How do we get Android to spit out the true memory & storage situation?

[Danny D'Amico]

I bought an Optimus F3 for one of my kids and found out belatedly it doesn't
have enough "storage" to install offline mapping programs on it.

Yet, my Samsung Galaxy SIII has absolutely no problem installing more than
a half-dozen offline mapping programs, even with concomitant offline maps.

Comparing the phone specs, I'm still confused simply because nothing
matches up.

Googling, I find the way to find available storage is:
Android:Settings->Storage

The S3 has 1024MB of System Memory RAM & 32GB of built-in storage.
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Samsung-Galaxy-S-III_id6330
Yet, inexplicably (to me), Android:Settings->Storage shows 11.95GB
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3737/11099154624_f8a05495cb_o.gif

The F3 has 1024MB of System Memory RAM & 4GB of built-in storage.
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/LG-Optimus-F3_id7862
Yet, Android:Settings->Storage only shows 1.27GB
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7409/11099217954_10969eb414_o.gif

I realize some of the "storage" is used for built-in programs such as the
Android Operating System itself, but, my confusion lies in *none* of the
specs seem to be shown in the GUI.

Googling, I see that's it's (apparently) "normal" for us to have far less
available memory than what the phone specs say:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/9905584/Which-warns-over-mobile-phone-memory.html

But, how can I *see* the phone specs in the Android Operating System?

That is:
Q: How do we get Android to spit out the true memory & storage situation?

[nob...@nada.com]

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.advancedprocessmanager

[Danny D'Amico]

On Thu, 28 Nov 2013 11:44:44 -0800, nobody wrote:

> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.advancedprocessmanager


Nice. Thanks.

I will download, test, and report back shortly.
Meanwhile, here's the description:

Description
Top 18 features to help you easily and efficiently manage your android
phone.

Android Assistant is one of the most powerful and comprehensive
management tools to improve your android phone's performance. It speeds
up your phone's running speed and saves battery.

No ads: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?
id=com.androidassistant.paid

【Top18 features】
1. Monitor status (cpu, memory, battery)
2. Process Manager (Auto Boost and Quick Boost can distinguish different
types of processes thus will not kill fatal system processes and apps in
Ignore List.)
3. Cache Cleaner
4. System Clean(Browser History, Clipboard, Market History, Gmail
History, Google Earth History, Google Map History)
5. Save Battery Settings(bluetooth, wifi, gps, auto-sync, orientation,
haptic feedback, screen brightness, timeout)
6. File Manager
7. Startup Manager
8. Batch Uninstall
9. Battery use
10. Volume Control
11. Ringer
12. Startup Time
13. Startup Silent(Menu->Settings->Startup Silent)
14. System Info
15. Widget(Quick Booster[1,4], Shortcuts[4])
16. App 2 SD(Support android2.2 and later)：Get more free internal phone
storage space
17. Batch Installation
18. App backup and restore


KW: task kill taskkill ATK app killer tool tools taskmanager task manager
system panel systempanel process manager processmanager memory taskpanel
task panel Advanced Process android 2.3 Android Assistant tablet

[Danny D'Amico]

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 02:58:07 +0000, Danny D'Amico wrote:
> I will download, test, and report back shortly.

The S3 specs are
System Memory RAM = 1.024GB
Built-in storage = 32GB
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Samsung-Galaxy-S-III_id6330

Android:Settings->Storage only shows 11.95GB
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3737/11099154624_f8a05495cb_o.gif

Without a microSD card in the slot (i.e., the external memory slot is
empty), Android Assistant version 5.6 build 67 shows:
RAM = 1.56GB
ROM = 12.05GB
SDcard = 11.05 GB
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2870/11110619666_7ed5555e4e_o.gif

So, now I'm *really confused* since none of the numbers match up,
and, there is no SD card that I know of, but, Android Assistant
says there is one of 11GB size.

Why don't any of these numbers add up to the phone spec?

[Danny D'Amico]

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 03:10:27 +0000, Danny D'Amico wrote:

I also tried Memory Usage

This memory usage app says:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=mem.usage&hl=en
Total=1.594GB Inact=253MB Thres=64MB Avail=431MB Act=1.070GB Low=No
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5475/11110973043_772ee87a8c_o.png

This second memory usage app says:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.rjj.android.memorymonitor&hl=en
/sdcard = 3.22GB
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7378/11110867744_37b75c52a4_o.png

Can someone make sense of this data, with respect to what the system
is supposed to have?
System Memory RAM=1024MB
Built-in Storage=32GB
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Samsung-Galaxy-S-III_id6330

[Juan Wei]

Danny D'Amico has written on 11/28/2013 10:10 PM:

What they call the SD card is the actual internal non-volatile memory.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 13:18:58 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

> What they call the SD card is the actual internal non-volatile memory.

Thanks for clarifying that.

They call it /sdcard but it's only 3.22GB, so, it doesn't match up
with any other spec.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 21:55:40 -0500, Anthony R. Gold wrote:

> Yes, some S3s do have 32GB of internal storage but some others don't.
>
> See: http://www.samsung.com/global/galaxys3/specifications.html

It looks like some are 16GB.
Mine is t-mobile supplied, so, I wonder what they give out.
I can't tell from the specs, but, I'd suspect it is 16GB.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 21:55:40 -0500, Anthony R. Gold wrote:

> Clearly yours is a 16GB phone.

Ooops. Didn't see this in the subsequent post!

[Danny D'Amico]

On Fri, 29 Nov 2013 21:55:40 -0500, Anthony R. Gold wrote:

>> Why don't any of these numbers add up to the phone spec?

>> RAM = 1.56GB
>> ROM = 12.05GB
>> SDcard = 11.05 GB
>> http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2870/11110619666_7ed5555e4e_o.gif
>

> They add fine.

I must be missing how they add up.

If the spec is 16GB of "internal memory", then why is nothing
anywhere near 16GB?

For example, if I add up ROM + internal /sdcard, I get about 23GB.

And, if the spec is 1024 MB RAM, then how do I get MORE than that
(i.e., 1.56GB) when I run the suggested programs?

Nothing adds up, to me, so, I would appreciate a pointer explaining
how this adds up.

Do YOUR phone memory specs add up?

[Danny D'Amico]

On Sat, 30 Nov 2013 09:33:19 -0500, Anthony R. Gold wrote:

> In Systems Settings look at the Storage section.

Heh heh... Look at the original post of this thread.

That OP contains the following observations:

The S3 specs are:
System Memory RAM = 1.024GB

Built-in storage = 32GB or 16GB
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Samsung-Galaxy-S-III_id6330
Yet, Android:Settings->Storage only shows 11.95GB
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3737/11099154624_f8a05495cb_o.gif

Given that, *nothing* whatsoever matches up with the specifications!
- Not Android Settings->Storage
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3737/11099154624_f8a05495cb_o.gif
- Not Android Assistant
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2870/11110619666_7ed5555e4e_o.gif
- Not "Memory Usage" #1:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=mem.usage&hl=en
Total=1.594GB Inact=253MB Thres=64MB Avail=431MB Act=1.070GB Low=No
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5475/11110973043_772ee87a8c_o.png

- Not "Memory Usage" #2:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.rjj.android.memorymonitor&hl=en
/sdcard = 3.22GB
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7378/11110867744_37b75c52a4_o.png

I just tried the SanDisk Memory Zone application:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.sandisk.mz&hl=en
It says only that I have 11.9GB of internal memory:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7387/11144749963_b1d1e20c47_o.gif

The odd thing is that absolutely no application suggested or tested shows the
correct amount of system memory RAM of 1024KB and built-in storage of 16GB.

The fact that nobody accurately knows how much memory they have doesn't
bother anyone but me?

[Danny D'Amico]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 04:06:35 +0000, Danny D'Amico wrote:

> The odd thing is that absolutely no application suggested or tested shows the
> correct amount of system memory RAM of 1024KB and built-in storage of 16GB.

