Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Without arguing why I feel that way, I just wish to ask here whether
the complaint rightly goes to the FTC or to the FCC?

On the one hand, it's (grossly) false and misleading advertising.
On the other hand, it's a communication device.

Whom would you file the complaint to?
How?

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014, Danny D. wrote:

Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Without arguing why I feel that way, I just wish to ask here whether
the complaint rightly goes to the FTC or to the FCC?

On the one hand, it's (grossly) false and misleading advertising.
On the other hand, it's a communication device.

Whom would you file the complaint to?
How?

It has nothing to do with the FCC.

The FCC deals with frequency allocation, and technical compliance. SO if
the phone was putting out unwanted signals, the FCC would be the place to
go.

But this is a consumer issue, there's no way it has anything to do with
the FCC.

Michael

On 04/04/2014 01:27 PM, Michael Black wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2014, Danny D. wrote:

Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Without arguing why I feel that way, I just wish to ask here whether
the complaint rightly goes to the FTC or to the FCC?

On the one hand, it's (grossly) false and misleading advertising.
On the other hand, it's a communication device.

Whom would you file the complaint to?
How?

It has nothing to do with the FCC.

The FCC deals with frequency allocation, and technical compliance. SO
if the phone was putting out unwanted signals, the FCC would be the
place to go.

But this is a consumer issue, there's no way it has anything to do with
the FCC.

Michael

Consumer complaints can start at the state AG's office.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics

160 North State Road #203
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

hobbs at electrooptical dot net
http://electrooptical.net

On 04/04/2014 11:44 AM, Phil Hobbs wrote:
On 04/04/2014 01:27 PM, Michael Black wrote:
On Fri, 4 Apr 2014, Danny D. wrote:

Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Without arguing why I feel that way, I just wish to ask here whether
the complaint rightly goes to the FTC or to the FCC?

On the one hand, it's (grossly) false and misleading advertising.
On the other hand, it's a communication device.

Whom would you file the complaint to?
How?

It has nothing to do with the FCC.

The FCC deals with frequency allocation, and technical compliance. SO
if the phone was putting out unwanted signals, the FCC would be the
place to go.

But this is a consumer issue, there's no way it has anything to do with
the FCC.

Michael

Consumer complaints can start at the state AG's office.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs


Did somebody round down? Sheesh!.

On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 13:24:02 -0700, dave wrote:

Did somebody round down?

The difference between 4GB and almost zero GB of usable
memory is more than a round off error ...

On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 14:44:53 -0400, Phil Hobbs wrote:

Consumer complaints can start at the state AG's office.

Thanks. I never complained to an AG before, but
what I found on the FCC web site says I need to fill
out the "Form 2000A - Deceptive or Unlawful Advertising
and Promotion Complaint":
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/consumerfacts/Form2000A.pdf

Then I will call the FTC at 888-225-5322 to provide
the necessary information. And I will fax the form
to 866-418-0232, and send a paper copy to the address:
Federal Communications Commission
Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau
Consumer Complaints
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, D.C. 20554

Basically, if you go to the T-Mobile web site, they
don't tell you the usable memory is nearly zero:
http://support.t-mobile.com/docs/DOC-5777

And, if you call them, they will email you the same
information (saying the usable memory is 4GB when, in
fact, it's nearly zero GB).

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 13:27:15 -0400, Michael Black wrote:

But this is a consumer issue, there's no way it has anything to do with
the FCC.

I can't disagree with you, as that's why I had asked
the question.

The confusing thing is that the FCC web page complaint form:
http://www.fcc.gov/complaints

Has a section for "Wireless Telephone" "Unlawful Advertising".

Since this advertising has all five elements of fraud, one
would think that the FCC is involved.

Meanwhile, I am going to fill out the FTC complaint form:
https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/Details#crnt

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 15:35:52 -0700, Danny DiAmico wrote:

The confusing thing is that the FCC web page complaint form:
http://www.fcc.gov/complaints

Has a section for "Wireless Telephone" "Unlawful Advertising".

Specifically, the FCC has a section for:
Deceptive or unlawful advertising or marketing by a
communications company (does NOT include Telemarketing)

So, it seems the right place is the FCC and not the FTC
(or so I think at the moment).

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 15:55:13 +0000 (UTC), Danny D. wrote:

Whom would you file the complaint to?

