Slashdot Mirror


Samsung Develops the First 1TB Storage Chips For Phones (engadget.com)

Samsung has started mass producing what it says is the industry's first one terabyte embedded Universal Flash Storage (eUFS) technology for smartphones. "It will give the company's mobile devices PC-like storage without the need for large-capacity microSD cards," Engadget reports. "It'll be incredibly useful if you use your phone to take tons of photos and HD videos -- Samsung says it's enough to store 260 10-minute videos in 4K UHD." From the report: "The 1TB eUFS is expected to play a critical role in bringing a more notebook-like user experience to the next generation of mobile devices," said Cheol Choi, EVP of Memory Sales & Marketing at Samsung Electronics. As ZDNet notes, Samsung's upcoming flagship devices, such as the S10, will most likely come with a 1TB option thanks to its new eUFS technology. After all, Samsung started mass producing its 512GB storage technology back in December 2017 and then debuted it with its new phones early on in the following year.

In addition to offering massive storage, the new eUFS was also designed to be faster than typical SSDs, microSDs and previous revisions of the technology. It has a 1,000-megabyte-per-second sequential read speed, twice that of the usual SSD and faster than its 512GB predecessor. Despite all those, Samsung says it'll come in the same package size as its 512GB flash memory, so it won't have to make its big phones even bigger.

72 comments

  1. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    That sure is a lot of porn

    1. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might want to consider the effects of pornography on your life... PIED - Pornography Induced Erectile Dysfunction, among other things.

      www.yourbrainonporn.com

    2. Re: Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I watch a lot of porn and my cock still gets hard enough to fuck my wife in every hole she has. PIED is a joke.

  2. show butthoal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i smell youre dog butthoal,

    1. Re:show butthoal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clive Robinson, is that you? What, the Russians have never been caught hacking? Oh I didn't know you could just say that and make it so. Cool!

    2. Re:show butthoal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck off homo

    3. Re:show butthoal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know every time you shitpost like that it gets worse and worse, so there's something you should know, AC: If you continue huffing spraypaint cans like that it's eventually going to kill you.

  3. Better energy efficiency too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It looks like Samsung claims 10% efficiency over eMMC too. Anybody know of any drawbacks to eUFS (other than price, of course)?

  4. QLC? by mentil · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No mention in the press release if this is QLC (quad-level cell) or TLC. It's said that next-gen v-nand tech is responsible for doubling the density, although they generally increase the number of layers by 30% or so each generation, and the chip size is the same. Could be that the 16 layers is double the number their 512GB chip used, although 16 has been the upper limit for years.

    QLC would actually be fine for most smartphone users, who only use a tiny portion of the storage anyway, and wouldn't even get close to the ~1,000 rewrite limit (1 petabyte of writes, here). That'll help bring NAND prices down for the enthusiasts who could utilize the higher speed/endurance of TLC.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    1. Re:QLC? by mentil · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I should clarify that V-NAND is stacked say 64 layers deep on one die, and that up to 16 dies can be stacked for one chip. So there's stacking on top of stacking. More dies on a chip tends to lower the speed, thus why they don't always use the max of 16 dies. Density improvements have been coming from adding more V-NAND layers, Samsung started making 96 layer dies last July, and Hynix is working on 128.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    2. Re: QLC? by hyperlinx · · Score: 1

      With all the stacking and close proximity, is heat a problem?

      --
      In /.space, no one can hear you SCREAM!
    3. Re:QLC? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yo dawg, I herd you like stacking, so we put a stack in yo stack so yo can stack while yo stack.

    4. Re: QLC? by mentil · · Score: 2

      Rarely, nand chips will come with thin aluminum heatsinks. In general, no. This is because each chip uses about 1watt of power.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
  5. Storage capacity is not the problem by Immerman · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "The 1TB eUFS is expected to play a critical role in bringing a more notebook-like user experience to the next generation of mobile devices,"

    Raise your hand if you regularly use a computer/laptop with far less than 1TB of hard disc/SSD capacity.