I tried "Android Memory Toolbox Lite", which also displays the wrong data:
Total RAM = 1.594GB (instead of 1.024GB of System Memory RAM)
Internal Memory = 12.335GB (instead of 16GB of Internal Memory)
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7442/11145800383_2159b6be47_o.png

So, out of the half-dozen memory managers I installed, absolutely none
of them reported the correct information of 1,024KB of RAM and 16GB of
internal storage (exclusive of my 32GB external SD card).

This is a sad situation; but I'll keep looking for a memory manager
that can simply discern the truth.

[Bob Martin]

Why? Have you nothing better to do? :-)

[Danny D'Amico]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 05:36:18 +0000, Danny D'Amico wrote:

> So, out of the half-dozen memory managers I installed, absolutely none
> of them reported the correct information of 1,024KB of RAM and 16GB of
> internal storage (exclusive of my 32GB external SD card).

I tried Clean Master, which doesn't report RAM (yet it will free up RAM),
but it too reports 12.1GB of "Device Storage" instead of 16GB:
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3761/11148510753_ee384e902a_o.png

[Danny D'Amico]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 07:45:01 +0000, Bob Martin wrote:

> Why? Have you nothing better to do?

Have you never tried to understand anything?

[John B.]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 07:45:01 GMT, Bob Martin <bob.m...@excite.com>
wrote:

Your Settings > Storage should report the correct formatted memory
sizes. The numbers you are quoting 1024 KB and 16GB are the physical
size of the memory that is installed on your devise but in order to
use the storage the system has to "format' the memory.

You might like to read a bit.
http://superuser.com/questions/575756/wrong-free-space-reported-for-an-ext4-formatted-3tb-drive

http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/13547/ext4-how-to-account-for-the-filesystem-space

https://ext4.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Ext4_Disk_Layout

should give you an idea of how the system works.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 18:04:56 +0700, John B. wrote:

> Your Settings > Storage should report the correct formatted memory
> sizes. The numbers you are quoting 1024 KB and 16GB are the physical
> size of the memory that is installed on your devise but in order to
> use the storage the system has to "format' the memory.

This may be why the 1024KB of RAM turns into 1056KB RAM (formatted)
and the 16GB internal storage turns into 12335MB (formatted).

But, it's interesting, if what you suggest is what's happening, that
the RAM, once formatted, goes up only slightly in usable size, while the
16GB internal sdcard memory goes down by 25% in usable size (to 12GB).

[Danny D'Amico]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 09:59:06 +0000, Danny D'Amico wrote:

I tried to analyze storage space using the "Disk Usage" application:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.diskusage

The results were similar to the rest in that the 16GB internal storage
shows up as 12,335MB (which is 25% less than advertised!).

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5533/11149647423_da27cdc3dd_o.png

[Chris Uppal]

Danny D'Amico wrote:

> The fact that nobody accurately knows how much memory they have doesn't
> bother anyone but me?

The fact that /you/ don't accurately knows how much memory /you/ have doesn't
seem to be bothering anybody very much ;-)

However. Notice a few things:

All of these applications report that you have just shy of 12GB of internal
storage (not including RAM which is a different kettle of fish). So it seems
likely that they are all correct.

So where's the other 4-ish GB ? Note that one of your test apps shows ~4BG of
"ROM". I don't know what it means by that, but I guess that that's where your
missing 4G is. The Android devices seem to have /really/ complicated
filesystem settups, with loopback systems and God knows what else. One thing
that is /possible/ (I have seen it on other embedded systems) is that the
system reserves part of the underlying storage for a sort of "backup" or
"template" copy that is not normally mounted but which is copied to more
accessible store on boot (the idea is to provide extra safety during updates,
and prevent "accidents" during which the filesystem becomes how the owner wants
it to be rather than how the manufacturer intended). Dunno if that's what's
happening here, but it seems very plausible to me.

FWIW, a (old-style) Nexus 7 with 32GB reports that it has 28.17 GB is storage.
A Sony Experia tablet with 32 GB reports that it has 25.68 GB. So the numbers
seem similar to me -- about 4GB "reserved" somehow.

And that's without thinking about the various meanings that different vendors
give to "GB", nor to the question of whether the system is reporting physical
space, or space available after formatting. On the same tablet, a "64 GB" SDXC
card is reported as having 59.45 GB of space.

-- chris

[Danny D'Amico]

I found another app that lists a summary of memory information:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=net.adisasta.androxplorer

But, the numbers still don't match up...

Here's the output of the AndroXplorer on my Samsung Galaxy S3:
Available RAM 310MB
Total Internal Storage Memory = 12.0GB
Total External Storage Memory = 11.9GB

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2860/11150293693_7947d0a413_o.png

[Danny D'Amico]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 12:14:24 +0000, Chris Uppal wrote:

>
> The fact that /you/ don't accurately knows how much memory /you/ have
> doesn't seem to be bothering anybody very much ;-)

Hi Chris,
Thanks for replying as it's not fair for all we Android users to not
have a clue what memory we truly have available in our cellphones.

IMHO, everyone should care how much memory *they* have in their
Android phones, especially since *some* phones' memory isn't extensible.

> All of these applications report that you have just shy of 12GB of internal
> storage (not including RAM which is a different kettle of fish). So it seems
> likely that they are all correct.

It's odd. I agree.

> So where's the other 4-ish GB ? Note that one of your test apps shows ~4BG of
> "ROM". I don't know what it means by that, but I guess that that's where your
> missing 4G is.

That's likely true. But, does anyone else with a Samsung Galaxy exist on
this newsgroup who can confirm this oddity?

> that is /possible/ (I have seen it on other embedded systems) is that the
> system reserves part of the underlying storage for a sort of "backup" or
> "template" copy that is not normally mounted

This is interesting. Thank you for that idea. I'll google to check up on it.

> FWIW, a (old-style) Nexus 7 with 32GB reports that it has 28.17 GB is storage.
> A Sony Experia tablet with 32 GB reports that it has 25.68 GB. So the numbers
> seem similar to me -- about 4GB "reserved" somehow.

Interesting. Thank you for that datapoint.
So, the rule of thumb for all users may be that we have about 4GB less usable
storage than what the manufacturer claims.

Seems to me there should be a better standard. One that is fair to the
consumer and doesn't rob the consumer of 33% of their claimed storage!

> On the same tablet, a "64 GB" SDXC card is reported as having 59.45GB
> of space.

That small difference is well known and is due to the way 1,000 and
1024 differ in use by memory suppliers.

[TJ]

Several things may be at work here. Part of your confusion may come from
the way "gigabyte" is defined. With Linux systems (Android is a Linux
derivative), designations of "kilo," "mega," and "giga" are
binary-based. But drive manufacturers are notorious for using
decimal-based figures. Thus, when your system says "kilo" it means 1024,
where when the manufacturer says it, it means 1000. My 4GB SD cards,
each formatted in FAT32, report themselves to my Linux system as
containing 3.6GB, a difference of 10%.

The file system format also makes a difference. In modern Linux systems,
part of the drive is reserved for root for various system functions,
mostly to keep things functioning if the available space is completely
used up. The standard for this is 5%, but it can easily be made higher
by root if root decides extra safeguards are a good idea. Non-root users
can't change this.

So, (just guessing on the size of these figures) if you have 10% knocked
off for nomenclature differences and file system overhead, and an
additional 10% reserved for root as a safety factor, that's 20% right
there, explaining most of the "discrepancy" you observed.

TJ

[Paul Miner]

On Sun, 1 Dec 2013 04:06:35 +0000 (UTC), Danny D'Amico <da...@is.invalid>
wrote:

>The fact that nobody accurately knows how much memory they have doesn't
>bother anyone but me?

To be honest, it has bothered me, as well. I have a Samsung Galaxy S3 and a
Note II, and neither shows the amount of memory I know they have.