I filed form 2000A to the FCC:
https://esupport.fcc.gov/ccmsforms/f...orm_type=2000A

Usually, just one FCC complaint won't do much.
If lots of people complained, they'd do something.
But, for just one complaint, I'm told they just send it to
the manufacturer, who sends back a reply to the FCC, and
who gives you a call. That's pretty much it.

Nothing happens unless other people are as upset as I
that they lie about the available memory.

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 16:04:15 -0700, Danny DiAmico wrote:

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 15:55:13 +0000 (UTC), Danny D. wrote:

Whom would you file the complaint to?

I filed form 2000A to the FCC:
https://esupport.fcc.gov/ccmsforms/f...orm_type=2000A

Usually, just one FCC complaint won't do much.
If lots of people complained, they'd do something.
But, for just one complaint, I'm told they just send it to
the manufacturer, who sends back a reply to the FCC, and
who gives you a call. That's pretty much it.

Nothing happens unless other people are as upset as I
that they lie about the available memory.

I'm not clear on what you're upset about. From your other thread, it seems
to be centered around not being able to use the SD card for applications, so
the obvious question becomes, did you assume that you'd be able to do those
things, or did you see something in writing that led you to believe that you
could?

Like I wrote in your other thread, I never expected or assumed that I'd be
able to use external storage for applications, so my expectations weren't
shattered. I'm able to do exactly what I expected I'd be able to do: use the
external storage for content rather than apps.

--
Paul Miner

On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 18:28:26 -0500, Paul Miner wrote:

I'm not clear on what you're upset about.

Basically, I would never have bought the phone had I known
there were only 600 MB of "usable" memory on it.

When I called T-Mobile, they insisted it had 4GB of
internal storage, and that you could add a 32 GB card.

It turns out that it has about 600 MB of "usable" internal
memory, and, the SD card slot is virtually worthless (for
moving applications onto or installing onto).

Had T-Mobile not lied in my many (well documented) calls,
I never would have bought the phone. So, all five elements
of fraud are (arguably) evident:
http://quizlet.com/19041431/5-elemen...d-flash-cards/

1. a false representation of fact
2. knowledge of the falsity by party making false representation
3. intent to deceive the party by making false representation
4. reasonable reliance by the innocent party
5. actual loss suffered by the innocent party

"Danny D." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 18:28:26 -0500, Paul Miner wrote:

I'm not clear on what you're upset about.

Basically, I would never have bought the phone had I known
there were only 600 MB of "usable" memory on it.

When I called T-Mobile, they insisted it had 4GB of
internal storage, and that you could add a 32 GB card.

It turns out that it has about 600 MB of "usable" internal
memory, and, the SD card slot is virtually worthless (for
moving applications onto or installing onto).

Had T-Mobile not lied in my many (well documented) calls,
I never would have bought the phone. So, all five elements
of fraud are (arguably) evident:
http://quizlet.com/19041431/5-elemen...d-flash-cards/

1. a false representation of fact
2. knowledge of the falsity by party making false representation
3. intent to deceive the party by making false representation
4. reasonable reliance by the innocent party
5. actual loss suffered by the innocent party


As I understand it from my own Android experiences, apps that the phone
comes pre-programmed with, mostly can't be deleted from the internal
storage - and some of these take up a lot of space. And then the reason that
many - if not most - downloaded applications cannot be moved to the SD card,
is because this is a slow device compared to the internal memory, and this
can screw with the operation of these apps.

The solution, of course, is to 'root' the phone. Then you can do what you
like with the storage ...

Arfa

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 02:58:57 +0100, Arfa Daily wrote:

The solution, of course, is to 'root' the phone.
Then you can do what you like with the storage ...

I've never rooted a phone, but, I may be forced to do so,
just to make the phone usable.

I do agree with you that *all* the preloaded apps won't allow
you to move them.

I guess if you could move them, you could delete them.

Mewonders if Google makes certain apps non-removable (e.g., Chrome)
because it's in there best interest. Yet, mewonders why
T-Mobile makes certain apps (e.g., T-Mobile TV) non-removable,
since there are plenty of their apps I'd never ever use but
I can't get rid of.

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 15:55:13 +0000 (UTC), Danny D. wrote:

Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Well, they *do* have 4 GB of internal memory. And they use 'most all of it.

And they *can* use "up to a 32 GB external microsd card." Just not for
anything your little heart desires -- rather, only for what the OEM allows.

No lies there -- just truth, but rather less than the *whole* truth :-) .

Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 20:18:59 -0400, tlvp wrote:

No lies there -- just truth, but rather less than the *whole* truth

Actually, I have many documented phone calls to T-Mobile,
with a witness (my wife) who was known to the T-Mobile as
a witness when I had asked the question each time.

