On 04/08/2014 09:03 PM, Danny D. wrote:
On Tue, 08 Apr 2014 14:58:54 -0400, TJ wrote:

More likely they, as experienced smartphone users, know but don't
consider it as important as you do.

That "may" be the case, but, if so, why did the reviewers accept the
clearly incorrect answer the phone reported for the "available space"?

The fact they didn't catch on to what took me a while myself to
understand, is that this "available space" isn't the available space
at all.

I still wish an Android expert would chime in to explain this, but,
it appears to be the space that *was* available after the OS was
installed.

The actual available space is MUCH smaller than what is reported
by the Android OS, on the order of half of what is reported
(depending on the Android version and on what the user installed).

So, if the PC Magazine and CNET reviewers did understand what they
were doing, why did they report the wrong numbers when they
complained about the bloatware?

The actual numbers are far worse than those that they complained
about. Methinks that, if they actually knew this, they would have
said so.

But, they didn't.

I'm no expert by any means, but I would think that caches could explain
at least part of the discrepancy you're seeing. Because each app runs in
its own "sandbox," each app has its own cache, with the size of each
cache expanding or contracting depending on how the apps are used. Thus,
if you check available storage before using any apps, as someone who is
reviewing a phone might do, you'll get a different number than *after*
you use some of them.

TJ