What bothers me much more, however, are some of the responses you've
received in this thread. Some of them were a bit condescending, making it
seem like the numbers really did add up when they clearly don't. Thanks for
sticking with it. I hope you track it down and share what you learn.

--
Paul Miner

[nob...@nada.com]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 13:01:26 -0500, "Anthony R. Gold"
<not-fo...@ahjg.co.uk> wrote:

>On Sun, 1 Dec 2013 15:22:25 +0000 (UTC), Danny D'Amico <da...@is.invalid>
>wrote:
>

>> On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 12:14:24 +0000, Chris Uppal wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The fact that /you/ don't accurately knows how much memory /you/ have
>>> doesn't seem to be bothering anybody very much ;-)
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>> Thanks for replying as it's not fair for all we Android users to not
>> have a clue what memory we truly have available in our cellphones.
>

>That claim surprises me. Under Systems Settings / Storage do you not find
>numbers for Total space and for Available? Unless you believe that display
>is inaccurate you are being told very clearly what memory you truly have
>available in your cellphone. What you don't understand, and I have no
>criticism about your curiosity, is what the phone or Android are doing with
>the remainder of memory that is not being made available to you for storage,
>but that is quite different from that quoted claim and complaint of yours.

That does seem to tell you how the storage is used or reserved for
various things, except for where the OS is. On my Nexus 5 it all looks
pretty accurate to me.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 13:01:26 -0500, Anthony R. Gold wrote:

> That claim surprises me. Under Systems Settings / Storage do you not find
> numbers for Total space and for Available? Unless you believe that display
> is inaccurate you are being told very clearly what memory you truly have
> available in your cellphone. What you don't understand, and I have no
> criticism about your curiosity, is what the phone or Android are doing with
> the remainder of memory that is not being made available to you for storage,
> but that is quite different from that quoted claim and complaint of yours.

What is surprising is that the phone is listed as having either 16GB or
32GB of internal storage, and slightly less than 12GB shows up.

So, 33% of the advertised memory "doesn't exist" or the programs are
reporting it incorrectly.

Since we've recently assumed they're reporting it correctly, it's shocking,
to me, that 1/3 the claimed memory doesn't exist (for all practical purposes).

That's HUGE!

[Danny D'Amico]

On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 04:50:22 +0000, Danny D'Amico wrote:

> Since we've recently assumed they're reporting it correctly, it's shocking,
> to me, that 1/3 the claimed memory doesn't exist (for all practical purposes).

Ooops, it's 1/4 of the claimed memory that doesn't exist.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 11:19:38 -0500, TJ wrote:

> Thus, when your system says "kilo" it means 1024,
> where when the manufacturer says it, it means 1000.

We have to come up with why 1/4 of the claimed memory doesn't exist.

On hint might be in this article I found by accident:
http://www.v3.co.uk/v3-uk/news/2267254/samsung-galaxy-s4-memory-claims-face-bbc-watchdog-scrutiny
Where it looks like Samsung is being investigated for the S4 claims of
16GB turning out to be about 9GB instead.

And here, the 16GB claim turned out to be 8GB:
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/mobiles/samsung-defends-16gb-s4s-mere-8gb-of-usable-storage-50011111/

So, something is fishy in Samsung land.

But, it's not just Samsung land, it seems. Based on the information in that
latter article, Microsoft's 64GB Surface Pro has just 23GB of usable space,
while the 8GB Wii U actually leaves just 3GB available to users.

This is sad, because, if you buy a quart of milk, you should get a quart
of milk. Not an entire pint less than a quart.

[David Taylor]

On 02/12/2013 05:05, Danny D'Amico wrote:
[]

> So, something is fishy in Samsung land.
>
> But, it's not just Samsung land, it seems. Based on the information in that
> latter article, Microsoft's 64GB Surface Pro has just 23GB of usable space,
> while the 8GB Wii U actually leaves just 3GB available to users.
>
> This is sad, because, if you buy a quart of milk, you should get a quart
> of milk. Not an entire pint less than a quart.

Microsoft document the available user storage on their Web site:

http://www.microsoft.com/surface/en-gb/support/storage?lc=2057

so it's hardly a secret.
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

[TJ]

But you aren't buying milk. You're asking about internal storage of a
phone. When talking about internal storage, you have to understand the
difference between "total" and "available." From the second article you
cited:

"Nearly half of the S4's storage space (after a factory reset, our 16GB
Galaxy S4 showed 8.49GB of available room) is taken up with the phone's
operating system and built-in apps, limiting the amount of data you can
store on the company's quad-core monster."

Take note: While the total internal storage, which would not include RAM
but would include any ROMs, might indeed be 16GB, storage available to
the user is much less. Space allocated to root, as well as that used by
any installed apps, is not available to the user. If you had root
privileges to your phone, and issued the proper command, the answers you
receive would be different than those received by a user asking about
available space.

TJ

[TJ]

On 12/02/2013 12:05 AM, Danny D'Amico wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 11:19:38 -0500, TJ wrote:
>
>> Thus, when your system says "kilo" it means 1024,
>> where when the manufacturer says it, it means 1000.
>
> We have to come up with why 1/4 of the claimed memory doesn't exist.
>

Another spot where your memory probably "disappeared" is that some
space, probably at least a full Gig, is reserved for RAM overflow. In
Linux, this reserved space is called "swap." Some apps, especially the
most intensive ones like photo editors, will temporarily store part of
what's in RAM to work on the rest. (If you only have a Gig of RAM and
your map is 1.5Gigs, it won't all fit in RAM at the same time.) Then,
when they need it, the apps will swap what's in temporary storage with
what's in RAM.

Space reserved for "swap" won't be reported as available to the user.

TJ

[Danny D'Amico]

On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 12:14:24 +0000, Chris Uppal wrote:

> So where's the other 4-ish GB ?
> Note that one of your test apps shows ~4BG of "ROM".

Hi Chris,
You seem to have a balanced view, and I like that.

I went back and they only show that 4GB in relation to the 12GB,
not in relation to the 16GB, so, I must conclude *all* the suggested
memory applications don't tell the truth.

> The Android devices seem to have /really/ complicated
> filesystem settups, with loopback systems and God knows what else.

This is sad.

What I had assumed, and what I must intimate and what the app is telling
me are all three different things; hence, I am forced to (sadly) conclude
that none of the suggested apps tell you the truth about your memory.

For example:
- I had assumed I started with 32GB of "system memory" in the S3.
- I must intimate that I actually started with only 16GB.
- In contrast, most of the apps are telling me I started with 12GB.

I hope people see the problem here.

What if I didn't know that a 16GB Samsung Galaxy S3 existed? Then
I'd be wondering where the other 20GB went (i.e., 32 minus 12).

What if a 12GB S3 actually existed? Or a 14GB S3?
And, what if I didn't know the phone specs at all?

Shouldn't I expect a memory app to tell me what the original amount
of system memory was?

All these failed to tell me anything useful toward that truth:
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5533/11149647423_da27cdc3dd_o.png
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7387/11144749963_b1d1e20c47_o.gif
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2870/11110619666_7ed5555e4e_o.gif
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3761/11148510753_ee384e902a_o.png
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5475/11110973043_772ee87a8c_o.png
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7442/11145800383_2159b6be47_o.png
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7378/11110867744_37b75c52a4_o.png
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3737/11099154624_f8a05495cb_o.gif

That's sad.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 15:17:36 +0000, Danny D'Amico wrote:

> Shouldn't I expect a memory app to tell me what the original amount
> of system memory was?
>
> All these failed to tell me anything useful toward that truth:
> http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5533/11149647423_da27cdc3dd_o.png
> http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7387/11144749963_b1d1e20c47_o.gif
> http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2870/11110619666_7ed5555e4e_o.gif
> http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3761/11148510753_ee384e902a_o.png
> http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5475/11110973043_772ee87a8c_o.png
> http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7442/11145800383_2159b6be47_o.png
> http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7378/11110867744_37b75c52a4_o.png
> http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3737/11099154624_f8a05495cb_o.gif

Looking for the one device identifier app that tells the truth
about original system memory, I've tested these 16 applications:
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5508/11173641603_a26a2d90b0_o.png
Note: The 16th application is native Android 4.1.2 Settings->Storage.