Many times they told me the "usable memory" was 4GB!

In each case, I have the first name and employee ID of the
person who provided that errant information.

The errors are repeated, widespread, across Customer Service,
Customer Service Supervisors, Technical Support, and Technical
Support Supervisors.

Had I known the phones were unusable (they actually have less
than 1 MB of usable memory out of the box), I never would have
bought them.

Had T-Mobile told me the truth when I ordered the phones from
them, I never would have bought them.

"Danny D." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 20:18:59 -0400, tlvp wrote:

No lies there -- just truth, but rather less than the *whole* truth

Actually, I have many documented phone calls to T-Mobile,
with a witness (my wife) who was known to the T-Mobile as
a witness when I had asked the question each time.

Many times they told me the "usable memory" was 4GB!

In each case, I have the first name and employee ID of the
person who provided that errant information.

The errors are repeated, widespread, across Customer Service,
Customer Service Supervisors, Technical Support, and Technical
Support Supervisors.

Had I known the phones were unusable (they actually have less
than 1 MB of usable memory out of the box), I never would have
bought them.

Had T-Mobile told me the truth when I ordered the phones from
them, I never would have bought them.



From my experience of the Android platform on phones, you won't find it is
much different from your experience with the T-Mobile phone, right across
the board.

Arfa

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 03:01:39 +0100, Arfa Daily wrote:

From my experience of the Android platform on phones, you won't find it is
much different from your experience with the T-Mobile phone, right across
the board.

I think the "problem" is that the "little lie" becomes a "big lie" the
closer your internal memory gets to 4GB.

For example, if they lie by 4GB in a 32GB phone, you still have a usable
28GB of "usable" memory.

Likewise, if they lie by 4GB in a 16GB or even 8GB phone, you still have
a usable 12GB and 4GB respectively.

But, if they lie by 4GB in a 4GB phone, you end up with a useless phone.

Compound that lie with the lie of the promise of the SD card, and you
are dead in the water with a phone you never would have bought, had the
carrier provided the truth when you looked up the specs and asked on
the phone about the "usable" memory.

On Sat, 5 Apr 2014 11:49:16 +0000 (UTC), "Danny D."
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 03:01:39 +0100, Arfa Daily wrote:

From my experience of the Android platform on phones, you won't find it is
much different from your experience with the T-Mobile phone, right across
the board.

I think the "problem" is that the "little lie" becomes a "big lie" the
closer your internal memory gets to 4GB.

For example, if they lie by 4GB in a 32GB phone, you still have a usable
28GB of "usable" memory.

Likewise, if they lie by 4GB in a 16GB or even 8GB phone, you still have
a usable 12GB and 4GB respectively.

But, if they lie by 4GB in a 4GB phone, you end up with a useless phone.

Can you expand a bit on why you feel that the phone is useless? Surely it
works as advertised, able to do everything it's supposed to do. Is it the
case that you have one or more apps in mind that you'd like to install, but
you can't because there isn't enough space available? If that's the case, I
don't think I would call it useless.

--
Paul Miner

On 04/05/2014 04:49 AM, Danny D. wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 03:01:39 +0100, Arfa Daily wrote:

From my experience of the Android platform on phones, you won't find it is
much different from your experience with the T-Mobile phone, right across
the board.

I think the "problem" is that the "little lie" becomes a "big lie" the
closer your internal memory gets to 4GB.

For example, if they lie by 4GB in a 32GB phone, you still have a usable
28GB of "usable" memory.

Likewise, if they lie by 4GB in a 16GB or even 8GB phone, you still have
a usable 12GB and 4GB respectively.

But, if they lie by 4GB in a 4GB phone, you end up with a useless phone.

Compound that lie with the lie of the promise of the SD card, and you
are dead in the water with a phone you never would have bought, had the
carrier provided the truth when you looked up the specs and asked on
the phone about the "usable" memory.

A knowledgeable person might have defined 'usable' as 'usable for
downloading and running additional applications'; the problem is that
NOBODY is knowledgeable the first time they buy a smartphone...or
computer...or anything else that's fairly complex; there's always SOME
nasty surprise no matter how much research you do.

Had that been done I think T-Mobile wouldn't have had a leg to stand on,
especially if you'd recorded the conversation. I also think that the
helpdroid would have said exactly the same thing -- "Sure you can do it"
-- because he didn't expect to hear the qualifier. Sort of like WW2
'dazzle' paint on ships :-)

--
Cheers, Bev
================================================== ====
Guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.