    Even relatively cheap smartphones have had plenty of storage, RAM, and processing power to deliver a compelling desktop experience for years. The problem is not a lack of storage space, it's a lack of a desktop-oriented operating system. A tiny screen and horribly crude default I/O devices don't help either, but bluetooth peripherals and/or a USB-C dock can (potentially) solve that nicely

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    1. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by mentil · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Doesn't help that most iOS devices use the Lightning connector at USB2 speeds. Copying 4k video over that is a pain; a wireless connection is probably faster.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    2. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No they don't...how old are you?

      I can currently take 0.4 seconds of slo motion video because the memory it uses is too slow and fills up too quickly. In addition to that, I can only take so many hd photos and videos because there isn't enough storage to keep more (unless I have removeable microsds).

      And by taking things, photos and videos, in such high resolution, it allows me to later convert and compress it to whatever I need. In order to do that, I need the system memory to be able to open and manipulate those files.

      People saying there is no such need for phones especially to have so much memory are just completely out of touch. It's like telling people there was no need for thumb drives because rewritable DVDs had plenty of storage. Wtf...

    3. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of my computers at home have 60GB SSD with at least 50GB free.
      All the big stuff is on the server, 16TB in a central location is quite nice.

      Honey, I dropped my eUFS chip again and now I can't find the Library of Congress.

    4. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Compared to USB-A, USB-B, USB-B mini, Mini DisplayPort/thunderbolt (1 and 2) and even the lightning connectors the usb-b micro as well as the usb-C have really badly mechanical engineering of the connectors, the socket and the mechanism that attaches the socket to the board. They fail quite often. I've had to resolder sockets multiple times on the things I own with micro and usb-c connectors while I never had to do that on any other connector. Sorry - do not want micro or usb-c - they are crap

    5. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Raise your hand if you regularly use a computer/laptop with far less than 1TB of hard disc/SSD capacity.
      The Ubuntu box I've been building up over time lately boots off a 512GB SSD, and only 64GB of it is actually used. If I hadn't got such a great deal on this SSD it'd be running on a significantly smaller SSD, and I wouldn't feel bad about it at all.

    6. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by ljw1004 · · Score: 1

      Not relevant. My laptop has 128gb but isn't the device that takes hundreds of high trees photos and videos each month.

      When it comes time for me to download a year's worth of photos to process them, pick favorites, make a holiday card - I can't do it. Not enough storage. I have to page in only a couple of months at a time.

      My phone also has 128gb. It doesn't have a big operating system, nor Office, nor Eclipse, not my source tree and all the binaries. Pretty much nothing but photos and videos. It ran out of space too.

      I think bigger storage would be huge.

    7. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      80386dx40 4 MB memory 20MB seagate 5400 rpm PATA harddrive and dos 6.22 here

      I totally agree that storage capacity is not the problem

    8. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by sheramil · · Score: 1

      No they don't...how old are you?

      I can currently take 0.4 seconds of slo motion video because the memory it uses is too slow and fills up too quickly. In addition to that, I can only take so many hd photos and videos because there isn't enough storage to keep more (unless I have removeable microsds).

      (gently)Then perhaps you need a video camera, and not a phone.

    9. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BS. Video cameras are close to dead. Phones keep improving at breakneck speed and will eliminate video cameras in the future.

    10. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are you so obsessed with high trees? Your family must be worried about you.

    11. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've had to resolder sockets multiple times on the things I own with micro and usb-c connectors while I never had to do that on any other connector.

      If resoldering helps the problem isn't with the connector but with the manufacturing process.

      Stop buying gadgets from companies that doesn't have proper QA.

    12. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. I'm not into social media, or photography I consider myself a typical user and I've managed to fill all 128GB of my internal phones memory with single shot photos and video.