To add to what is listed above, I just installed the following, and
tested them for what they tell me about my internal storage memory:

All-In-One Toolbox (29 Tools)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=imoblife.toolbox.full
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2883/11173516014_4976a0c6bb_o.png
RAM = 1.56GB, ROM = 12.05GB

CPU / RAM / DEVICE Identifier (aka CPU Identifier)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.Bfield.CpuIdentifier&hl=en
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7303/11173450915_32caafd3bf_o.png
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3737/11173515504_36b83a0660_o.png
RAM memory module = 2Gb DDR (Usable 1594Mb), Flash memory = 12,335MB

Android System Info
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.electricsheep.asi
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7445/11173642883_a81d7189de_o.png
RAM = 1594MB, Internal memory = 12335.1MB

System Test (antivirus flagged this one as intrusive adware)
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=cn.menue.phonepermance.international&hl=en
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2888/11173642753_0fc8a3d1a5_o.png
RAM capacity = 1594MB, ROM capacity = 12335MB

After testing these 16 applications, I must conclude *none* of them
tell you how much system memory (ROM) you started with if you didn't
already know the answer before running the application:
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5508/11173641603_a26a2d90b0_o.png

Given that (sad), but tenable conclusion, I realize some people
mentioned *rooting* the system.

I've never rooted a phone. Do you think rooting would get me
closer to the truth on how much system memory was initially installed?

[Whiskers]

35mm film is 35mm wide, but you can't use more than 24mm of that width -
the rest is required for 'system purposes' over which the user has no
control (in the case of the film, the system purpose is controlling the
movement of the film through the camera or projector by means of
physical holes which engage with the teeth on sprocket wheels or with an
optical or electrical counting mechanism).

A car might have a 200hp engine, but some of that power is required to
charge the battery, drive the electrical system and fuel pump or
injectors, power the power-assisted steering and brakes, and perhaps an
air-conditioning system. So a significant proportion of that 200hp is
not available for making the wheels go around.

Your smartphone has 16GB of RAM installed. Some of it is used by the
operating system to help keep things running and to enable the device to
'sleep' or 'stand-by' instead of having to shut down and then reboot
every time you use it. This is probably the sort of RAM that maintains
its contents without needing power, but which is relatively slow,
whereas the actual 'computing' done by the device uses fast-acting
volatile RAM which loses its contents whenever the power goes off or the
machine 'sleeps'.

It would be helpful if smartphone sellers declared how much 'user
accessible memory' was available, as well as how much RAM was installed.
I suspect they don't because then people would know which seller was
loading the thing up with 'free extras' or 'customised interface' that
the user probably doesn't want. They'd also have to change their
brochures etc every time they changed the extra software.

--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^
-- Whiskers
-- ~~~~~~~~~~

[Danny D'Amico]

On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 16:12:26 +0000, Whiskers wrote:

> Your smartphone has 16GB of RAM installed.

We're only guessing this is the case (based on published specs).
There is nothing that actually says that there "was" 16GB at the start.
So, in reality, all we know is that there was more than 12GB to start with.

> It would be helpful if smartphone sellers declared how much 'user
> accessible memory' was available, as well as how much RAM was installed.

Indeed!

[Juan Wei]

Anthony R. Gold has written on 12/1/2013 1:01 PM:

> On Sun, 1 Dec 2013 15:22:25 +0000 (UTC), Danny D'Amico <da...@is.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 12:14:24 +0000, Chris Uppal wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The fact that /you/ don't accurately knows how much memory /you/ have
>>> doesn't seem to be bothering anybody very much ;-)
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>> Thanks for replying as it's not fair for all we Android users to not
>> have a clue what memory we truly have available in our cellphones.
>

> That claim surprises me. Under Systems Settings / Storage do you not find
> numbers for Total space and for Available? Unless you believe that display
> is inaccurate you are being told very clearly what memory you truly have
> available in your cellphone.

FWIW, my S3 shows:

Internal Memory
Total space 11.95GB
Available 7.07GB

SD Card
Total space 7.20GB
Available 5.35GB

[Juan Wei]

Whiskers has written on 12/2/2013 11:12 AM:

RAM? Really?

My S3 has internal memory of 12335.14MB, external SD card memory of
7376.0MB and RAM of 1594MB.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 18:27:02 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

> FWIW, my S3 shows:
>
> Internal Memory
> Total space 11.95GB

It looks like all our Samsung Galaxy S3's, which are advertised
as 16GB and 32GB models, are actually only 12GB!

[TJ]

On 12/01/2013 01:01 PM, Anthony R. Gold wrote:

> On Sun, 1 Dec 2013 15:22:25 +0000 (UTC), Danny D'Amico <da...@is.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 01 Dec 2013 12:14:24 +0000, Chris Uppal wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> The fact that /you/ don't accurately knows how much memory /you/ have
>>> doesn't seem to be bothering anybody very much ;-)
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>> Thanks for replying as it's not fair for all we Android users to not
>> have a clue what memory we truly have available in our cellphones.
>

> That claim surprises me. Under Systems Settings / Storage do you not find
> numbers for Total space and for Available? Unless you believe that display
> is inaccurate you are being told very clearly what memory you truly have
> available in your cellphone. What you don't understand, and I have no
> criticism about your curiosity, is what the phone or Android are doing with
> the remainder of memory that is not being made available to you for storage,
> but that is quite different from that quoted claim and complaint of yours.
>

My brand-new (delivered yesterday) Hannspree tablet, which is supposed
to have 1GB "internal storage" and 16GB on the "internal SD card" is
reporting .99GB and 12.90 totals, respectively. This does not upset me,
as I believe the portions reserved for root and system functions are
simply not being reported to the ordinary user.

TJ

[Danny D'Amico]

On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 09:13:10 -0500, TJ wrote:

> I believe the portions reserved for root and system functions are
> simply not being reported to the ordinary user.

I understand. But, you're *guessing* at the total memory, simply
because the apps aren't telling the truth.

In my case, I *believed* I had 32GB, but, of course, I only have
12GB, which I can *assume* started out at 16GB; but, why should
we have to guess.

The question I tried to resolve with an Android application was
how much memory did the phone start with (i.e., the truth).

It turns out that, even with all the help from Android experts,
arriving at the starting number can not be done from the phone.

Of course, it is probably *on the box*; but that wasn't the point
of this thread.

To my knowledge, no (unrooted) Android app seems to tell us the
truth about how much memory we *started* with; they only tell us
how much memory we can use (which wasn't the question).

[Juan Wei]

Danny D'Amico has written on 12/3/2013 4:03 PM:

> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 09:13:10 -0500, TJ wrote:
>
>> I believe the portions reserved for root and system functions are
>> simply not being reported to the ordinary user.
>
> I understand. But, you're *guessing* at the total memory, simply
> because the apps aren't telling the truth.

No. He's believing the manufacturer's specs.

> To my knowledge, no (unrooted) Android app seems to tell us the
> truth about how much memory we *started* with; they only tell us
> how much memory we can use (which wasn't the question).

I understand curiosity but what programs in use for say a Windows
computer tells you the total amount of memory installed on your computer
(including the BIOS)?

[Ivan D. Reid]

On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:28:17 -0500, Juan Wei <juan...@gmail.com>
wrote in <l7lidg$b0j$1...@dont-email.me>:

> I understand curiosity but what programs in use for say a Windows
> computer tells you the total amount of memory installed on your computer
> (including the BIOS)?