On 04/04/2014 09:24 PM, Danny D. wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 20:18:59 -0400, tlvp wrote:

No lies there -- just truth, but rather less than the *whole* truth

Actually, I have many documented phone calls to T-Mobile,
with a witness (my wife) who was known to the T-Mobile as
a witness when I had asked the question each time.

Many times they told me the "usable memory" was 4GB!

In each case, I have the first name and employee ID of the
person who provided that errant information.

The errors are repeated, widespread, across Customer Service,
Customer Service Supervisors, Technical Support, and Technical
Support Supervisors.

Had I known the phones were unusable (they actually have less
than 1 MB of usable memory out of the box), I never would have
bought them.

Had T-Mobile told me the truth when I ordered the phones from
them, I never would have bought them.

I'm no lawyer, but I've watched several lawyer shows on TV. ;^)

Judging by that, I'd say that if the company reps said "usable" memory,
you haven't a leg to stand on. The memory on the phone is *usable." You
use it every time you turn the phone on. It's usefulness may be limited,
but that's different from "unusable." That's what the lawyers would
argue, anyway.

Now, if they used the term "available," that might be a different story.
Then again, it might not. As I said, I'm no lawyer.

Be aware that you aren't just taking on T-Mobile with this complaint.
You are taking on the entire computer industry. And the computer
industry has been doing this for a very long time. One of my first
computers, back in the mid-80's, was an Atari 800XL. It was advertised
as having 64K of RAM. It did, but only 48K was usable without special
manipulation which most users didn't know how to do. After a while, I
bought an aftermarket kit that boosted the RAM to 256K. I KNOW it had
256K, as I installed the chips myself. Even so, the new memory was only
available in 16K blocks and one at a time, through the same manipulation
used to access any more than the basic 48K.

Was it fraud to say I had a 256K computer when only 48K was easily
available? I didn't think so, because the full 256K was *usable*. It
just wasn't easy.

TJ

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 09:24:32 -0400, TJ wrote:

Judging by that, I'd say that if the company reps said "usable" memory,
you haven't a leg to stand on. The memory on the phone is *usable." You
use it every time you turn the phone on. It's usefulness may be limited,
but that's different from "unusable." That's what the lawyers would
argue, anyway.

I do agree with you. I think my complaint won't carry much weight with
either the FTC or the FCC unless (and this is the biggie), unless I'm
not alone in considering this deceptive advertising.

For example, if hundreds or thousands of consumers complain with the same
complaint of deceptive advertising, then the FTC and/or FCC, I think,
would take it seriously.

If I'm the only one who is complaining of deceptive advertising, then,
I'm simply the one fool in the crowd who fell for it.

It's no different than when people complain about an automotive defect
or an advertising scam. If enough people complain about deceptive
advertising, the FTC and/or FCC will listen.

One complaint is just one disgruntled consumer.

HINT: If you feel like complaining, you get 1,000 characters on the
online FCC complaint form & 3,000 characters on the online FTC form:
FCC 888-225-5322 http://www.fcc.gov/complaints (deceptive advertising)
FTC 877-382-4357 https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/Details#crnt

On Sat, 5 Apr 2014 18:34:12 +0000 (UTC), "Danny D."
wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 09:24:32 -0400, TJ wrote:

Judging by that, I'd say that if the company reps said "usable" memory,
you haven't a leg to stand on. The memory on the phone is *usable." You
use it every time you turn the phone on. It's usefulness may be limited,
but that's different from "unusable." That's what the lawyers would
argue, anyway.

I do agree with you. I think my complaint won't carry much weight with
either the FTC or the FCC unless (and this is the biggie), unless I'm
not alone in considering this deceptive advertising.

For example, if hundreds or thousands of consumers complain with the same
complaint of deceptive advertising, then the FTC and/or FCC, I think,
would take it seriously.

If I'm the only one who is complaining of deceptive advertising, then,
I'm simply the one fool in the crowd who fell for it.

It's no different than when people complain about an automotive defect
or an advertising scam. If enough people complain about deceptive
advertising, the FTC and/or FCC will listen.

One complaint is just one disgruntled consumer.

HINT: If you feel like complaining, you get 1,000 characters on the
online FCC complaint form & 3,000 characters on the online FTC form:
FCC 888-225-5322 http://www.fcc.gov/complaints (deceptive advertising)
FTC 877-382-4357 https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/Details#crnt

It's less deceptive advertising than the failure to do your research.
You will get nowhere with regulators on this.

