kim0785b
Oct 23, 04:20 PM
losers, i hate microsoft, stupid capitalists.
Ben Dixon
Sep 17, 05:37 AM
I'm all set for Gran Turismo 5 now :D
http://i971.photobucket.com/albums/ae198/Ben_Dixon/003.jpg
Don't worry, your vision is fine. One of the wheels is for a friend at university.
http://i971.photobucket.com/albums/ae198/Ben_Dixon/003.jpg
Don't worry, your vision is fine. One of the wheels is for a friend at university.
skunk
Apr 27, 12:50 PM
Obviously taking everything out of context, when we are dealing with the bleeding obvious there is no reason not to suggest it. I watched the video before reading the comments, so your point has no substance.You must have seen a lot of people having fits to be able to make such a confident judgement. Personally, having only lived with a severe epileptic in the household for nine years, I would unhesitatingly defer to you expertise. What do I know?
Tones2
Apr 22, 10:29 AM
I'm just curious if the projected combined CMA / HSPA chips to be included in the iPhone would support HSPA+? That would at least give us some extra speed for iPhone 5. I don't think the current AT&T iPhone 4 does support HSPA+ - unless I'm mistaken.
Tony
Tony
more...
daneoni
May 1, 11:27 PM
The whole operation sounds like something the fictional Clark and Chavez leading a very small Rainbow Six unit from a Tom Clancy novel would do. :)
lol so true. More supposed info leaking out...
This was a helicopter raid conducted by a small team of special forces. There were allegedly ISI personnel on the ground with our special forces. Zadari was contacted to give safe transit of the helicopter team.
lol so true. More supposed info leaking out...
This was a helicopter raid conducted by a small team of special forces. There were allegedly ISI personnel on the ground with our special forces. Zadari was contacted to give safe transit of the helicopter team.
countach
Oct 24, 09:07 AM
(Guess I would want the non-glossy screen? I guess that looks like a normal desktop LCD?)
Do some google searches on the pros and cons. The glossy has a sharper image with brighter colors. It even has less glare under some circumstances.
Do some google searches on the pros and cons. The glossy has a sharper image with brighter colors. It even has less glare under some circumstances.
more...
ciTiger
Apr 22, 05:04 PM
I think the iphone can still loose half of it's size lol
But I find it hard to believe it is going to suffer a redesign already...
But I find it hard to believe it is going to suffer a redesign already...
yg17
Apr 29, 03:22 PM
You like lossy compression? How 1990's of you.
iTunes is lossy too :rolleyes:
Edit: And glad to see someone downrated me for stating a fact. Real mature.
iTunes is lossy too :rolleyes:
Edit: And glad to see someone downrated me for stating a fact. Real mature.
more...
Tonezorz
May 4, 03:39 PM
Read through this thread. Look at other sites that picked this up. Look at what you did.
Think next time.
Wow. I knew exactly what I did. I was fishing for an official response and noted I had planned, like every other year, to upgrade to the newest phone this summer. Instead of detailing exactly why the date was moved, I was told about Apple's plans not to release during June/July. I too purchased the iPhone 4 as soon as it was available, and in fact had it in my hands on the 23rd.
I don't know where this got off track onto how and when I pay my bill, but you don't need to jump on me for forwarding an email.
Think next time.
Wow. I knew exactly what I did. I was fishing for an official response and noted I had planned, like every other year, to upgrade to the newest phone this summer. Instead of detailing exactly why the date was moved, I was told about Apple's plans not to release during June/July. I too purchased the iPhone 4 as soon as it was available, and in fact had it in my hands on the 23rd.
I don't know where this got off track onto how and when I pay my bill, but you don't need to jump on me for forwarding an email.
calderone
Jan 30, 03:44 PM
I just ordered this bag
I was just looking at this one, it looks huge on the site. If you could, shoot a line back on what you think.