The BIOS certainly does, as does Task Manager, & system info in
Control Panel. In the Linux world there's gkrellm, gnome-system-monitor,
System Info, top[1], ...

[1] E.g.:
top - 21:57:50 up 94 days, 11:32, 2 users, load average: 4.28, 4.24, 4.28
Tasks: 138 total, 5 running, 132 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie
Cpu(s): 0.4%us, 0.4%sy, 99.0%ni, 0.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.2%si, 0.0%st
Mem: 2051072k total, 1180304k used, 870768k free, 336924k buffers
Swap: 8008364k total, 9756k used, 7998608k free, 387868k cached

--
Ivan Reid, School of Engineering & Design, _____________ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@[brunel.ac.uk|cern.ch] Room 40-1-B12, CERN
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

[Juan Wei]

Ivan D. Reid has written on 12/3/2013 5:02 PM:

> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:28:17 -0500, Juan Wei <juan...@gmail.com>
> wrote in <l7lidg$b0j$1...@dont-email.me>:
>
>> I understand curiosity but what programs in use for say a Windows
>> computer tells you the total amount of memory installed on your computer
>> (including the BIOS)?
>
> The BIOS certainly does, as does Task Manager, & system info in
> Control Panel.

Does the BIOS tell how big the BIOS/CMOS memory is?

TM and SysInfo tell about RAM, not total memory.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:28:17 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

> I understand curiosity but what programs in use for say a Windows
> computer tells you the total amount of memory installed on your computer
> (including the BIOS)?

I don't think that's the same thing.
Besides, I think there *are* programs that tell you the total amount of
memory installed. Plus, you can generally *see* memory cards when they're
on the motherboard (or in expansion slots).

Plus, I don't think the manufacturers *lie* as much as Samsung and others
seem to when it comes to the memory on a phone.

And, I doubt it's as *important* for comparison purposes for PCs as it
is for phones.

For example, if I were to compare two 16GB phones by the "specs", I would
really be comparing a 12GB phone with (who knows what)?

So, it could be off by as much as 2 or 3 GB (which is nothing for a PC but
which is huge for a phone!).

So, it does matter. Personally, I think Samsung is telling a big lie, but,
I still don't have any proof of how much memory was in the phone in the
first place. It could be 12GB or 13GB or 14GB, etc.

I have no way of telling, from the phone itself.

That's sad.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 17:22:02 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

> Does the BIOS tell how big the BIOS/CMOS memory is?

Even if what you suggest is true, it's not anywhere near as important
as a device-comparison metric.

How much you can store on a phone (especially non-expandable phones!) is
tremendously important. Even on the Samsung phone, where the memory is at
least 12GB (we've never determined how much it actually has), apparently
you can't run apps from the external microSD card.

If you run out of the ability to run apps, then it's extremely important
how much system memory you have in a phone.

You might as well compare the gasoline tank of a car versus the manufacturers
specifications, for all that it matters on a PC how much the BIOS takes.

But, for a phone, it's like the size of the ammo cartridge in a rifle; it
matters greatly, especially for comparison and daily usage purposes.

As an analogy, you'd compare two rifles, both of which "say" they have
16 bullets to a clip, but one only has 12 bullets in the clip and the
other has 16.

If you depended on those extra bullets, it would matter a lot.
It's similar with Android cellphones. (IMHO)
It's not similar to BIOS sizes in a PC. (AFAICT)

[Juan Wei]

Danny D'Amico has written on 12/3/2013 5:32 PM:

> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:28:17 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:
>
>> I understand curiosity but what programs in use for say a Windows
>> computer tells you the total amount of memory installed on your computer
>> (including the BIOS)?
>
> I don't think that's the same thing.
> Besides, I think there *are* programs that tell you the total amount of
> memory installed. Plus, you can generally *see* memory cards when they're
> on the motherboard (or in expansion slots).

Don't forget that memory in a phone serves a somewhat more complex
purpose because there's no hard drive! So there has to be somewhere to
store the O/S and its adjuncts.

Phone apps are telling you how much of "memory" is available to you
(12GB out of 16GB).

[Juan Wei]

Danny D'Amico has written on 12/3/2013 5:36 PM:

So you would like a spec that tells not how much memory the device has,
but how much is after the O/S and "factory bloatware" has eaten a chunk
of the memory that's installed.

I think you can get that by reading reviews, asking on forums, going to
phone stores and playing, etc.

[TJ]

On 12/03/2013 05:32 PM, Danny D'Amico wrote:


> For example, if I were to compare two 16GB phones by the "specs", I would
> really be comparing a 12GB phone with (who knows what)?
>
> So, it could be off by as much as 2 or 3 GB (which is nothing for a PC but
> which is huge for a phone!).
>
> So, it does matter. Personally, I think Samsung is telling a big lie, but,
> I still don't have any proof of how much memory was in the phone in the
> first place. It could be 12GB or 13GB or 14GB, etc.
>
> I have no way of telling, from the phone itself.
>
> That's sad.
>

As long as you're complaining, don't stop with phones. Tuna cans
commonly say that they contain a "net weight" of 5 ounces these days.
But that 5 ounces isn't just tuna - it's tuna plus the water or oil it's
packed with. The "drained weight" varies from brand to brand, with
national brands often having less tuna than lesser-known brands.

They all publish the same specs on the side of the can. They all tell
the same Big Lie. There's no way of telling from the can how much tuna
is actually there for you to use, no way to make a comparison before
buying and opening the can.

That's sad.

TJ

[Paul Miner]

He never disputed that you can get the specs in a number of ways. The entire
issue is that you can't get the phone to tell you how much memory it has.
That might be important since most people don't scratch the specs into the
back of the phone for reference.

As for "and playing, etc.", what does that refer to? If you know of a way to
see how much memory an Android phone has, please do tell. So far in this
thread, no one seems to know.

--
Paul Miner

[Juan Wei]

Paul Miner has written on 12/3/2013 7:38 PM:

I thought he was complaining about not knowing before making a purchase
how much memory he will have to play with once he gets his phone.

After he gets his phone, any number of apps will tell him how much is left.

> As for "and playing, etc.", what does that refer to? If you know of a way to
> see how much memory an Android phone has, please do tell. So far in this
> thread, no one seems to know.

See above.

[Paul Miner]

On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 20:28:05 -0500, Juan Wei <juan...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Paul Miner has written on 12/3/2013 7:38 PM:
>> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 17:40:42 -0500, Juan Wei <juan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I think you can get that by reading reviews, asking on forums, going to
>>>phone stores and playing, etc.
>>
>> He never disputed that you can get the specs in a number of ways. The entire
>> issue is that you can't get the phone to tell you how much memory it has.
>> That might be important since most people don't scratch the specs into the
>> back of the phone for reference.
>
>I thought he was complaining about not knowing before making a purchase
>how much memory he will have to play with once he gets his phone.

I'll let him speak for himself, but your understanding is quite different
from mine.

>After he gets his phone, any number of apps will tell him how much is left.

And so far exactly none will correctly report how much memory the phone has.
Not how much is "left" or "available", but simply how much the phone has.

>> As for "and playing, etc.", what does that refer to? If you know of a way to
>> see how much memory an Android phone has, please do tell. So far in this
>> thread, no one seems to know.
>
>See above.

I looked above, but I didn't see anything applicable.

--
Paul Miner

[Bob Martin]

If you really believe that Samsung's specifications are a lie then it is you that is sad.
Do you really think they would get away with that?

Have you gone into a terminal and typed "cat /proc/meminfo" ?

[Chris Uppal]

Bob Martin wrote:

> Have you gone into a terminal and typed "cat /proc/meminfo" ?

Thanks. But that's only about RAM, not stable storage which is the principle
subject of this thread. I'm no Linux expert, is there something similar to
give information about the underlying stable storage too (not the filesystems,
the raw underlying "disk") ? /proc/partitions looks promising...