Education is expensive.

On 04/05/2014 02:34 PM, Danny D. wrote:

One complaint is just one disgruntled consumer.

HINT: If you feel like complaining, you get 1,000 characters on the
online FCC complaint form & 3,000 characters on the online FTC form:
FCC 888-225-5322 http://www.fcc.gov/complaints (deceptive advertising)
FTC 877-382-4357 https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/Details#crnt


I have nothing to complain about. I knew the "full" capacity of the
internal storage wasn't available for my use, just as the "full"
capacity of my computer's hard drives aren't available. I've known it
for decades.

TJ

On 04/05/2014 11:34 AM, Danny D. wrote:

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 09:24:32 -0400, TJ wrote:

Judging by that, I'd say that if the company reps said "usable" memory,
you haven't a leg to stand on. The memory on the phone is *usable." You
use it every time you turn the phone on. It's usefulness may be limited,
but that's different from "unusable." That's what the lawyers would
argue, anyway.

I do agree with you. I think my complaint won't carry much weight with
either the FTC or the FCC unless (and this is the biggie), unless I'm
not alone in considering this deceptive advertising.

For example, if hundreds or thousands of consumers complain with the same
complaint of deceptive advertising, then the FTC and/or FCC, I think,
would take it seriously.

If I'm the only one who is complaining of deceptive advertising, then,
I'm simply the one fool in the crowd who fell for it.

It's no different than when people complain about an automotive defect
or an advertising scam. If enough people complain about deceptive
advertising, the FTC and/or FCC will listen.

One complaint is just one disgruntled consumer.

HINT: If you feel like complaining, you get 1,000 characters on the
online FCC complaint form & 3,000 characters on the online FTC form:
FCC 888-225-5322 http://www.fcc.gov/complaints (deceptive advertising)
FTC 877-382-4357 https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/Details#crnt

OK, I complained to both. The FTC complaint contained a bit of
clarification missing in my FCC complaint:

"When I was first interested in buying an Android cellphone, I
determined that I
wanted an external sdcard in order to NOT be limited by the internal
phone memory.
Every single provider of phones gives the amount of internal memory (in
my case,
4GB) along with the fact that a slot for an external SD card ("up to nn
GB") is
provided. No warning is given that it's not possible to move the included
applications or run new ones on the external SD card. Indeed, many of
the phones
themselves refer to their internal memory as "sdcard", which is completely
deceptive. If companies provide the amount of memory as a selling
point, which
they do, they should make it clear that 'usable' in terms of external
storage means
"NOT usable to run applications". Anything less is fraud.

If you like my complaint, feel free to use it or any part of it in your own.

--
Cheers, Bev
================================================== ====
Guns kill people like spoons make Rosie O'Donnell fat.

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 09:24:32 -0400, TJ wrote:

Be aware that you aren't just taking on T-Mobile with this complaint.
You are taking on the entire computer industry. And the computer
industry has been doing this for a very long time. One of my first
computers, back in the mid-80's, was an Atari 800XL. It was advertised
as having 64K of RAM. It did, but only 48K was usable without special
manipulation which most users didn't know how to do. After a while, I
bought an aftermarket kit that boosted the RAM to 256K. I KNOW it had
256K, as I installed the chips myself. Even so, the new memory was only
available in 16K blocks and one at a time, through the same manipulation
used to access any more than the basic 48K.

Was it fraud to say I had a 256K computer when only 48K was easily
available? I didn't think so, because the full 256K was *usable*. It
just wasn't easy.

Another example from that era: Commodore 64, 64KB of memory, but when you
turn it on, it says "Commodore 64 Basic V2 38911 Basic Bytes Free". As
above, you could get to some of the additional memory through paging, but
I'm sure it was beyond most people at the time.

--
Paul Miner

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:30:08 -0500, Paul Miner wrote:

Another example from that era: Commodore 64, 64KB of memory, but when you
turn it on, it says "Commodore 64 Basic V2 38911 Basic Bytes Free". As
above, you could get to some of the additional memory through paging, but
I'm sure it was beyond most people at the time.

Hi Paul,

Along those lines, it's currently beyond my capabilities, but, I may have
to root the 4GB phone (not that I really know what that entails) in order
to free up some of the 3.4 GB that is currently being used by the T-Mobile
Android 4.1.2, P76920h, LG Optimus L9 smartphone (model LG-P769).

