http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/360334/inte ... martphones

Will this help bring prices down? I want them in a netbook, even if it does mean having to leave XP behind

1Tb on an iPhone. Maybe I can finally get all my music on it.

Isn't the storage in smartphones already an SSD? Isn't the distinction between 'flash memory' and 'an SSD' fairly arbitrary anyway?

Flash memory has been increasing in size per £ steadily since it was invented. At some point we will have 500GB or 1TB in a smartphone. That's just engineering progress.

The question is we should be asking is 'why?'. Beyond a certain size the problem with data is not keeping it but organising it. I defy anyone to have 1TB of 'stuff' and need all of it to hand, or indeed be able to take me to any one given piece of it if necessary. For example, you don't need all your music on your phone, you just need the music you are likely to want to listen to. That may only actually be 10% of it or less. A dumb device will copy all of your music across and leave you to figure out which bit you need, A smart device will copy only the music you are likely to actually want to play - using some sophisticated algorithm base don the music you've played recently - and present it to you in an easily accessible form.

I pretty much can't abide trudging through masses of data on my desktop, I see no reason at all why I would want to do it on a phone.

That's what I was thinking, but it did give me the image of a phone with a big spinning hard disk

I prefer to have all of it, because I hate it when I go to listen to a song I haven't heard in ages only to find it isn't on my phone/MP3 player.

Same here plus my music collection is enormous. I still have not found the necessity to join Spotify because of it.

If our mobile data infrastructure wasn't so expensive and poor, then I wouldn't care how much storage my phone had.

Mobile networks are only permitted to use less than 0.1% of the available bandwidth. Why?!

I didn't realise that. Do we know where the rest goes?

It's either not used, or it's a secret.

There must be a list of how the entire spectrum is used somewhere, but the 60 seconds I just spent looking didn't find it. Here's a relevant quote from Wiki:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrum_management

If you do that more than once or twice a month, you're very unusual. Most people have basically a 'core' of music they listen to most of the time, plus a smattering of new music that they want to listen to because they've just acquired it. That music gets accessed a lot for a short period of time (say a month or so) then it moves into the general collection of music that gets listened to very very infrequently, if at all.

BTW, anyone who thinks they might need 1TB of MP3/AAC etc? I think you're vastly underestimating how much 1TB of encoded music actually is.

In fact, OK. Let's do some quick 'back of a beermat' maths. Say a CD encoded with a 'lossless' encoded is 300MB. Most people don't do that they do MP3/AAC, which means an album takes 70MB, but let's go for 'worst case'. In 1TB of space you could therefore have 3100 albums or say 43,000 songs. Say an average of four minutes per song and you're talking about 173,600 minutes of music. Or, in more useful units, 4 months of constant music. Or 6 months if we assume you're actually asleep for 1/3 of the day.

OK, so you don't want to listen to your music end to end (who does) but you want to be able to listen to bits of it when you feel like. Can you really remember all 3100 albums? Course you can't. Say then 600 or so artists? Not unless you're willing to spend years training your memory to be able to. I suspect most people at most can remember say 20 or so artists and at most 100 albums. The rest gathers dust.

I have around 27700 track which will take 83.4 days to play non stop, though longer as you say allowing for other factors.

As for remembering the albums and artists. I do not remember many but it is individual tracks that I remember, usually triggering a memory of some kind. Sort of like "Our tune" on a massive scale. That is why I would want all of them together.

I wouldn't have a hope in hell of remembering my music collection (which is a lot smaller than Amnesia's anyway), but I can stick the whole lot on "random", meaning I get to hear songs I'd long forgotten about, but still like.

I think you would be surprised...I am when I play Buzz

http://www.play.com/Games/PlayStation2/ ... cat:Puzzle

A smart phone is perfect as a portable backup device, giving instant access to the data from anywhere. With BT, WiFi, SD and a powerful OS it's pretty much a mini laptop and there's no reason not to use it as such.

As I said before, I'd rather have my data in "the cloud" or a secure server, but mobile data rates are still several orders of magnitude away from making that possible. In the mean time, massive local caching is the only answer.

I have a modest 100GB of music files, comprising about 15,000 mp3s and videos. Some of those are my own work, although it's best not to witness those...

However, music is not the only thing I want on my smart phone. Given the decent screen size, it's perfect for TV shows. I could fill 1TB just with the stuff I'd like to watch on holiday! OK maybe not, but I couldn't fit it on an iPhone. I currently have around 3TB of video and it increases by several GB every week. It would be ideal to have it all in my pocket.