-- chris

[TJ]

Not sure how meaningful that statistic really is. Until the storage is
formatted, it's pretty much useless. And the formatting process, by
necessity, uses part of that "raw" capacity. Some formats use more than
others. The formatted capacity, the amount that can actually be *used*
by whatever, is a much more useful statistic. And the most useful
statistic of all is what's available to the user, regardless of the
"raw" capacity.

I've used Linux for nearly 12 years, and I know of no command that tells
you what you want to know. But then, I never sought to become a Linux
"expert" and never had a use for the information, so I never looked for one.

TJ

[Anssi Saari]

Danny D'Amico <dan...@is.invalid> writes:

> On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 16:28:17 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:
>
>> I understand curiosity but what programs in use for say a Windows
>> computer tells you the total amount of memory installed on your computer
>> (including the BIOS)?
>
> I don't think that's the same thing.

Perhaps. Then again, you can't know the exact size of a hard disc
either. No one other than the manufacturer knows for example how many
reserve sectors there are in a specific hard disc model or how much
other space there might be that could be used for the disc's internal
bookkeeping.

> So, it does matter. Personally, I think Samsung is telling a big lie, but,
> I still don't have any proof of how much memory was in the phone in the
> first place. It could be 12GB or 13GB or 14GB, etc.
>
> I have no way of telling, from the phone itself.
>
> That's sad.

You could google for a teardown of your phone and find out that the
specific Samsung part used for storage is a KMVTU000LM but that gets you
nowhere since there doesn't seem to be much info about that part
available publically. Other than the size but hey, they could lie.

You could also google for the partition layout of your specific device
and add those sizes together. Unfortunately, I ended up with 15.3 GB
(power of ten gigabytes) instead of 16 with my Galaxy Nexus. Oh, looks like
I can run fdisk on the block device too! That shows this:

Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0: 15.7 GB, 15758000128 bytes

Close enough to 16 GB I suppose. I guess partitioning wastes some
space. The fdisk tool on my phone is unable to show the actual
partitions so I grabbed an ARM binary of parted. It shows this:

Model: MMC VYL00M (sd/mmc)
Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0: 15.8GB
Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B
Partition Table: gpt

Number Start End Size File system Name Flags
1 131kB 262kB 131kB xloader
2 524kB 4194kB 3670kB sbl
3 4194kB 25.2MB 21.0MB ext4 efs
4 25.2MB 33.6MB 8389kB param
5 33.6MB 37.7MB 4194kB misc
6 37.7MB 41.9MB 4194kB dgs
7 41.9MB 50.3MB 8389kB boot
8 50.3MB 62.8MB 12.5MB recovery
13 62.8MB 62.9MB 65.5kB metadata
9 62.9MB 79.7MB 16.8MB radio
10 79.7MB 765MB 686MB ext4 system
11 765MB 1218MB 453MB ext4 cache
12 1218MB 15.8GB 14.5GB ext4 userdata

With this I'm satisfied that I have the storage I expected in my
device. But I have no solution for a layman.

[Dick Streefland]

TJ <T...@noneofyour.business> wrote:
| I've used Linux for nearly 12 years, and I know of no command that tells
| you what you want to know. But then, I never sought to become a Linux
| "expert" and never had a use for the information, so I never looked for one.

Try "df -h". The filesystems named /dev/block/... correspond to
partitions on the internal flash and SDcard.

--
Dick

[Anssi Saari]

TJ <T...@noneofyour.business> writes:

> Not sure how meaningful that statistic really is. Until the storage is
> formatted, it's pretty much useless. And the formatting process, by
> necessity, uses part of that "raw" capacity. Some formats use more
> than others. The formatted capacity, the amount that can actually be
> *used* by whatever, is a much more useful statistic. And the most
> useful statistic of all is what's available to the user, regardless of
> the "raw" capacity.

As far as I know, putting a typical Linux filesystem (ext4 these days
but I suppose Samsung's F2FS will be used in Android more in the future)
on a storage device (formatting, if you like) doesn't use that much
space. You can always use df on the filesystem to get the formatted
capacity and compare to the partition size. For example on my phone I
get 13.3 GB from df and parted shows 14.5, but I think df's output is
actually in power-of-two GB and parted's isn't so we have 14.5 GB raw
space and 14.3 formatted. That's just 1.5% space lost due to
formatting. I have the same ratio on my PC too.

[Danny D.]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 17:41:31 +0200, Anssi Saari wrote:

> That's just 1.5% space lost due to
> formatting. I have the same ratio on my PC too.

On my Galaxy S3, I lose 25% (I'm assuming I started with
16GB) since there is only 12GB remaining.

Others have the same experience on the S3, so, that's
a huge loss.

It's almost like selling a 16 pound carbon dioxide
tank where the tank is 4 pounds so you only get 12
pounds of carbon dioxide and then comparing the
steel to aluminum where (say) the aluminum tank only
weighs 2 pounds, so, in the end, you're trying to
compare two 16 pound tanks where one gives you 12
pounds of C02 (i.e., the samsung galaxy s3) and
the other gives you 14 pounds of C02 (i.e., other
phones who don't lie as much about their specs).

In the end, I now know what I had not known before,
that buying a phone by the specs is dangerous.

You have to find out (somehow) the usable memory
before you can compare two similar phones.

Lesson learned.

[Danny D.]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 15:38:03 +0000, Dick Streefland wrote:

> Try "df -h". The filesystems named /dev/block/... correspond to
> partitions on the internal flash and SDcard.

On an Android (unrooted) phone, how do we get to the
command line prompt to run this command?

[Danny D.]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 17:07:39 +0200, Anssi Saari wrote:

> I can run fdisk on the block device too! That shows this:
> Disk /dev/block/mmcblk0: 15.7 GB, 15758000128 bytes

My Samsung Galaxy S3 is unrooted.
Can I run fdisk on it?
How?

[Danny D.]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 08:41:11 -0500, TJ wrote:

> And the most useful
> statistic of all is what's available to the user, regardless of the
> "raw" capacity.

I agree.
My Samsung Galaxy S3 is *not* a 16GB phone which is
what they advertise.

It's a 12GB phone.

[Danny D.]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 08:14:33 +0000, Bob Martin wrote:

> If you really believe that Samsung's specifications
> are a lie then it is you that is sad.
> Do you really think they would get away with that?

Clear as day, they lied.
It's not a 16GB phone at all. It's a 12GB phone.

But, I'm not about to sue them over it.

Still, they're being "investigated" for that lie with the S4:
BBC Watchdog to investigate Samsung Galaxy S4 internal
storage claims:
http://androidandme.com/2013/05/news/bbc-watchdog-to-investigate-samsung-galaxy-s-4-internal-storage-claims/

In that case, it's just a *bigger lie*, where 16GB turns into
8.5GB in US carrier-branded phones.

See also:
http://phandroid.com/2013/05/16/samsung-galaxy-s4-available-storage/
"Users had a valid complaint: when a phone is advertised to
come with 16GB, there shouldn’t be close to half of that being
taken up for OS use. Sure, formatted storage is always less
than the advertised amount, but this falls outside the realm
of normal."

So, whether it's a lie or not, basically boils down to
what *your* definition of normal is.

For me, I would want all phones to advertise the usable
storage, and, for the S3, that's 12GB (which is not even
close to the 16GB claimed).

For the S4, it's even worse, at 8.5GB (versus the claimed
16GB).

Seems to me that Samsung is on a roll here, if they continue
to get away with lying to us.

[Dave Higton]

In message <l7o0uc$7f1$1...@speranza.aioe.org>

"Danny D." <dan...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>It's almost like selling a 16 pound carbon dioxide
>tank where the tank is 4 pounds so you only get 12
>pounds of carbon dioxide and then comparing the
>steel to aluminum where (say) the aluminum tank only
>weighs 2 pounds, so, in the end, you're trying to
>compare two 16 pound tanks where one gives you 12
>pounds of C02 (i.e., the samsung galaxy s3) and
>the other gives you 14 pounds of C02 (i.e., other
>phones who don't lie as much about their specs).

