Why the limited flash memory?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

My library is my PC, my reader is my book bag: my wildly oversized book bag.

Same here. I have about 20% of my eBook library on my Kindle: the 20% that I'm likely to want to read in the foreseeable future. Eg I always like to read books in series order, so for all my series I have the next 3 or 4 in the series on the Kindle. So if I have books 1, 2, 3 in a series on my Kindle, when I finish book 1, I'll delete it, and load book 4 onto the Kindle, so that the next few books in the series are there waiting for me.

[shalym]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

My library is my PC, my reader is my book bag: my wildly oversized book bag.

Exactly.

Shari

[Ripplinger]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

My library is my PC, my reader is my book bag: my wildly oversized book bag.

That's me as well. I keep around 500 books on my ereader, there's really no need for me to carry any more than that. I long ago got over wanting to carry every ebook I own with me 24/7. There's just no reason for it, so I'm fine with a reader that doesn't even have an SDcard slot.

[MikeB1972]

I only keep a subset of my books on my reader as well, it becomes near impossible to decide/find what to read if all my books are on it.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

I only keep a subset of my books on my reader as well, it becomes near impossible to decide/find what to read if all my books are on it.

This is, of course, a limitation of the software on your reader. But since those of us with hundreds/thousands of ebooks are in a very small minority, it seems unlikely that ebook reader software will consider our needs any time soon.

Thank Kovid for calibre. I think it's time for another donation.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

And there is also the fact to consider, that even many many of the heavy readers still don't care, since we have computers and stuff to keep our books on.
Absolute necessity for organization purposes -- calibre rules.
.

Uh-huh.
When I got my FIRE tablet I was worried that 32GB was not going to be enough.
Then I found out that ES File manager can mount SMB network shares. Storage problem solved.

Then Calibre Companion came to the Amazon App store and so did in-app OneDrive support for most of my frequently used tablet apps. Nowadays I normally run with 11-15G free and still have access to everything. I'm slowly re-ripping my CDs and LPs to flac and that would not be an affordable option without network storage. It's taken me a while to recalibrate (pun intended) my media use patterns (and I'm still not as cloud-centric as I could be--probably never will be) but once I reset I stopped worrying about device storage. 32GB PCs don't scare me now; they tempt me with potential. Like this:

http://www.amazon.com/VENSMILE%C2%AE...+atom+computer

I'm still learning new ways to exploit my toys.
Times change.
I adapt.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by crankypants

On my Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 I can hook a flash drive to the micro USB port, but I don't know how to unhook it via the OS. With unix, if you just pull off the flash drive, it could scramble your data. They sell an angled micro-usb to USB converter for tablets. They are also making USB drives with a micro USB connection too.

Funny, I've never had a problem "just pulling off the flash drive", although I've been exclusively using a linux OS for several years now.

The same problem happens with Windows -- but you may be missing what the problem is.
Writes are buffered, they don't happen immediately.

"Safely Eject", or umount, is nothing more than a way to tell the OS that you are about to remove the device, and to immediately flush the write cache, then detach the device from the OS.

...

Unless you pull the drive immediately after intense writing, you are most likely going to be all right.

...

Just want to point out again, that this has nothing to do with unix.
In fact, Windows will curse you with the dreaded dirty bit any time you remove a drive without ejecting, regardless of whether it was copying files something which unix emphatically doesn't do.

[DiapDealer]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Times change.
I adapt.

What sort of heretical nonsense is this?!

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

"Safely Eject", or umount, is nothing more than a way to tell the OS that you are about to remove the device, and to immediately flush the write cache, then detach the device from the OS.

The previous poster is saying (if I understand him correctly) that he simply doesn't know how to safely dismount a USB drive from his tablet, not that he doesn't understand the necessity of doing so.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The previous poster is saying (if I understand him correctly) that he simply doesn't know how to safely dismount a USB drive from his tablet, not that he doesn't understand the necessity of doing so.

Well, that and that it is a unix thing to do.

Apologies if I was unclear what I was pointing out is that it is more a feature of disk drives than the OS.

Also, that waiting enough time for the write cache to flush itself is a usually-safe alternative.

[theducks]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

What sort of heretical nonsense is this?!

What is wrong with straw filled shipping crates for your clay tablets?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by theducks

What is wrong with straw filled shipping crates for your clay tablets?

Stone tablets are a lot better if you want to read your tablets in the bath.

[SleepyBob]

Originally Posted by crossi

Putting a larger memory in during construction is just a matter of substititing one widget for another during construction, no change in the architecture or software needed.

Isn't "switching one widget for another" what caused the failure of the Apollo 13 mission? Changes are rarely as simple as end-users assume they are. For all we know, 4GB is a hardcoded constant in the software.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by SleepyBob

Isn't "switching one widget for another" what caused the failure of the Apollo 13 mission?

No, it was caused by damaged insulation on wires to a "stirring fan" inside an oxygen tank causing a short-circuit which ignited the insulation, leading to an explosion.

[Cinisajoy]

Originally Posted by SleepyBob

Isn't "switching one widget for another" what caused the failure of the Apollo 13 mission? Changes are rarely as simple as end-users assume they are. For all we know, 4GB is a hardcoded constant in the software.

Switching widgets was what saved them. I assume you mean the oxygen scrubbers.