhone 4/4S format (double resolution in both dimensions), iPhone 5 format (like 4/4S only larger in the longer dimension), iPad 1/2 format, iPad 3 format (double previous as before), and presumably the upcoming iPad mini format...not counting whatever else gets introduced in the future.
That's a lot of fat in a universal app, in terms of its icons and static graphics (not nearly so much in terms of the code, although if a universal app has separate versions of the executable within the app, that could also be stripped down to just the appropriate one). And it's a problem that will only get worse.
Fixing that will take away the one liability of universal apps (which are otherwise great if you have as i do an iPhone and an iPad).
plus, apple doesn't service like amazon. icloud is not free. there is no way I could save all contents expect backup drive. 8GB is just joke. I have 32GB new ipod touch 5th gen. I try to control proper size for my contents. but it only left 5GB now. do you think that 5GB is enough for the rest my use? no.
If this increase continues the older iPhone 5 will only be able to have a few newer apps running.
you right. my GF has 16gb ipad she has no single movie or music, even no game bigger than 100mb, literally 4-5 small 40-50mb games, she uses 80% for reading (which is fraction of the memory)+ email + average photo gallery which is over 6GB.
Dear MacRumors readers,
No one is forcing you to buy the 8GB model. It's the freaking "entry-level" iPad.
Just like almost every other Apple consumer device... it will come in 16GB, 32GB and 64GB.
If you're looking for the cheapest iPad ever made... but you want it to hold the most stuff... maybe this product isn't for you.
No one is forcing you to buy the 8GB model. It's the freaking "entry-level" iPad.
Just like almost every other Apple consumer device... it will come in 16GB, 32GB and 64GB.
If you're looking for the cheapest iPad ever made... but you want it to hold the most stuff... maybe this product isn't for you.
But... but... on CSI, they can zoom in on a pixel to see the reflection of a license plate on glasses from 100 meters away! (all with a VB gui!)
With the same technology, they don't even need those retina images, just make them up runtime!
(Do I really need /sarcasm?)
Here's the solution. Purchasing an app gives you access to all versions, and the complete app can be downloaded to iTunes, but your iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch only downloads the components necessary for that particular advice. For example, purchase an app on your iPhone and it shows up on your iPad, but the iPhone only has iPhone graphics installed and the iPad version only has iPad graphics installed. iPad apps are marginally smaller, and iPhone apps are significantly smaller. Simple, right?
I'm not sure who is to blame here, but I know Android has fixed this issue the right way. On iOS, most large apps, such as big games, cram tones of textures and other app items into a single installer for all devices. For example, some newer games have 480x360 models for the 3GS, textures for 960x640 mobile devices, iPad 1 textures, iPad 2 improvements, iPad 3 retina models, iPhone 5 extended resolution items, etc in a single huge file for everyone. When I open a big game on Android, the app immediately downloads one set of files that will run best on my device. That keeps the overall game size way down... Why cant the iOS ecosystem do the same?
As said, Android apps do this a lot. When you purchase a large game from the Google Play store, you first download a sub 10MB "shell" app which is a downloader if you will. When you first open the game downloader, it sends your system information back to the developer. The graphical item set that is best suited for your device is then downloaded. You have one set of app resources that best matches your individual device and its hardware capabilities, and keeps the file size down.
As said, Android apps do this a lot. When you purchase a large game from the Google Play store, you first download a sub 10MB "shell" app which is a downloader if you will. When you first open the game downloader, it sends your system information back to the developer. The graphical item set that is best suited for your device is then downloaded. You have one set of app resources that best matches your individual device and its hardware capabilities, and keeps the file size down.
Last edited:
So is this a sign of creeping software bloat, lazy programming, or more feature-rich, more capable apps? It does stand to reason that with more processing power at their disposal and more available APIs, developers can make their apps offer more features (which could be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on the features selected and how they are implemented). But it stands to reason that when you increase processing power, memory needs will also increase. I hope Apple has some increased storage for iDevices planned for the very near future. This definitely makes me question the rumor of an 8 GB iPad Mini.