Googling, I see that the rooting process is risky; but, if I faithfully
follow it, do you have any idea of what I can reasonably expect by way
of gains?

That is, can I only hope to free up 10 MB of memory? 20MB? 100MB? 1GB?

QUESTION:
If I root the phone, what can I reasonably expect to free up?

On 04/04/2014 09:24 PM, Danny D. wrote:
On Fri, 04 Apr 2014 20:18:59 -0400, tlvp wrote:

No lies there -- just truth, but rather less than the *whole* truth

Actually, I have many documented phone calls to T-Mobile,
with a witness (my wife) who was known to the T-Mobile as
a witness when I had asked the question each time.

Many times they told me the "usable memory" was 4GB!

In each case, I have the first name and employee ID of the
person who provided that errant information.

The errors are repeated, widespread, across Customer Service,
Customer Service Supervisors, Technical Support, and Technical
Support Supervisors.

Had I known the phones were unusable (they actually have less
than 1 MB of usable memory out of the box), I never would have
bought them.

Had T-Mobile told me the truth when I ordered the phones from
them, I never would have bought them.

If I were you and I still wanted to pursue the matter, I'd involve some
consumer advocate groups like Consumer Reports. My guess is they already
have several others who feel as betrayed as you do.

Maybe even contact a US Senator looking to get re-elected. Try one of
mine, Chuck Schumer. He's always looking for causes to "investigate" to
get his name in the paper.

TJ

On 04/05/2014 09:31 AM, TJ wrote:

Maybe even contact a US Senator looking to get re-elected. Try one of
mine, Chuck Schumer. He's always looking for causes to "investigate" to
get his name in the paper.


Wow. Really revealed my age on that one. I should have said, "in the news."

TJ

On 04/05/2014 06:33 AM, TJ wrote:
On 04/05/2014 09:31 AM, TJ wrote:

Maybe even contact a US Senator looking to get re-elected. Try one of
mine, Chuck Schumer. He's always looking for causes to "investigate" to
get his name in the paper.


Wow. Really revealed my age on that one. I should have said, "in the news."

TJ


What is the OP using to determine he can't use the memory outside the
phone? I've never seen that (except Apple junk).

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 09:31:17 -0400, TJ wrote:

If I were you and I still wanted to pursue the matter, I'd involve some
consumer advocate groups like Consumer Reports. My guess is they already
have several others who feel as betrayed as you do.

I've always wanted to get Consumer Reports (aka Consumers Union) involved,
especially when the *true* test of how much *usable* memory is far different
than the carrier's *advertised* internal memory specifications.

But, I could never find the correct *person* to speak to.
Everyone I spoke to had absolutely no clue what I was saying (technically).

Basically, all my prior inquiries in the past went into a black hole:
http://consumersunion.org/about/contact-us/
Consumers Union in NY 914-378-2000 (press 0 for the operator)
In Texas 512-477-4431, in Washington 202-462-6262, SF 415-431-6747

The best I could do is write a measly review:
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/p...ory-select.htm

But, what we'd like to ask CR to do is run a *test* of the true
available memory on the budget smartphones, which should be right
down their alley.

For that, we'd need to get an *editor* interested in the concept.
http://consumersunion.org/experts-staff/

Do you have any decent Consumers Union contact information for someone
who would understand that, and, more importantly, *care* about writing
such an article on budget smartphone usable memory?

I don't.
(They never answer email to their general inbox.)

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 20:18:59 -0400, tlvp
wrote:

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 15:55:13 +0000 (UTC), Danny D. wrote:

Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Well, they *do* have 4 GB of internal memory. And they use 'most all of it.

And they *can* use "up to a 32 GB external microsd card." Just not for
anything your little heart desires -- rather, only for what the OEM allows.

No lies there -- just truth, but rather less than the *whole* truth :-) .

Cheers, -- tlvp

And why no whining about RAM? My first smartphone had 4GB storage and
512MB RAM. The problem with it was the limited RAM, maiking you stop
applications to run others.

You have to assess your needs, do your homework , and make the
decision.

caveat emptor

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:54:21 -0700, wrote:

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 20:18:59 -0400, tlvp
wrote:

On Fri, 4 Apr 2014 15:55:13 +0000 (UTC), Danny D. wrote:

Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Well, they *do* have 4 GB of internal memory. And they use 'most all of it.

And they *can* use "up to a 32 GB external microsd card." Just not for
anything your little heart desires -- rather, only for what the OEM allows.