    13. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      BS. Not even in the near future. Do you think that networks are going to be using phone cameras to broadcast live sports in 4K? Now that's just crazy talk!

    14. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by LostMyAccount · · Score: 1

      My question is why aren't the major smartphone brands pushing their phones as dockable desktops since they have desktop-like resources under the hood?

      You can argue they have bad desktop user experiences and that's maybe true at a Finder/Explorer "desktop" level, but would it really matter for actual applications on an external monitor provided scaling is done right?

      You could also argue that maybe Apple specifically doesn't want it because it because it might undermine Macintosh sales. But really, would someone who would dock an iPhone as a desktop actually be a "lost" Mac sale, or someone who would otherwise buy a cheap PC ultrabook instead? It's also hard to see Apple as 100% dedicated in their desktop platform given the lackluster hardware cycles there. It seems more compelling that they *should* pursue this further because of flagging smartphone sales.

      It seems like whatever smartphone vendor can pull this off will see a ton of growth and mostly rob from the low-end PC market. With that in mind, I'm kind of left with the conclusion we don't have dockable phones is that the entire computing industry is tied to an economic model of a PC *and* a smartphone per user. This makes sense for Samsung who sell into the desktop hardware market and might just end up shifting total dollars from PC components to smartphones, but less so for Apple whose phones are in the hands of a lot of non-Mac owners and who doesn't make money off the x86 component market.

    15. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by hairyfeet · · Score: 2

      I still use a EEE PC netbook for work, its running Linux Lite with 8Gb of RAM and 320Gb of HDD...honestly never had storage be an issue, I can always stream video if I want to watch something and you don't need a ton of space to look up parts or test networks.

      And I gotta agree with you 110% friend, as I haven't had an issue with storage on my smartphone since like Android 2 (I'm not gonna keep up with all those damn snack names like Gingerbread and Oreo or whatever) the problems have always been battery life being shit once you start doing real work and the UI being crap for anything more complicated than some Fruit Ninja style game. If I'm actually doing work? Its not gonna be on a phone, it'll be my netbook or desktop where I have actual programs built for a keyboard and mouse and enough power I can get shit done without worried I'm gonna be left without a way to get calls.

      I thought for a bit there during Android 4 things were gonna get better as the phone I had at the time had a slide out keyboard and for just a few bucks you could get a new back for it with a double sized battery (remember those? I miss those) but of course the OEM never put out any updates and soon everyone was copying Crapple and making sliver phones with weaksauce batteries and that dream died a quick death, now all my phone does besides call and text is play a time waster or watch some YouTube, certainly not gonna try to do real work on it and watch my battery meter run to empty quicker than a Caddy goes through gas.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    16. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      Why are you storing so many photos and videos on your phone? Do you need to carry them around and show/view them on a regular basis in locations without data service?

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    17. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by geek · · Score: 1

      Storage absolutely is a problem. I have to buy my wife the largest capacity because she takes pictures and videos nonstop of the kids and family. She can fill her 256GB iPhone in a weekend. I have it setup to upload photos and videos to OneDrive and then remove from the device but even then, she can fill it faster than it uploads, especially if shooting 4k.

      I can get away with a base model no problem but my wife can't and a lot of other people can't either for the same reasons. We used to store this shit on our computers but more and more we're doing it on phones.

    18. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds like a wife problem, not a technology problem. One that's choosing you money. She's using her videos and pictures as a proxy for quality of experience (parenting and otherwise.) This also costs you and your kids the benefits of her presence. It's an old trope, but nobody wants to see your videos and pictures.

    19. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What in the world do you do with all those pictures and videos? Serious question. If she's filling 256GB every weekend, and we don't count any pictures / movies at any other time, that's a shitload of pictures and videos... to do what with? There is only so much time in a day, are you spending the rest of the week reviewing them or something?

