Current location - Health Preservation Learning Network - Healthy weight loss - OPPO Huawei has something? Is the "pool area" of mobile phone memory in lawyer's mouth a farce?
OPPO Huawei has something? Is the "pool area" of mobile phone memory in lawyer's mouth a farce?
I don't know if you still remember. I bought a mobile phone with 64G memory for the first time and found that only 40G was available.

When you feel puzzled, others will tell you that everyone is like this. The system takes up a little memory, and the phone comes with some apps, so there will be no complete 64G memory available.

All along, we have grown up in such an environment, and we have become accustomed to the "improper use of words" in the memory of mobile phones. Recently, however, a lawyer named Xie in Beijing took these mobile phone manufacturers to court in one fell swoop.

"OPPO was sued by me! Apple and Huawei may be sued in the future! " The lawyer's word-for-word statement showed his firm belief.

In its comment area, netizens woke up like a dream, "the actual memory of mobile phone manufacturers does not match the promotional memory", which sounds really unreasonable ... but the matter itself is still controversial.

"The shared memory area of these phones is actually the same as buying a house. Buy a house 100 square meter, but only 70 square meters ... "

"Support, safeguard their own rights and interests, and prevent manufacturers from exploiting loopholes for personal gain."

"If you buy a mobile phone in the future, the manufacturer will give you a bare machine with no system and no APPlication. The storage is absolutely standard, but you have to install your own system and your own app. Can you accept it? "

"There is indeed a need to distinguish. Although we all know that the system needs to take up space, we still need to subtract the space when promoting nature. Because most people understand the actual size of space available ... "

But when we think from the perspective of major mobile phone manufacturers, in the face of such an obvious BUG problem, have they never considered this issue?

The answer is of course no, not only did they think about it, but in hindsight, these "considerations" were also very subtle.

First of all, the most fundamental point is that the total memory capacity is correct and indisputable. Secondly, note that "the maximum memory ..." or "the actual capacity will be less than the marked capacity" will be written on the official website of the mobile phone, although it is not in the most conspicuous position.

But despite this, not all mobile phone manufacturers are willing to "go with the flow", and some people actively seek change in the chaos and try to set things right.

As we all know, the software installed by mobile phone manufacturers must first be paid by the software manufacturers. The more pre-installed apps, the more mobile phones are sold, and the more money mobile phone manufacturers make. In this case, they rarely consider memory encroachment.

However, Coolpad's new COOL20 is very different. It does the opposite, as if it disdains to do such a thing.

While frantically increasing the number of pre-installed apps, other mobile phones choose to reduce unnecessary apps as much as possible, leaving enough "memory freedom" for consumers. This can be clearly seen from the comparison chart below.

In addition, in this incident, the memory occupied by the system is large, which is also the most criticized point. To this end, Coolpad even developed its own CoolOS system for this mobile phone, and at the same time, it spent a lot of manpower to transplant the black technology and file slimming system EROFS unique to Huawei flagship machine, making the built-in system of the mobile phone system smaller and faster. Of course, it will inevitably take up some memory, but Coolpad has obviously done its best for consumers and shown enough sincerity.

At present, the case of Xie v has been accepted by the Shanghai court. This is also the first public welfare case in China and the digital circle with me as the plaintiff. Regardless of the outcome, mobile phone manufacturers need to be aware of this problem.

That is: let the mobile phone return to cleanliness and give us the right to choose freely.