No lies there -- just truth, but rather less than the *whole* truth :-) .

Cheers, -- tlvp

And why no whining about RAM?

'Cuz I'm not the one whining in the first place :-) .

caveat emptor

Amen! Cheers, -- tlvp
--
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 14:54:21 -0700, nobody wrote:

And why no whining about RAM? My first smartphone had 4GB storage and
512MB RAM. The problem with it was the limited RAM, maiking you stop
applications to run others.

I did see on the forum.xda-developers.com site you had kindly
suggested that there are ways to format the SD card so that
it acts as RAM, so, that's one possible way for me to add
what they called "virtual memory".

On 4/4/2014 11:55 AM, Danny D. wrote:
Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Without arguing why I feel that way, I just wish to ask here whether
the complaint rightly goes to the FTC or to the FCC?

On the one hand, it's (grossly) false and misleading advertising.
On the other hand, it's a communication device.

Whom would you file the complaint to?
How?


I would complain to neither since both claims seem to be literally true. If
I made such a purchase and wanted somebody to blame for the results then
I'd have to start by blaming myself for not doing a bit of basic research
before the act. Whinging afterward seldom does any good.

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:23:31 -0400, John McGaw wrote:

I'd have to start by blaming myself for not doing a bit of basic
research before the act. Whinging afterward seldom does any good.

Do you really consider it "basic research" to know that the phone
only has 600MB of usable storage space for apps?

How are you supposed to find this out, if neither LG nor T-Mobile
will tell you?

On Sun, 6 Apr 2014 18:11:55 +0000 (UTC), "Danny D."
wrote:

On Sun, 06 Apr 2014 12:23:31 -0400, John McGaw wrote:

I'd have to start by blaming myself for not doing a bit of basic
research before the act. Whinging afterward seldom does any good.

Do you really consider it "basic research" to know that the phone
only has 600MB of usable storage space for apps?

How are you supposed to find this out, if neither LG nor T-Mobile
will tell you?

Try posting the question on any or all of the several L9 specific
forums.

"John McGaw" wrote in message
...
On 4/4/2014 11:55 AM, Danny D. wrote:
Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Without arguing why I feel that way, I just wish to ask here whether
the complaint rightly goes to the FTC or to the FCC?

On the one hand, it's (grossly) false and misleading advertising.
On the other hand, it's a communication device.

Whom would you file the complaint to?
How?


I would complain to neither since both claims seem to be literally true.
If I made such a purchase and wanted somebody to blame for the results
then I'd have to start by blaming myself for not doing a bit of basic
research before the act. Whinging afterward seldom does any good.


I don't know about the U.S., but here in the UK, the mobile phone business
seems to be the modern day equivalent of the dodgy car dealers of the past.
Whilst you might well say that it is the OP's fault that he didn't do enough
research, I have to say that I have a degree of sympathy with him. The
claims being made by the people who sold him the phone are, in my opinion,
misleading at a minimum, and bordering on bare faced lies at worst. It's
also fine for the other good folk on here who really understand about phones
to deride the OP for his lack of knowledge, but it could just as easily be a
similar situation with some other product for them.

I consider myself to be an intelligent and tech-savvy person - I repair
electronic equipment for a living, and have done for 45 years - but I also
got caught by exactly the same problem as the OP, although for my useage, I
was able to get around it enough without it rendering the phone useless to
me.

So, what is the rationale behind the root owners 'locking' this bloatware so
that you can't at least move it if not delete it, or why put it on there in
the first place ? Do they get paid by the originators to put it on there,
and make sure it stays on there ? And if you are going to go to the trouble
of designing in additional external memory capability, why not allow its
full useage for anything other than storing photos on ?

So yes, I quite understand where the OP is coming from on this one, and why
he feels that he has been misled as to the capabilities of his phone for the
purposes that he needs - particularly after he took the trouble to ask those
who *should* have known, and who *should* have been able to advise him with
regard to the true amount of app storage available to him, and the
restricted storage abilities of the SD card as an augmentation of the
internal storage.

Arfa

Arfa Daily wrote:

So yes, I quite understand where the OP is coming from on this one, and
why he feels that he has been misled as to the capabilities of his phone
for the purposes that he needs - particularly after he took the trouble
to ask those who *should* have known, and who *should* have been able to
advise him with regard to the true amount of app storage available to
him, and the restricted storage abilities of the SD card as an
augmentation of the internal storage.