I was just looking at this one, it looks huge on the site. If you could, shoot a line back on what you think.
more...
E.Lizardo
Apr 13, 06:27 PM
This is a false rumor. Absolutely no way will this happen.
First of all Google failed with their TV.
Second of all, it is much better to have the components separate. You can more easily pass the audio to a home entertainment system for surround sound. With a component built into the TV, you have cables going back in the other direction to the receiver. If audio and video both take the same path there is less change of them getting out of sync.
I thought it was unlikely too,but after reading this thread,with multitudes of people flatly stating it will never happen,I'm leaning much more toward them actually making a television.
The amount of certainty with which you make a prediction is inversely proportional to it's likelihood of being accurate.
First of all Google failed with their TV.
Second of all, it is much better to have the components separate. You can more easily pass the audio to a home entertainment system for surround sound. With a component built into the TV, you have cables going back in the other direction to the receiver. If audio and video both take the same path there is less change of them getting out of sync.
I thought it was unlikely too,but after reading this thread,with multitudes of people flatly stating it will never happen,I'm leaning much more toward them actually making a television.
The amount of certainty with which you make a prediction is inversely proportional to it's likelihood of being accurate.
EugenexYew
Apr 29, 02:52 AM
Technically, Apple DOES have a smallprint at the bottom of the page which reads:
Actual size and weight vary by configuration and manufacturing process.
Actual size and weight vary by configuration and manufacturing process.
more...
nies
Apr 27, 08:20 PM
im gonna follow with ucfgrad and throw -aggie- out there
lifeofart
Jul 12, 05:20 PM
That's more or less what I've done. The issue is this. If you envision a twenty page booklet, it will consist of five pieces of paper. On the front of the first piece of paper, the left panel will be page 20 and the right panel will be page 1. On the back, the left panel will be page 2 and the right panel will be page 19. And so on. It is this non-sequential printing of the pages that I'm struggling with. How do you tell it to print pages 20 and 1 on the first piece of paper, other than having it print page 1, then putting the paper back into the printer and having it print page 20.
(A big reason that I'm trying to get away from the manual solution is that I want to save this as a PDF so I can hand it to a copy shop to print out multiple copies for me. But, unfortunately, you can't print to a PDF page twice. :) Oh, and I've tried using the Layout option in the print dialog, but it reduces that page image dramatically, so 10pt font becomes 6pt font. So that wasn't a good solution...)
Too bad you don't have a professional app such as the latest MS Word!:eek:
Then you could just open the new brochure wizard. Set it up for four quadrants per page, front and back printing. Place your images & text in the proper quadrant in the proper orientation. Autopage number the quadrants, and email the doc file to your printshop.
Almost all professional printshops except word doc files and can print your brochure out on their professional quality printers on your paper of choice.
But I guess you are stuck with a worthless .pages file and if you fart around with it long enough you might just be able to get something out that a print / copy shop could use.
(A big reason that I'm trying to get away from the manual solution is that I want to save this as a PDF so I can hand it to a copy shop to print out multiple copies for me. But, unfortunately, you can't print to a PDF page twice. :) Oh, and I've tried using the Layout option in the print dialog, but it reduces that page image dramatically, so 10pt font becomes 6pt font. So that wasn't a good solution...)
Too bad you don't have a professional app such as the latest MS Word!:eek:
Then you could just open the new brochure wizard. Set it up for four quadrants per page, front and back printing. Place your images & text in the proper quadrant in the proper orientation. Autopage number the quadrants, and email the doc file to your printshop.
Almost all professional printshops except word doc files and can print your brochure out on their professional quality printers on your paper of choice.
But I guess you are stuck with a worthless .pages file and if you fart around with it long enough you might just be able to get something out that a print / copy shop could use.
more...
sinser
Apr 26, 10:16 AM
Give me a non glossy display option and I'll buy it!
Non glossy + 24" would be simply perfect.
Non glossy + 24" would be simply perfect.