      I bet your kids would prefer she put down the phone and play with them instead. This sounds like an addition of sorts, a digital hoarding issue. Maybe stepping back from it you can see it's not normal and get her some help.

    20. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are you storing so many photos and videos on your phone? Do you need to carry them around and show/view them on a regular basis in locations without data service?

      This is hilarious. Someone says they are doing something you wouldn't so you go around questioning their motives because you don't agree.

      Maybe they don't want their shit stored on someone else's servers?

      Maybe they don't want to pay cell providers to have it "streamed" to them.

      Maybe they don't want to waste limited battery transmitting and receiving RF.

      Maybe they don't want to deal with service interruptions and low performance.

      Maybe they don't want to deal with the hassle of uploading content to someone else's servers?

      Personally I have a 400 GB SD card in my phone most of which is consumed with a huge video library. If I had several TBs of storage I would fill that up too. Whether or not you think there is another way to live without storage means absolutely nothing to everyone else.

    21. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Immerman · · Score: 1

      There's always room for improvement but - and this is the important question - how much slow-motion video do you shoot with your laptop? Shooting video is not really part of the typical "notebook experience" that I'm discussing.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    22. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I can see this thing being useful only if formatted in the phone as an extension of the internal, rather than the external storage. So that if the thing has just 16 or 32GB, then the SD card can be useful

      The speed would then be critical if the storage is being formatted as internal storage, which is not an option on iPhones or iPads. In which case, we are talking about phones post Android 6.

    23. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Forget scaling, just use the external monitor as a second screen at its native resolution - a 1080p TV works just fine as a monitor, and 4k is glorious.

      The problem though is not only the finder/explorer "desktop", it's the entire interface philosophy - phone interfaces are designed around the incredibly crude and limited tiny touch-screen interface. At best it's a crude and clunky interface to navigate via mouse. I mean yeah, you could coax it to work for some things, especially assuming you stuck to a non-windowed "fullscreen only" philosophy for applications - maybe "windows key" for pulling up the active/recent programs display, and... "Alt" for the basic menu - but toolbars? Rich multi-level context menus? You need software designed for a desktop to deliver a desktop experience, which means you need an API that provides developers the UI widgets they need in a standardized, good-looking form. None of which will be compatible with the default crude touch-screen interface.

      Now personally I don't see a major problem - you could get a LOT of work done with just full-screen programs, there are even a number of experimental desktop OSes that have intentionally gone in that direction, but it would mean that your phone is basically two separate UI platforms - touch-screen apps, and desktop programs. Apps would mostly run fine in a desktop mode, provided they didn't use multi-touch, though the crudity of the UI would be very obvious. Desktop programs though would mostly be completely unusable in touch-screen mode.

      Still, it wouldn't be that hard to make desktop programs easy to identify so that you get a standard startup splash screen when trying to launch them in touch-screen mode: "This program is designed for the desktop and not recommended for touch-screen mode [Cancel] [Continue] [Do not warn me again]".

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    24. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I haven't filled anything close to 128GB, but on WhatsApp, the photos and videos that relatives keep sending me, plus the few that I send them, has managed to fill up something less than 10GB. But yeah, I once had a camcorder, which I rarely used b'cos I rarely had it handy. The phone, on the other hand, is something always there, and the camera's gotten more useful in this age of apps, doing things like scanning checks, barcodes, Q-codes, et al.

    25. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by unixisc · · Score: 1

      I'm not AC above, but usually, the reason is that that is the device that captures the images, and the main reason to copy them to, say, a laptop, was storage capacity. Now that typical storage capacity is usually 64GB or above, which is more than enough for all the OS overhead and apps that a phone needs, there is enough space for pictures and videos. This 1TB storage would probably be handy if one wants to capture movies, or TV serials on their phone

    26. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Three words: external hard drive.

      If you want to keep a huge media library on your phone, then yes, that's likely to interfere with using it as a desktop. But there's no reason everyone else would have to forgo that functionality on your behalf.

