08-05-2016, 08:20 AM
Marcus, I purchased one of the Samsung Evo+ cards, the 64GB version, and have had the exact same problem that I had with my SanDisk Ultra cards. I have yet to find a company that sells flash storage that uses 1024. Both my Samsung and SanDisk cards even state on the packaging (in very small letters) that they use 1000. Knowing that is the case, I would agree with Stiansen (as well as many others that have made the same point in numerous threads) that the images should be sized with this in mind. So telling someone to go buy a better quality SD card is not really a fix.
As mentioned in this thread, there are those of us who do not have a linux system or know anything about setting one up, myself included. So we don't know how to deal with changing partitions.
I don't understand why the image files aren't just made a little smaller, as that would solve this problem once and for all. From all the threads I've read on this same issue, it sounds like part of the image is actually just open space that can be used for storage. Why not just make that a little smaller so it fits on the cards? They aren't oversized by much, and I imagine dropping a small amount of the storage space would be the way to go. Besides, having a 32GB image on a 64GB card means there's a ton of storage I'm missing out on, so if the storage available in the image was dropped by 1 or 2 GB, it would be an improvement because I could use the rest of the space on my larger card.
So make the images a little smaller, make everyone happy, and those of us that don't know how to resize partitions can still make full use of the cards we buy. It seems much easier for the provider of the images to resize rather than asking every user to resize the image on their own.
As mentioned in this thread, there are those of us who do not have a linux system or know anything about setting one up, myself included. So we don't know how to deal with changing partitions.
I don't understand why the image files aren't just made a little smaller, as that would solve this problem once and for all. From all the threads I've read on this same issue, it sounds like part of the image is actually just open space that can be used for storage. Why not just make that a little smaller so it fits on the cards? They aren't oversized by much, and I imagine dropping a small amount of the storage space would be the way to go. Besides, having a 32GB image on a 64GB card means there's a ton of storage I'm missing out on, so if the storage available in the image was dropped by 1 or 2 GB, it would be an improvement because I could use the rest of the space on my larger card.
So make the images a little smaller, make everyone happy, and those of us that don't know how to resize partitions can still make full use of the cards we buy. It seems much easier for the provider of the images to resize rather than asking every user to resize the image on their own.
Kickstarter backer #5,864 -- SBC Noob -- SE Michigan, USA