[DallasFlier]

I just migrated yesterday from an 8800 to a new 8310. Installed the latest OS before I did anything else, so am on 4.2.2.184 from these forums. For reference, my old 8800 is on 4.2.1.101. For some reason, my identically configured 8310 has a LOT less memory available. Here are the specs:

8310:

File Total: 54,919,168
File Free: 9,616,917

8800:

File Total: 63,569,920
File Free: 20,146,992

So a nearly 9Mb difference in File Total, which translates to less than half the File Free space, which is worrying me a little. Why is this? Is this normal? I think my 8700 File Total was about what the 8800 reports So why is the 8310 reporting so much less to start with (again, for identical configurations, via the Switch Device Wizard, which worked flawlessly, FWIW)?

[rivviepop]

Try installing the 8310 firmware files that match your device version on your PC, then run the Application wizard. I would hazard to guess that you have a bunch of extra languages and stuff still installed that you don't need (but can't see, so to speak) - typical free space after boot with only English (and no 3rd party apps - i.e. like new) should be around 18 to 20 meg, give or take. Most people end up with 14 to 16meg free after adding their 3rd party stuff.

[DallasFlier]

Originally Posted by rivviepop

Try installing the 8310 firmware files that match your device version on your PC, then run the Application wizard. I would hazard to guess that you have a bunch of extra languages and stuff still installed that you don't need (but can't see, so to speak) - typical free space after boot with only English (and no 3rd party apps - i.e. like new) should be around 18 to 20 meg, give or take. Most people end up with 14 to 16meg free after adding their 3rd party stuff.

No, I don't have any extra languages and "stuff" and have also removed the sample video. Please note what I posted - its the File Total, not the File Free space that's low, and the phone is configured identically to the 8800 it replaced. The File Total shouldn't have anything to do with what I have installed or not, that's the File Free number.

Does everyone else's 8310 have this low File Total memory amount??

[rivviepop]

Originally Posted by DallasFlier

Does everyone else's 8310 have this low File Total memory amount??

I misunderstood your concern. My 8320 lists the same file free as your 8310.

[DallasFlier]

Originally Posted by rivviepop

I misunderstood your concern. My 8320 lists the same file free as your 8310.

Sorry, if I sounded short with you, it wasn't intended. Did you mean your 8320 lists the same File Total amount? If so, thanks for that data point, I wonder why the 83xx stars out almost 9Mb short of the other models!

[rivviepop]

Originally Posted by DallasFlier

Sorry, if I sounded short with you, it wasn't intended. Did you mean your 8320 lists the same File Total amount? If so, thanks for that data point, I wonder why the 83xx stars out almost 9Mb short of the other models!

Yes, the File Total (I mis-typed, sorry) is what matches.

[Grammer]

I'm not sure, but my only guess would be that the 83xx series BBs might restrict a certain amount of memory to be used with the handling of media files.

[pinhead]

I noticed this a long time ago on the first AT&T Curve and it is still the same on the newer ones from AT&T and T-Mobile. My 8800 had plenty of memory but I find that I keep a close eye on the memory of my 8320. If the 8800 from T-Mobile had the update OS I would probably switch back...it has more memory and better battery life.

[tdawg00]

8320 starts at 52mb.... WIfI/uma files maybe, same goes for the gps curve....

[CBR900RR]

Only one thing is common with 8300 8310 8320, the camera, just a guess.

[rivviepop]

The OP was referring to the size of the memory chip(s) in the device, it has nothing to do with what's installed or if it's GPS, Wifi, etc. Basically it appears the 88xx devices are manufactured with 64meg, whereas the 83xx are 52meg based on what people are reporting. Because RIM uses a single/unified memory pool this directly translates into less space free after installing all the OS bits on the 83xx series devices.

[tdawg00]

Wirelessly posted (8320: BlackBerry8320/4.2.2 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/100)

Originally Posted by rivviepop

The OP was referring to the size of the memory chip(s) in the device, it has nothing to do with what's installed or if it's GPS, Wifi, etc. Basically it appears the 88xx devices are manufactured with 64meg, whereas the 83xx are 52meg based on what people are reporting. Because RIM uses a single/unified memory pool this directly translates into less space free after installing all the OS bits on the 83xx series devices.

Not true.. They don't even manufacture flash memory in partial capacities. The 8300 8310 and the 8320 all have three different memory totals. the wifi needs more software to process data. The gps needs more software to process data. The 8800 has a different memory than the 8100 even though its the same phone as the 8800 except it doesn't have gps... All blackberries since the pearl all have 16sram and 64mb flash memory. but it seems that the gps and wifi have software stacks set aside for that purpose

[rivviepop]

Originally Posted by tdawg00

All blackberries since the pearl all have 16sram and 64mb flash memory. but it seems that the gps and wifi have software stacks set aside for that purpose

While I really want to believe (heh), one problem is that the 8300 also only displays a 52meg total - and we know if has neither GPS or Wifi. Maybe they just bit the bullet on the base 8300 and there's some wasted reserved flash ram sitting there? They probably have a core partitioning of the reserved areas then that's common to an entire line (83xx + OS 4.2, e.g.).

Sadly, I'm finding little official information and only ad-hoc observance reports; a Google hit brought back this interesting list:

These are the Stats for the different Blackberrys On our BES:
Device/memory/OS
7100/32mb/4.1
7100i/64mb/4.1
7100/32mb/4.0
7290/32mb/4.1
7290/32mb/4.0
8703e/58mb/4.1
8700/72mb/4.1
8700/64/4.2
8100/72/4.2
8800/64mb/4.2
8830/48/4.2
8300/56mb/4.2
8310/56mb/4.2

(hxxp://blackberryforums.pinstack.com/501997-post11.html)

[tdawg00]

Originally Posted by rivviepop

While I really want to believe (heh), one problem is that the 8300 also only displays a 52meg total - and we know if has neither GPS or Wifi. Maybe they just bit the bullet on the base 8300 and there's some wasted reserved flash ram sitting there? They probably have a core partitioning of the reserved areas then that's common to an entire line (83xx + OS 4.2, e.g.).

Sadly, I'm finding little official information and only ad-hoc observance reports; a Google hit brought back this interesting list:



(hxxp://blackberryforums.pinstack.com/501997-post11.html)

Hmmm odd The Pearl has 72mb when all the ones I seen 8100gsm has 64, the 8120 has 48 or something like that. 8310 has something has different.

RIM doesn't manufacture memory, and no one does random memory chips.... That information is wrong...

Every memory chip made is double by its predecessor by two. 16,32,64,128,256,512 not 46,49,53,61,62,66,71,72.

Look at those devices and tell me the different between the two... 8830 CDMA/GSM need software to run that combo, 8320 has 52 and needs software for the wifi/UMA calling.....


Research In Motion 8310 Blackberry

[rivviepop]

Originally Posted by tdawg00

Hmmm odd The Pearl has 72mb when all the ones I seen 8100gsm has 64, the 8120 has 48 or something like that. 8310 has something has different.

yeah I think that list is "observed total", they're all 64meg (well except the older ones) and that poster is reporting what they see after OS partitioning as you've laid out. That 72meg looks like an anomaly and we should ignore them - the poster didn't really provide much detail so it all might be circumspect, really.