      Besides, just one of those photos takes up far more space than a complete reasonably powerful office suite from the good old days of yore. Delete a second photo and you'd have room for dozens or hundreds of office documents. Or if you want something more modern, you can get a feature-rich word processor, spreadsheet, graphics program, etc, etc, etc in under a dozen MB each. Not MS- or Libre-Office, but those are huge bloated cows where most people don't use even 10% of the features.

      Basically, storage capacity puts a limit on the size of your media library, NOT on your phone's ability to function as a desktop. (Storage *speed* on the other hand...). And your phone already has a big operating system on it - it's mostly just the small user-interface component of it that's not designed to be used as a desktop.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    27. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      storage will consume more for desktops, as soon as M$FT and their ilk decide to embrace security and allow virtualized enclaves mroe seamlessly (ala Qubes OS).

      cynic in me say their will hurt their data mineing profit, so it (security) wont be pushed.

      having said that; phones: pictures videos backups audio, podcasts, takes up a lot of space. even if its shipped to the cloud eventually. I really feel 1tb should be standard, with optional SD card.

    28. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by Immerman · · Score: 1

      Thing is, as I've mentioned to above, that is a problem has absolutely nothing to do with the viability of a desktop experience. Compulsive hoarding will always fill all available storage space, but store just a dozen fewer pictures, and you've got plenty of room for a large collection of desktop programs.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    29. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple will gladly sell you a 1 TB iPhone... for one Kajillion dollars! Wait, no, they've decided you don't need that much storage. If you hold them correctly your storage needs go down, apparently.

    30. Re:Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, current Ipads have 4GB RAM (the ones branded as "Pro") unless you get the one with 6GB RAM. How to get the 6GB RAM? It's only available on Ipad with 1TB flash.

    31. Re: Storage capacity is not the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://www.samsung.com/us/explore/dex/

  6. Re: It sure is, homo. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is no whore. That is a woman.

  7. Portability and Future Proofing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's not the capacity or the speed I care about. I want the ability to move the card between devices, or repurpose it for other uses. Tying it to a device where every other component (such as the battery) is locked out is not what I care for. MicroSD for me!

  8. Laptops by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

    Hopefully this will also lead to more affordable solid state storage solutions for laptops too.

    I could also hope this will feed into lower prices for Nintendo Switch cartridges, but the type of storage probably isnâ(TM)t adapted for that?

    --
    Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    1. Re:Laptops by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 2

      Hopefully this will also lead to more affordable solid state storage solutions for laptops too.
      One problem with that: unless it's on a user-replaceable module, if something unrecoverable happens to it, your laptop becomes a brick.
      On the other hand if they can get 1TB on a single IC, then imagine the capacity of a standard 2.5" SSD! Virtually unlimited space for a single user.

    2. Re:Laptops by mentil · · Score: 1

      Actually, at least some early Switch cartridges used NAND instead of mask ROM, which is likely why they delayed 64GB cartridges a whole year (since NAND prices were sky-high at the time.) At wholesale high-volume pricing, it amounts to pennies, so you won't see games on the shelf any cheaper.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    3. Re:Laptops by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      On the other hand if they can get 1TB on a single IC, then imagine the capacity of a standard 2.5" SSD! Virtually unlimited space for a single user.

      I was thinking in the same direction. I don't care about soldering this chip inside a phone. Give me a couple of these on an M.2 drive.

    4. Re:Laptops by iampiti · · Score: 1

      I'm under the impression that recently the capacity of SSDs hasn't been limited by the size of a typical 2.5'' enclosure but rather by the cost of the flash memory.

    5. Re:Laptops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are pictures of some opened SATA SSDs : the board is very small, near the power and data connectors, and about 80% of the enclosure is empty.

  9. Three-letter agencies should love this by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Now people will be encouraged and enabled to keep everything on their phones, so it'll be one-stop-shopping for all the three-letter government agencies when they decide to sift your life. I'd encourage everyone to put as much scat porn on their phones as possible against future possibility of this.

