External SD card or no external SD card – Google Nexus4

Trefor DaviesJust scanned through a review of the Google Nexus 4 Android handset in the Grauniad. One of the things that caught my attention was the decision to not support an external SD card. Apple has lead the way with doing away with SD cards on the basis that they wanted everyone to do everything through the cloud.

The argument for a removable drive is that you can easily move data on and off the handset. My Galaxy S3 does support an external (micro) SD card but I have to say the only time I ever remove it is when I change handsets which, repair jobs aside, is less frequent than once a year.

Proponents of removable storage also remind us that we are using more and more space for photos and games. The former is certainly true for me but my needs would be accommodated with a large enough internal storage in the first place. What currently happens is that I run out of space on the phone (say) and have to adjust the settings to save media to the SD card which is a manual step that should be unnecessary.

All my pics are automatically backed up the the cloud using Instant Upload over WiFi. Once Instant Upload has done its stuff I then also shift them off the phone via USB to my laptop and once a month (ish) back up to one or two external hard drives. I’m not sure I’ll ever rely totally on the cloud for the backup.

So on balance I agree that we no longer need to support external SD cards as long as the phone itself has a suitably large capacity in the first place which, considering the low cost of memory, should not be difficult. Any growth in storage usage is likely to be down to a change in habits that accompany the use of a new handset so I can’t see that running out of space should be a problem – just make sure you have enough from the off.

Whaddaya think?

Enjoy this article? Please share it with your friends.

8share on Facebook 3share on LinkedIn 2share on Twitter 2share on Google4share on Comments

More Posts

8 thoughts on “TalkTalk break records for downloads with 557GB per sec on New Year’s Day

  1. PhilT says:

    Not convinced. You sure the 577 isn’t Gbits/sec ? Seems unlikely they would be three times LINX somehow, even with peering to the Beeb etc.

    With 4m subscribers, allegedly provided with below 100 kbits/s each of backhaul, capacity would be around 400 Gbits/s (4 million at 0.1 Mbits/s each) which seems like the 460 Gb/s quoted at

    Put another way, 577 Gbytes per second sustained over 3 days is 25 GB per subscriber which is probably above the average TT user’s *monthly* usage.

    As is often the case, saving a few characters abbreviating bits as b and bytes as B end up in wasted paragraphs of clarification 😉

  2. Trefor Davies tref says:

    Yes I left it to others to have the debate:)

  3. Trefor Davies tref says:

    btw the B & b mix up is an age old mistake & is typically done by people who have no idea there is a difference. Also I suspect there is a lesson in that high profile blogs should be written by the high profile people themselves and not delegated.

  4. Craig Aspey says:

    The B & b mix up does look to have struck here, but yet on some parts of the Blog they’ve actually gone an spelt out “gigabytes”. No doubt the PR people will be sat in one corner smiling and feeling pleased with their work, while the techies are finding a brick wall

  5. Trefor Davies tref says:

    It’s a good word gigabyte btw, that’s all

  6. pctech says:

    The techies probably don’t care as they are too busy planning the next infrastructure upgrade.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *