More specifically: The claim is not in regard to a new type of memory or storage, or a new usage of storage. It only refers to a computing device's capabilities to store data both temporarily and semi-permanently. For example, the difference between a captured photo or video image, or audio sample, that is dismissed if not specifically designated to be saved, vs. ones that are saved on a drive of any type.

  • 1
    Did you want to only cover storage physically present in "the device"? – George White Jan 16 '18 at 19:33
  • Initially I was thinking only of storage on "the device." Considering it further I suppose it will be better if the wording covers storage “external to the device,” such as a form of internet cloud storage. Suggestions about that? – Charles Jan 16 '18 at 21:04
  • 1
    What exactly is it that you're trying to claim? That is, why does it matter that there's data, and in what way does that data matter? For example, if only having access to the data is important, but it is irrelevant where the data is stored, there is seemingly no reason to mention its storage at all: it is simply data accessible by the device, whether transient or not. Without knowing the context, I'm not sure it's possible to have any view about whether it's adequately covered. – Maca Jan 16 '18 at 22:38
  • Maca, that seems a good point. Maybe I was obsessing too much about how "memory" is defined or extended in meaning. In fact for the concept, the manner of storing data is not important. The idea has nothing to do with what kind of memory or exactly how is used, it only depends on using some form of data storage. – Charles Jan 17 '18 at 2:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.