Support

Open search

Apps storage space issue

Highlighted
Helping Hand

TV: UE55 NU7500

I'm not sure whether this is a general Samsung issue or just to do with my TV, but the amount of space allocated to the Smart Hub apps seems to be seriously lacking.

 

As this is a new TV I thought I'd explore some of the available apps, but when I went into the Apps area I got a message saying that there was insufficient space to update apps. This was before I had downloaded anything, so it would purely apply to the pre-installed apps. 

 

I checked settings and the used space was 751MB with 64MB available, i.e. 7%. This seems absurd as these apps can't be deleted and are built into the system. The available space doesn't even allow them to be updated. I then tried resetting Smart Hub. This has helped to an extent as the available space is now 13%. However, it's still far too low and whenever I try and download a new app I get a warning about available space.

 

I can't believe that the pre-installed apps are taking around 700MB of space, and it seems crazy that Samsung would design the system this way. Presumably I will have to install an SD card to provide more space for the apps?

Any tips welcome as this is my first Samsung TV.

1,749 REPLIES 1,749
Highlighted

I would assume that even though the Samsung support network is widely dispersed they'd have a logging system to track reoccurring issues. Therefore it's particularly annoying that when this fault is reported they make out that it's a new thing which needs 'investigating'.  

 

You sound like a IT professional. I'm not but I have an interest in it, and one of the reasons I keep subscribed to this thread is that one day I hope to see the root cause of the issue and maybe a solution. I'm astonished as to how something like this can happen.

 

The OS is standard and the updated 2019 RU 7*** range has no such issues. Do you have any thoughts as to what might be causing the issue with the 2018 NU7*** range, especially if the mobo is a standard 4GB unit?

Highlighted

Well,

 

in this sense you're making a mistake ( as consideration ).

The motherboards are not identical, the storage "is" on the paper identical

 

If it was a software issue, it would have been easily fixed >>> is simply an hardware issue, and by logic is located in the emmc chip ( storage ), be it a partitioning error or a production flaw.

What we don't know is if every single board produced has this problem. What we know is that the substituted ones mentioned in this thread "have" the issue ( and available storage is not even fix but I think there's a variance that we can deduce ).

From this we can guess one of two things : 1) all boards produced are flawed, including the spares or 2) they don't know which batches are flawed and thus they attempt substituting in the chance that the spare is maybe one of the boards without issues

Highlighted
Navigator

So I've recently been getting the storage full message pop up, so logged a call with JL. I emailed them waited two days for them to respond, which never came, so eventual went to online chat and logged the call that way. I explained the issue and they have assigned a technician from their repair company out next Saturday to resolve the issue! Lol. I'd like to hear what they have to say about this...

 

I'm already browsing my replacement TV on JLs website lol, Gona go with LG this time

Highlighted

As we altr


@mazzinia wrote:

Well,

 

in this sense you're making a mistake ( as consideration ).

The motherboards are not identical, the storage "is" on the paper identical

 

If it was a software issue, it would have been easily fixed >>> is simply an hardware issue, and by logic is located in the emmc chip ( storage ), be it a partitioning error or a production flaw.

What we don't know is if every single board produced has this problem. What we know is that the substituted ones mentioned in this thread "have" the issue ( and available storage is not even fix but I think there's a variance that we can deduce ).

From this we can guess one of two things : 1) all boards produced are flawed, including the spares or 2) they don't know which batches are flawed and thus they attempt substituting in the chance that the spare is maybe one of the boards without issues


As we know that all board replacements have failed to resolve the issue I suppose it's safe to assume that all the boards for this model are flawed. The next question is why?

Highlighted

@Tony47 wrote:

I would assume that even though the Samsung support network is widely dispersed they'd have a logging system to track reoccurring issues. Therefore it's particularly annoying that when this fault is reported they make out that it's a new thing which needs 'investigating'.  

 

You sound like a IT professional. I'm not but I have an interest in it, and one of the reasons I keep subscribed to this thread is that one day I hope to see the root cause of the issue and maybe a solution. I'm astonished as to how something like this can happen.

