Allegedly, a lot of users often cheaped out on SD cards and then used them as adopted system storage where they moved all their apps to. This had the effect of completely tanking phone performance and then they would often get corrupted after a bit of use taking user data with them. This then generated a load of negative reputation about the devices being slow and unreliable, when the problem was the choice of SD card, and generated a load of wasted money in supporting these users when that happened (think unnecessary RMAs, etc).

Personally I think they should just have restricted it to A1+ SD cards, and sucked up the people complaining about their bargain bin Scrandrisk SD not working. But I guess they saw an opportunity to have their cake and eat it by just removing it and charging a premium for larger storage skus.

[–] potustheplant@feddit.nl 10 points 2 months ago (4 children)

I literally never heard or read about a user say that when using an sd card. They just took it out to charge more for more storage.

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (3 children)

It's not the users saying it, it's the OEMs. Back when this was a new discussion, I at least remember Google saying this as justification for why it stopped including them in their devices after the nexus 4

[–] potustheplant@feddit.nl 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Well, that was a lie to justify screwing over their users.

[–] 9point6@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don't think it's a lie, it's objectively true that shit SD cards would have that effect on performance if used as adopted storage. But I do agree with you that it was a convenient excuse, as I wrote at the end of my original comment.

[–] potustheplant@feddit.nl 1 points 2 months ago

Yeah but how many people you kbow actually formatted their sd card to install apps on it? Everyone I know (and myself) use it only for media.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (9 replies)