SilianRail
Apr 11, 01:59 PM
Are any details known on the licensing costs of TB devices?
more...
Mackan
May 3, 08:00 AM
Apple continues their model to suck most money out of their customers.
Example:
-Can't buy base 21.5'' with 6770M or 6970M.
-Can't buy base 27'' with 6970M.
Why does it always have to be that if you want a good graphics card, you must go for the top model, and thereby paying so much more than if you could just customize the base model with it?
Already know the answer, but let your defending excuses come.
Example:
-Can't buy base 21.5'' with 6770M or 6970M.
-Can't buy base 27'' with 6970M.
Why does it always have to be that if you want a good graphics card, you must go for the top model, and thereby paying so much more than if you could just customize the base model with it?
Already know the answer, but let your defending excuses come.
KnightWRX
Apr 15, 02:47 PM
Ahhh.... Google bought that. And given Android is based on open source, don't you think your argument on OSX is rather weak?
Apple bought OS X too. :D
I'm arguing that both were massive undertakings by both parties. My OS X example was tainted with sarcasm if you didn't catch the little :rolleyes: there.
Both OS X and Chrome OS (and Android, and iOS) borrow heavily from others, either through acquisitions or from the open source community. To claim Google is any inferior here is just trying to stir the pot, especially calling the poster Troll, that is just insulting and uncalled for.
Both companies deserve props from providing the software they do, neither deserves scorn that some posters here like to dish out.
ChromeOS has pieces of Linux...I'll give you that. But Google didn't do much...
Android is Linux. They didn't make that either.
So what ? OS X is Mach/XNU, Apple didn't make that. It's also a GNU/Berkeley userland, Apple didn't make that either. Again guys, drop the non-sense competition, this thread is about a release of OS X, not some type of Google bashing contest.
Apple bought OS X too. :D
I'm arguing that both were massive undertakings by both parties. My OS X example was tainted with sarcasm if you didn't catch the little :rolleyes: there.
Both OS X and Chrome OS (and Android, and iOS) borrow heavily from others, either through acquisitions or from the open source community. To claim Google is any inferior here is just trying to stir the pot, especially calling the poster Troll, that is just insulting and uncalled for.
Both companies deserve props from providing the software they do, neither deserves scorn that some posters here like to dish out.
ChromeOS has pieces of Linux...I'll give you that. But Google didn't do much...
Android is Linux. They didn't make that either.
So what ? OS X is Mach/XNU, Apple didn't make that. It's also a GNU/Berkeley userland, Apple didn't make that either. Again guys, drop the non-sense competition, this thread is about a release of OS X, not some type of Google bashing contest.
Sodner
Apr 12, 09:22 AM
Aren't we quickly getting to the point where it's all about the software?
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Pretty much agree with everything you said though I do HOPE for a increased screen size on the 5.
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Pretty much agree with everything you said though I do HOPE for a increased screen size on the 5.
alexf
Oct 18, 04:47 PM
Check the links at the top of the press release (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/oct/18results.html).
Still not sure about this "less than half the total" figure... :confused:
Still not sure about this "less than half the total" figure... :confused:
bankshot
Nov 3, 07:10 PM
Parallels takes way too long to launch, and the GUI sucks.
Mine pops up instantly. 2.0 GHz Macbook. What's wrong with the GUI? Is it just that it's not Cocoa, the holy grail, or is there something tangible that isn't good? I've found it easy to use and unobtrusive.
Plus, do you really think a Qt C++ wrapper around Carbon is faster than direct Cocoa calls? :rolleyes:
Wouldn't surprise me a bit if it were. Many of the things that make Cocoa such a joy for programmers also slow it down at runtime. That's just a design decision that Apple made, and with faster computers always coming out, it becomes less of a drawback at runtime.
I just want a nice documented-based Cocoa app that behaves like a Mac app, with a fast virtualization at its core :)
Err, why should a virtual machine be document-based? That doesn't make any sense to me.