 

The OS is standard and the updated 2019 RU 7*** range has no such issues. Do you have any thoughts as to what might be causing the issue with the 2018 NU7*** range, especially if the mobo is a standard 4GB unit?


Yep, was it that obvious :face-with-stuck-out-tongue-and-winking-eye: ; 26+ years in IT ranging from systems assessment, desktop support, technical management, to system design and now I architect enterprise government IT systems.

 

So this is common in IT, and I am speculating quite a bit in what Samsung do, but I could log 20, 100, 1000 tickets, but unless someone effectively creates a PR (Problem Record), each ticket will exist in isolation, couple that with variance in support locations, internationally relevent, location of call centres etc and you never get to a resolution because it's not recognised wholesale.

 

You make an interesting point in regard to why it's not showing on the RU7x models. Plain and simple it could be just down to the actual allocated storage space. It may be software and how it interprets raw storage, and it may be prevelent there also for all we know, but the increased capacity allows the issue to pass by (although I have my doubts about this being the cause). We are also only going on a few chinese whispers and no real concrete position that it's actually 4GB in the NU7xx range. There is likely to be a reservation for the firmware, and given the dowload is 1.3Gb, I would have at a guess it's in that ball park, and if less, say 2GB, leaving 'user space' in the 700/800 range.

 

As has been mentioned, it could also be hardware. The eMMC chip in the NU models could be circa 2GB, the eMMC chip in the RU models could be 4GB, but the O/S, board and everything else is the same. It would make sense from a manufacturing POV to do this. NU model eMMC could also be <Make A> and RU eMMC could be <Make B>. They could even be the same make and the same size but the 2018 batch product quality vs 2019 batch product quality was lower, it could have even been manufactured in different plants, and hence has an inherent fault (think cheap nasty fake USB stick you buy off eBay and it says its 8GB, but really its only 4GB when used)

 

There are many factors to this.

Highlighted

Yes, but the 2017 and 2016 7x00 models have all the same amount of free storage the 2019 model (RU) has.

Nobody in his sane mind does a design for some years centered on 4gb visible to the userland ( with a bit more than 2gb left free to use), on purpose cuts down the storage for one year, and goes back to as before with the subsequent year.

Moreover I can infer that the emmc has always been 8gb in the past years and in the current year model.

 

4gb not visible to the user, with inside the boot loader + the os protected space and a copy of that area for upgrades , and a 4gb user area with inside the visible part of the os , the mandatory apps and the space for the to be installed by the user apps

Highlighted

@mazzinia wrote:

Yes, but the 2017 and 2016 7x00 models have all the same amount of free storage the 2019 model (RU) has.

Nobody in his sane mind does a design for some years centered on 4gb visible to the user and (with a bit more than 2gb left free to use), on purpose cuts down the storage for one year, and goes back to as before with the subsequent year.

Moreover I can infer that the emmc has always been 8gb in the past years and in the current year model.

 

4gb not visible to the user, with inside the boot loader + the os protected space and a copy of that area for upgrades , and a 4gb user area with inside the visible part of the os , the mandatory apps and the space for the to be installed by the user apps


The sentence above in bold is the key issue - how and why did this happen just with the 2018 models? It makes no sense whatsoever. If it's a manufacturing/component issue why wasn't it picked up?

Highlighted

@mazzinia wrote:

Yes, but the 2017 and 2016 7x00 models have all the same amount of free storage the 2019 model (RU) has.

Nobody in his sane mind does a design for some years centered on 4gb visible to the userland ( with a bit more than 2gb left free to use), on purpose cuts down the storage for one year, and goes back to as before with the subsequent year.

Moreover I can infer that the emmc has always been 8gb in the past years and in the current year model.

 

4gb not visible to the user, with inside the boot loader + the os protected space and a copy of that area for upgrades , and a 4gb user area with inside the visible part of the os , the mandatory apps and the space for the to be installed by the user apps


Where are you getting the information from that it's 8GB.  I have an NU7670 and an NU7400 xx and I've never had more than 815Mb free (I haven't checked my RU7400), so 'visibly' less than 1GB and assuming a 1.3GB firmware file (which contains the bootloader etc) and assuming a modicum of overhead for downloads, 4GB feels like what they've allocated.