You're trolling.

The phone contains as much memory as the manufacturer claims.

The discrepancy between the headline number and the amount you see
when you interrogate the phone, is memory that is already in use.

It's not at all like your analogy above.

Dave

[Danny D.]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 19:49:07 +0000, Danny D. wrote:

> On an Android (unrooted) phone, how do we get to the
> command line prompt to run this command?

Googling, I find this app: Android Terminal Emulator
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=jackpal.androidterm&hl=en

I'll try that and report back.

[Danny D.]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 08:14:33 +0000, Bob Martin wrote:

> Have you gone into a terminal and typed "cat /proc/meminfo" ?

Googling for a terminal emulator, I installed Android
Terminal Emulator, and then typed "cat /proc/meminfo"
at the command prompt.

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3709/11211147896_8e61272dfe_o.png

The first line is "MemTotal" which was "1632392 KB",
which seems to be the RAM (of roughly 1.6GB); but,
I can't see which line reports the "internal memory".

BTW, who is that username?
Is that my login to the device?

[Danny D.]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 20:09:16 +0000, Dave Higton wrote:

> The phone contains as much memory as the manufacturer claims.

Well, I was "told" (if I remember correctly) that *my* Samsung
Galaxy S3 is a 32GB phone; yet, I can't find anything to bolster
that claim.

All I can find is 12GB.

[Andy Burns]

Danny D. wrote:

> BTW, who is that username?
> Is that my login to the device?

Every installed app gets its own sandbox to run in and a user to own the
sandbox, you're seeing the username for the terminal app's sandbox.

[Juan Wei]

Paul Miner has written on 12/4/2013 12:11 AM:

>
> And so far exactly none will correctly report how much memory the phone has.
> Not how much is "left" or "available", but simply how much the phone has.

Why is that important? To make sure that the chips in the device match
the specs??

[Juan Wei]

Danny D. has written on 12/4/2013 2:48 PM:

> On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 17:41:31 +0200, Anssi Saari wrote:
>
>> That's just 1.5% space lost due to
>> formatting. I have the same ratio on my PC too.
>
> On my Galaxy S3, I lose 25% (I'm assuming I started with
> 16GB) since there is only 12GB remaining.
>
> Others have the same experience on the S3, so, that's
> a huge loss.
>
> It's almost like selling a 16 pound carbon dioxide
> tank where the tank is 4 pounds so you only get 12
> pounds of carbon dioxide and then comparing the
> steel to aluminum where (say) the aluminum tank only
> weighs 2 pounds, so, in the end, you're trying to
> compare two 16 pound tanks where one gives you 12
> pounds of C02 (i.e., the samsung galaxy s3) and
> the other gives you 14 pounds of C02 (i.e., other
> phones who don't lie as much about their specs).

<sigh> You buy a car that advertises it has a 350HP engine.

But what does that mean? It certainly doesn't mean that you will get
350HP delivered to the driving wheels? There are losses that prevent
that from happening (google BHP vs HP).

> In the end, I now know what I had not known before,
> that buying a phone by the specs is dangerous.
>
> You have to find out (somehow) the usable memory
> before you can compare two similar phones.

Absolutely! Even more important is whether or not you can add storage
via a microSD card.

[Juan Wei]

Danny D. has written on 12/4/2013 3:43 PM:

Who told you that? How much did you pay for it? Where did you buy it?

[John B.]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 20:09:16 GMT, Dave Higton <da...@davehigton.me.uk>
wrote:

Well, in a sense it is as the manufacturer's state the amount of
physical memory installed, i.e., a 1 GB memory. Than, if one wants to
use it, it must be formatted, i.e., some sort of order introduced,
which uses some of the physical space.

But this is true of just about every storage system. For example,
format a USB stick and than check the storage. I just did and there is
from 32 to 53 Kb used on various capacities of device. Re-format a 16
Gb stick to various storage systems showed:
fat 32 - 8.2 Mb used for storage system
ext2 - 818,2 Mb
ext4 - 834.9 Mb

But the analogy of a 16 lb. gas bottle is correct. A 16 lb. bottle of
CO2 weighs 16 lb. If one buys a 16 lb. bottle expecting it to contain
16 lb. of gas than one is simply exhibiting one's ignorance.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

But Samsung is not lying, just exactly as the CO2 people are not
lying. They have told you what they are giving you.... and you have
assumed something that isn't true. The 16 lb. bottle doesn't hold 16
lb. of gas.

By the way, have a look at the cans and bottles in your kitchen. They
all are labeled with the total weight of the can/bottle and contents.

So, in reality, by ranting that you don't know what everyone else does
know is what? Exhibiting your ignorance?
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Paul Miner]

Why it is or isn't important is a completely different question.

--
Paul Miner

[Danny D'Amico]

On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 18:38:49 -0600, Paul Miner wrote:

> The entire issue is that you can't get the phone to tell you how
> much memory it has.

Exactly!

It's all in the subject of this thread!

[Danny D'Amico]

On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 20:28:05 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

> After he gets his phone, any number of apps will tell him how much is left.

But that never was the question ...

[Danny D'Amico]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 19:37:54 -0600, Paul Miner wrote:

> Why it is or isn't important is a completely different question.

All I want is in the subject line of this thread.
I just want an application that tells me the truth.

And, as far as we can tell, no application will tell you anything
more than how much usable memory you have left.

So, for all I know, I have a 32GB Samsung Galaxy S3 (which, I agree,
is unlikely, but, that's what I had thought I had before running
these tests).

I have to "guess" that it's not 32GB and that it's 16GB (which,
all here would also assume); and I don't like guessing because
you have to know too much in order to guess correctly.

So, for example, if I picked up my friend's phone, and I ran the
applications suggested, *none* of them would tell me how much
memory that phone started with. That's sad.

Of course, we could then go to the published specs, and then, based
on those, we could *guess* what memory was initially installed in
that phone, but it would still be a guess.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:51:12 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

> Who told you that? How much did you pay for it? Where did you buy it?

I got it free, from T-Mobile, as part of a company phone plan.
My manager, when he ordered it, told me (IIRC) that it was a 32GB phone.
So, I always *thought* it was. But, of course, it's a 12GB phone instead.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:49:29 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

> Even more important is whether or not you can add storage
> via a microSD card.

That's not really the solution since you are limited by
what you can *do* with things stored in an external card.

At least that's what it says in the literature for Samsung.

So, external storage (e.g., a microSD card in the card slot)
is really not the answer.

It's better than nothing, but it's not as functional as the
internal storage.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:49:29 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

> <sigh> You buy a car that advertises it has a 350HP engine.

And only a dumbknuckle believes that stuff.
Same thing with radio specs (e.g., claimed xmit power in dBm or antenna power in dBi).

But, guess what?

The dynamometer at the DMV station can tell you (if hooked up right) the BHP.
And a power meter can tell you the true transmit power of a radio & antenna.

All this thread asked for was the truth for Android internal storage.

[Danny D'Amico]

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 08:07:58 +0700, John B. wrote:

> But Samsung is not lying, just exactly as the CO2 people are not
> lying. They have told you what they are giving you.... and you have
> assumed something that isn't true. The 16 lb. bottle doesn't hold 16
> lb. of gas.

I know this only after reading this thread, and all the helpful
responses.

So, from today onward, I'll never *believe* any spec I hear for the
internal memory storage of a cellphone.

There is no way to tell how much memory the phone had to start with,
from the phone itself.

The only way to tell is to believe the manufacturer's specs.

[Dick Streefland]

"Danny D." <dan...@nowhere.com> wrote:
| Googling, I find this app: Android Terminal Emulator
| https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=jackpal.androidterm&hl=en
|
| I'll try that and report back.