The whole thing that drew my attention to your original post was that comment about Cocoa. Why do you, as an end-user, care about that? Cocoa is great, but there seems to be a mentality here that anything else is inferior or a second-class citizen. I kind of understand why that mentality came to be - Cocoa came with OS X, Carbon is a bridge to the past in OS 9. Thus people automatically assumed that Cocoa = good and Carbon = bad. But Carbon is every bit as capable as Cocoa, and thus why an end-user would care one bit about either is beyond me.
Granted, Parallels is done with Qt, which looks a little bit "off" sitting next to a Carbon or Cocoa app, but does that really matter? It looks damn close, and frankly, looks mean nothing to me if the interface works intuitively. And that it does.
I'm not picking on you, just trying to understand your reasoning. ;)
Mine pops up instantly. 2.0 GHz Macbook. What's wrong with the GUI? Is it just that it's not Cocoa, the holy grail, or is there something tangible that isn't good? I've found it easy to use and unobtrusive.
Plus, do you really think a Qt C++ wrapper around Carbon is faster than direct Cocoa calls? :rolleyes:
Wouldn't surprise me a bit if it were. Many of the things that make Cocoa such a joy for programmers also slow it down at runtime. That's just a design decision that Apple made, and with faster computers always coming out, it becomes less of a drawback at runtime.
I just want a nice documented-based Cocoa app that behaves like a Mac app, with a fast virtualization at its core :)
Err, why should a virtual machine be document-based? That doesn't make any sense to me.
The whole thing that drew my attention to your original post was that comment about Cocoa. Why do you, as an end-user, care about that? Cocoa is great, but there seems to be a mentality here that anything else is inferior or a second-class citizen. I kind of understand why that mentality came to be - Cocoa came with OS X, Carbon is a bridge to the past in OS 9. Thus people automatically assumed that Cocoa = good and Carbon = bad. But Carbon is every bit as capable as Cocoa, and thus why an end-user would care one bit about either is beyond me.
Granted, Parallels is done with Qt, which looks a little bit "off" sitting next to a Carbon or Cocoa app, but does that really matter? It looks damn close, and frankly, looks mean nothing to me if the interface works intuitively. And that it does.
I'm not picking on you, just trying to understand your reasoning. ;)
Project
Oct 19, 02:14 AM
How has Apple NOT innovated on the Mac line up?
- Completely redesigned and absolutely beautiful architecture on the insides of the Mac Pro
- MagSafe
- 24" all in one machine
- Front Row/apple Remote/iSight in every "portable" Mac
- Two finger right clicking on trackpad
All of this in the year of a move to a new platform.
The REAL innovations though, will occur in the second generation of Intel products. THe most important thing was to make a swift but calm switchover to ensure nobody got nervous over the move. Now we are here, 2007 will be sick.
- Completely redesigned and absolutely beautiful architecture on the insides of the Mac Pro
- MagSafe
- 24" all in one machine
- Front Row/apple Remote/iSight in every "portable" Mac
- Two finger right clicking on trackpad
All of this in the year of a move to a new platform.
The REAL innovations though, will occur in the second generation of Intel products. THe most important thing was to make a swift but calm switchover to ensure nobody got nervous over the move. Now we are here, 2007 will be sick.
rdowns
Jan 30, 01:00 PM
I heard on the radio that the first thing he did every morning was to pull up TMZ to see what Charlie had done so if he knew whether to go to work or not
And I saw a tweet that said that Lindsay Lohan was worried about him
You know if she is worried about him you have reached the bottom
That's funny.
I think the phrase, "partying like the Kennedy's" needs to be updated. :D
And I saw a tweet that said that Lindsay Lohan was worried about him
You know if she is worried about him you have reached the bottom
That's funny.