    1. Re:Three-letter agencies should love this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How the hell is that 'flamebait'?

  10. I read both of the articles, but.... by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

    I read both of the articles, but neither one mentioned the only thing I'm interested in: how much will this 1TB chip cost?

    Cards with 400GB to 500GB of storage are anywhere from $130 up to $250 give or take, so how much is a 1TB card going to cost?

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:I read both of the articles, but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cost of the chip won't really tell you anything. The prices changes dramatically depending on if you buy 100 or 1,000,000.
      One thing to keep in mind is that work load and material cost doesn't change much between different storage sizes.
      The smaller chip will have better yield but the rest of the price has more to do with a negotiation of the price.
      It is expected that the larger chip will cost more to begin with but sooner or later the manufacturer wants to stop producing the older chips.

      As for the cost of a card it is on the consumer end and has more to do with what other cards costs.
      They will probably land at 195% of the cost of a 500GB card.
      Cheaper than buying two smaller cards, but not much.

    2. Re:I read both of the articles, but.... by mentil · · Score: 2

      This is an embedded chip that will be sold wholesale in volume, then soldered onto phone motherboards. There is an external version of UFS but it went nowhere so Samsung doesn't make them anymore AFAIK. The latest SD card standard is faster in comparison so UFS cards are likely permanently dead.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    3. Re:I read both of the articles, but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because it's going to be in a phone, it will cost $3000, and you will buy a new one every 9-14 months, and you will like it.

      Now, get back to work at your dead-end job, subject!

    4. Re:I read both of the articles, but.... by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      A quick look at current prices for 1 TB M.2 drives shows a range of around $150 to $350 (Samsung's is at the $350 end). I would guess that this chip would be about the same if you were buying it at regular retail price. Phone manufacturers will almost certainly get it cheaper in bulk.

    5. Re:I read both of the articles, but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um - the 400GB micro SD card is like $80 on amazon today...

  11. Samsung Best Brand In The World by jennywatson · · Score: 0

    Samsung is well known in the market for his products like printer samsung provides samsung printer support over the phone call. You can dial +1(800) 684-5649 for printer help instantly without wasting your time you can visit their site also : https://bit.ly/2ApldMO

    1. Re:Samsung Best Brand In The World by johnsie · · Score: 1

      I prefer Xiaomi. Better hardware with a lower price markup.

  12. 1 GB/sec faster than SSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Balderdash!

    My SSD has a sequential read speed of 3.2 GB/sec. It writes slightly slower, but not by much.

  13. LOL at "260 10 minute videos" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not just put "2,600 minutes of video"? Or is that too big a number for Americans to cope with? WTF?

  14. 640K ought to be enough for anybody by johnsie · · Score: 3, Funny

    640K ought to be enough for anybody

    1. Re:640K ought to be enough for anybody by mentil · · Score: 1

      I agree, 640,000 of these chips ought to store all my data.

      --
      Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
    2. Re:640K ought to be enough for anybody by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You joke. 100 years from now when you are trying to store just 1 more 3D holographic video in 800K resolution on your phone only to be greeted with: "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I cant do that".

  15. Hot stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Samsung's phones were not hot enough, after this they will be nothing short of explosive. Not for nothing is Samsung a company on fire. I bet we are all burning with anticipation.

  16. Re: It sure is, homo. by Alypius · · Score: 1

    "Well, no offense, but if that is a woman it looks like she was beaten with an ugly stick!" --Austin Powers

  17. Beautuful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For those who use their phones as a tiny computer, this is a godsend. Even with carrying around a small bluetooth keyboard and mouse, it's still much less of a hassle than carrying a laptop, plus those things can be stowed when I don't need them.

    Now if there are more Android work apps that can match up to their desktop counterparts, in terms of function, I'd be in heaven.