When you use that app, you will have to omit the -h option of df.
I use "Terminal IDE", which comes with its own collection of
utilities, including a version of df that supports more options.
It also includes an alternative keyboard, that is more suitable for
commandline work. Rooting is not required.

--
Dick

[John B.]

Well, the solution is to just chuck it. Get rid of the lying POS.

Why in the world would a bloke want to keep something that causes him
trauma?
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Tilman Ahr]

Well, no. It isn't. There are 16GB of Storage Memory installed.
Part of that is used by the OS. Who would have thought.

Would you call Packard-Bell liars, because they stated your Desktop
comes with a 500GB Harddisk, and yet you can't use all of that, because
Windows Vista Home Edition, their proprietary recovery partition and all
the cute little Desktop „enhancements“ on there eat up 10GB of that?

No. Of course you wouldn't. That's just silly. Everyone knows a PC needs
an OS on it's harddisk to do anything useful. And without the recovery
partition, one couldn't re-install the OEM-Windows when it's collapsed
under the myriad of „utilities“, „extensions“ and whatnot that get
thrown on top of it's inherent bloat…

Now take a deep breath, then a step back, and then think again.

[TJ]

Sounds like a good idea. To save Danny further mental anguish, I'll be
happy to take both of the evil, deceptive devices off his hands. I won't
even charge him for the service. I know, I know, it's not good business
procedure. But that's just the kind of guy I am. Always trying to help
the other guy.

TJ

[TJ]

On 12/04/2013 03:00 PM, Danny D. wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 08:14:33 +0000, Bob Martin wrote:
>
>> If you really believe that Samsung's specifications
>> are a lie then it is you that is sad.
>> Do you really think they would get away with that?
>
> Clear as day, they lied.
> It's not a 16GB phone at all. It's a 12GB phone.
>

And the "lie" will probably get bigger as you use the phone. OS's tend
to get bigger with each new version as new "features" are added, so if
your phone ever updates the OS, you'll probably have even less total
*available* storage as a result. That's sad - for you, I guess. For the
rest of us, not so much.

TJ

[TJ]

Sounds to me like he wants to force manufacturers to put a disclaimer in
the specs, something like "Storage capacity available to the user will
be less, due to operating system requirements." And he wants them to
advertise the total user space, not what they do now. Thing is, that's
not a set amount, but varies with OS updates, and whatever bloatware the
vendor includes with the device.

Danny's already answered your argument, saying that with a PC's hard
drive the amount used by the OS is trivial because the total amount is
so high, but on an Android device that same amount is much more
significant. To a certain extent that's true, but the complaint is
nothing new. Back in the days of Windows 95 and 98, when hard drives of
fewer than 10GB were commonplace, you saw the complaint over and over.
Once the OS was installed, with accompanying software and the inevitable
bloatware, space available to the user was much less than vendor specs
would have the uninitiated believe. People inevitably complained, just
as Danny's doing. And those complaints were just as ineffective.

TJ

[Chris Uppal]

Danny D'Amico wrote:

> All I want is in the subject line of this thread.
> I just want an application that tells me the truth.
>
> And, as far as we can tell, no application will tell you anything
> more than how much usable memory you have left.

I'm still looking into it, but my current impression is that opening
/proc/partitions in any text-file viewer (such as are built into many file
exporer utilities) will give an accurate statement of the physical storage
available. Needs a little care to interpret since it seems that there are
partitions nested within partitions, but the data is there.

More later, perhaps...

-- chris

[Juan Wei]

Danny D'Amico has written on 12/4/2013 9:35 PM:

Why aren't you pissed that your manager lied to you?

Well, I think that this has been the most successful red herring I've
ever seen in 20+ years on Usenet.

Your question is actually irrelevant.

[Juan Wei]

Danny D'Amico has written on 12/4/2013 9:39 PM:

> On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 16:49:29 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:
>
>> <sigh> You buy a car that advertises it has a 350HP engine.
>
> And only a dumbknuckle believes that stuff.
> Same thing with radio specs (e.g., claimed xmit power in dBm or antenna power in dBi).
>
> But, guess what?
>
> The dynamometer at the DMV station can tell you (if hooked up right) the BHP.
> And a power meter can tell you the true transmit power of a radio & antenna.

But the car itself and the radio itself cannot tell you that.

> All this thread asked for was the truth for Android internal storage.

No, you asked for an app running on the phone to tell you how much
memory was installed at the factory.

In your case, this is a totally irrelevant question: you were given the
phone, period. Now put on your big boy pants and figure out how you're
going to use the available memory.

[Juan Wei]

Tilman Ahr has written on 12/5/2013 9:06 AM:

How about "Now take a deep breath, then a step back, and then think."
Period.

[Danny D.]

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 14:49:15 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

> Now put on your big boy pants and figure out how
> you're going to use the available memory.

This is getting too personal.

It's a technical question, so, let's just summarize what
we've learned.

Q: How do we get Android to tell us how much internal
storage was installed on the phone before any software
was added?

A: We don't know of any method.

The only methods we know of, don't tell us what we were
looking for; they only tell us how much usable memory is left.

Pretty much, that's the current status of this question.

[Danny D.]

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 14:46:28 -0500, Juan Wei wrote:

> Why aren't you pissed that your manager lied to you?

Let's not get personal here.

I asked a technical question, and the technical answer
is that there is no known method of obtaining a report
of the full complement of internal memory in an Android
phone, that any of us know of (at this time).

That pretty much wraps the answer up.

[Danny D.]

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 18:58:19 +0000, Chris Uppal wrote:

> /proc/partitions in any text-file viewer (such as are built into many
> file exporer utilities) will give an accurate statement of the physical
> storage

Hi Chris,
I'm looking forward to what you figure out.

I've been looking about, using the Android Terminal Emulator,
but, I don't know what I'm doing.

Thanks for helping out!

[Danny D.]

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 09:26:26 -0500, TJ wrote:

> And the "lie" will probably get bigger as you use the phone. OS's tend
> to get bigger with each new version as new "features" are added, so if
> your phone ever updates the OS, you'll probably have even less total
> *available* storage as a result.

What this means, is that we, as consumers, must simply
be aware, when comparing phones, that the usable memory
is a number that you can't possibly know without having
the phone in your hand.

And, that the total memory, which the manufacturer spouts,
isn't at all a usable number.

Which means, in all practicality, you can't reasonably
compare this feature of two different phones without
having both phones in your hand.

Or, by asking someone who has the phone (which could be
a reviewer, if they're saavy enough to report the usable
memory instead of the original memory).

[Danny D.]

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 09:19:12 -0500, TJ wrote:

> Always trying to help the other guy.

I'm not sure how much you helped in this thread,
but, I do thank you for your opinions on how to get
the originally installed memory figure off the
phone.

[Danny D.]

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 15:06:03 +0100, Tilman Ahr wrote:

> Well, no. It isn't. There are 16GB of Storage Memory installed.
> Part of that is used by the OS. Who would have thought.

The problem comes up when you want to compare two
phones, to buy, for example, online for a Christmas
gift for your kid.

One factor is the usable memory. Right?

Well, it turns out that the usable memory is so
hugely different than the "stated memory" (in my
case, it's 2/3rds but in other cases we've seen,
it's 1/2!) that a review that spouts the manufacturer's
spec is useless by way of comparison for that
all-important spec.

To state what we've learned, from a pragmatic standpoint,
is that there is no way to tell how much memory a phone
started with, and, worse yet, there is no way to tell
how much usable memory a phone has based on the manufaturer's
specifications.

Let's hope the phone reviewers always make note of the
*usable memory* when they review a phone; otherwise, it's
a crap shoot when comparing two phones.

[Danny D.]

On Thu, 05 Dec 2013 19:06:08 +0700, John B. wrote:

> Well, the solution is to just chuck it. Get rid of the lying POS.
>
> Why in the world would a bloke want to keep something that causes him
> trauma?

Was that helpful?