 

I think, you are making some assumptions here. I could argue it's 2Gb, 4GB, 6GB, 8GB but without any hard fact you will never know.

 

You have to also remember that TV apps are as small as 16k, so you could reasonably assume 2GB (front facing), or 4GB would be a safe amount. The problem comes when you start to use that same storage for caching, user manuals, hotfixes, updates etc. For all we know, it may be downloading updates, but not removing residual files.

 

Regardless of what we all think, or assume, there is a problem and it can fall into any one of a number of areas.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Highlighted

I'm using the post from some days ago with the link to the team that tried to hack the tv as part of a competition.
They removed the emmc and obtained the data of the partitions and the contents. Bootloader + something small reserved , plus 2 x 1.6gb partitions (one for the os proper one for flashing a new one) plus the area to mount under opt as userland, around 4gb

 

PartitionSizeImage nameflash_upgrade_typeflash_partition_mapMountpointAccess
0512KBonboot.binOTHERBOOTLOADER0  
1512KBddr.initUSERINIT0  
2512KBddr.initUSERINIT1  
32048KBseret.binUSERSERET0  
42048KBseret.binUSERSERET1  
515360KBuImageUSERKERNEL0  
615360KBuImageUSERKERNEL1  
71024KBdtb.binUSERDTB0  
81024KBdtb.binUSERDTB1  
964KBsign.binUSERSIGN0  
1064KBsign.binUSERSIGN1  
1164KBVD-HEADER    
122048KBsecos.binUSERSECOS0  
132048KBsecos.binUSERSECOS1  
141024KBsecos_drv.binUSERS_DRV0  
151024KBsecos_drv.binUSERS_DRV1  
162048KB  K_DUMP Read-write
1712288KB  DRM0/mnt/drmRead-write
181638400KBplatform.imgUSERPLATFORM0  
191638400KBplatform.imgUSERPLATFORM1  
2020480KBsystemrw.imgOTHERCONTENT0/mnt/systemrwRead-write
214274360KBdata.imgOTHERCONTENT1/OPTRead-write
224096KBreserved    

@Vengeance72 wrote:


Yep, was it that obvious :face-with-stuck-out-tongue-and-winking-eye: ; 26+ years in IT ranging from systems assessment, desktop support, technical management, to system design and now I architect enterprise government IT systems.

 

So this is common in IT, and I am speculating quite a bit in what Samsung do, but I could log 20, 100, 1000 tickets, but unless someone effectively creates a PR (Problem Record), each ticket will exist in isolation, couple that with variance in support locations, internationally relevent, location of call centres etc and you never get to a resolution because it's not recognised wholesale.

 

You make an interesting point in regard to why it's not showing on the RU7x models. Plain and simple it could be just down to the actual allocated storage space. It may be software and how it interprets raw storage, and it may be prevelent there also for all we know, but the increased capacity allows the issue to pass by (although I have my doubts about this being the cause). We are also only going on a few chinese whispers and no real concrete position that it's actually 4GB in the NU7xx range. There is likely to be a reservation for the firmware, and given the dowload is 1.3Gb, I would have at a guess it's in that ball park, and if less, say 2GB, leaving 'user space' in the 700/800 range.

 

As has been mentioned, it could also be hardware. The eMMC chip in the NU models could be circa 2GB, the eMMC chip in the RU models could be 4GB, but the O/S, board and everything else is the same. It would make sense from a manufacturing POV to do this. NU model eMMC could also be <Make A> and RU eMMC could be <Make B>. They could even be the same make and the same size but the 2018 batch product quality vs 2019 batch product quality was lower, it could have even been manufactured in different plants, and hence has an inherent fault (think cheap nasty fake USB stick you buy off eBay and it says its 8GB, but really its only 4GB when used)

 

There are many factors to this.


Thanks for the reply. I always assumed that tech companies would be more organised and create unified problem records across their operation to chase down issues, but from what you say it doesn't appear that they do.

 

I agree there are many potential factors to this but would you think by now Samsung would have pinpointed the cause, or are they still floundering?

Top Liked Authors