Agreed: and when I buy a laptop (as I did) that advertised a 128 GB SSD, that
turns out to have 16 GB[*] reserved for a recovery partition (and a fair amount
of bloatware on the C: drive, to boot), then I feel that I've been lied to.
It's not that I can't fix it (I have), but I can't shop to /my/ best advantage
if the sellers twist the facts.

The position with phones is much the same, if not worse. On the little Samsung
phone I have (or rather: had until I bricked it) that came "free" with the
above laptop, there was so little space that, after I had added just /two/
small apps (a mapping app and a WiFi monitor) that it couldn't even update the
apps that Samsung had locked onto the phone ("Not enough space to update
YouTube", "Not enough space to update Google Hang-outs", ..) And, of course,
putting a 32GB SD card into it didn't help at all...

-- chris

On Mon, 7 Apr 2014 02:08:35 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
wrote:



"John McGaw" wrote in message
...
On 4/4/2014 11:55 AM, Danny D. wrote:
Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Without arguing why I feel that way, I just wish to ask here whether
the complaint rightly goes to the FTC or to the FCC?

On the one hand, it's (grossly) false and misleading advertising.
On the other hand, it's a communication device.

Whom would you file the complaint to?
How?


I would complain to neither since both claims seem to be literally true.
If I made such a purchase and wanted somebody to blame for the results
then I'd have to start by blaming myself for not doing a bit of basic
research before the act. Whinging afterward seldom does any good.


I don't know about the U.S., but here in the UK, the mobile phone business
seems to be the modern day equivalent of the dodgy car dealers of the past.
Whilst you might well say that it is the OP's fault that he didn't do enough
research, I have to say that I have a degree of sympathy with him. The
claims being made by the people who sold him the phone are, in my opinion,
misleading at a minimum, and bordering on bare faced lies at worst. It's
also fine for the other good folk on here who really understand about phones
to deride the OP for his lack of knowledge, but it could just as easily be a
similar situation with some other product for them.

I consider myself to be an intelligent and tech-savvy person - I repair
electronic equipment for a living, and have done for 45 years - but I also
got caught by exactly the same problem as the OP, although for my useage, I
was able to get around it enough without it rendering the phone useless to
me.

So, what is the rationale behind the root owners 'locking' this bloatware so
that you can't at least move it if not delete it, or why put it on there in
the first place ? Do they get paid by the originators to put it on there,
and make sure it stays on there ? And if you are going to go to the trouble
of designing in additional external memory capability, why not allow its
full useage for anything other than storing photos on ?

So yes, I quite understand where the OP is coming from on this one, and why
he feels that he has been misled as to the capabilities of his phone for the
purposes that he needs - particularly after he took the trouble to ask those
who *should* have known, and who *should* have been able to advise him with
regard to the true amount of app storage available to him, and the
restricted storage abilities of the SD card as an augmentation of the
internal storage.

Arfa


Oh, blarg. Think about who has skin in the game on how Android
development progresses. That is who is paying the bills, and guess what,
they who provide the gelt call the shots.

HTH

?-0

On 04/06/2014 09:23 AM, John McGaw wrote:

On 4/4/2014 11:55 AM, Danny D. wrote:
Long story short, I believe T-Mobile lied to the consumer by claiming
the LG Optimus F3 and LG Optimus L9 have both 4GB of internal memory
and that they can use up to a 32 GB external microsd card.

Without arguing why I feel that way, I just wish to ask here whether
the complaint rightly goes to the FTC or to the FCC?

On the one hand, it's (grossly) false and misleading advertising.
On the other hand, it's a communication device.

Whom would you file the complaint to?
How?

I would complain to neither since both claims seem to be literally true. If
I made such a purchase and wanted somebody to blame for the results then
I'd have to start by blaming myself for not doing a bit of basic research
before the act. Whinging afterward seldom does any good.

When we buy an automobile, we have certain unstated expectations --
motor, wheels, steering wheel etc. We don't need to ask for these
specifically because everybody knows that they're part of the car. When
was the last time you bought a car and the salesman asked "And will you
be wanting headlights with that, sir?"

Maybe that was how it worked 100 years ago, but not for a long time now.

Buying a cellphone, especially the first one, is very different.
First-time buyers don't know what they don't know. Since this is
relatively new technology aimed partially at first-time buyers, the
decent thing is to provide more and better explanation.

Unless the intent is to screw the customers, of course.

--
Cheers, Bev
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The Marketing Professional's Motto: "We don't screw the customers. All
we're doing is holding them down while the salespeople screw them."

-- Scott Adams