I think the phrase, "partying like the Kennedy's" needs to be updated. :D
*LTD*
Apr 24, 03:40 PM
There is a lot of Apple Dick riding going on. Their is nothing wrong with that. But at some point you have to wake up and look at the rest of the world. World wide in smartphone sells Iphone leads by a large margin. World wide Smartphone OSs, iPhone is generally in third or fourth place (Depends on who made it, Some put RIM in front of iOS). But the majority of them place Android or Symbian as the top selling OS.
If many of your theories that android would disappear if the iPhone was on the same carrier holds no weight. AT&T is still selling millions of Android based phones next to the iPhone (that is was even when AT&T had a piss poor line up android phones.) Right now yes iPhone is selling more then android OS on verizon. But once the honey moon phase is over android based phones will slip back ahead in sells.
And please for the love of all thats good stop going by your personal observations. Watch me do it. In my men of honor meetings on campus I see no iOS devices and half the room has Androids. In my history class there is an equal proportion of Android OS to iOS phones. its based on where and when you look however it does not represent the entire world.
But this does my school did a survey online and we found as March 20 the Ratios look like this- Blackberry 17%, iOS 40, Android 35%, other ties in the rest. Highest selling phone: iPhone 4, iPhone 3gs, Lg Optimus 1 series of phones.
Thanks for the anecdote.
The iPhone sets the bar. Google has to flood the market with a lot of junk to achieve higher share. That's hardly impressive. Google is the MS of mobile. Hardly a compliment. License out your beta OS to anyone that can slam together a box, give it away, and away you go.
The iPhone is still the #1 selling handset. Where are the iPhone killers? There aren't any. Because the competition doesn't know how to make one. Because Apple approaches tech from a totally different place.
The iOS platform still dominates, and given the iPad's success, it'll be that way for the foreseeable future.
Android enjoys highest smartphone market share. Yet the OS is pretty brutal and their ecosystem is a mess. So why do they have greater share? Not because they make a superior product, but because the only alternative to an iPhone was an Android-based device, and Eric T. Mole got to work licensing it out to everyone with no regard for design or User Experience. If you flood the market with what, 70+ (probably a lot more) devices and let everyone and their dog make the devices you'll eventually enjoy force of numbers.
Android is given away free to anyone to manufacture, to make as many POS devices as they wish, to sell for peanuts, in massive volume.
That's all it is. Market flooding at every price point and you get some sort of touchscreen and some sort of app store. And given Google's Microsoftian horizontal business model, that's all it'll ever be.
For instance, THIS is the kind of total junk that Google puts their name to:
http://www.gsmarena.com/zte_racer-reviews-3423.php
And guess what: Dell went ahead and copied it. The DELL XCD28. Same junk. But Android market share just went up!
Here's another amazing Android device:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2010/11/worst-gadget-ever-ars-reviews-a-99-android-tablet.ars
Anything to be proud of? But hey, they're dirt cheap. And uh . . . "open" or whatever.
If Google actually *cared* about what they put the Android name to, if they actually gave a damn about the USER, would they allow this? Ask yourself that. That's the difference. There are some things Apple *will not* allow to exist - namely: garbage.
Google does not care - I'll repeat that - DOES NOT CARE, about what happens to their OS, on what devices it's used, what the result is when someone like ZTE or Dell gets their hands on it. It's a great recipe for pushing huge amounts of volume. It's also a great recipe for manufacturing cheap, poorly-made phones in China. The upshot of all this is you get massively inflated market share, a good chunk owing to phones that should have never seen the light of day. Yes, you have the choice to buy junk. You have the choice to just buy a cheapie. Nothing inherently wrong with this. It's your call, right? HOWEVER, this also contributes to Android market share. That's the catch. The question is not just: how big is your market share? But also: what constitutes your market share?
What constitutes Apple's market share? There's no chance for any confusion here. The iPhone. Same attention to detail in hardware and OS, same high-quality User Experience device to device. All the things that make it the #1 selling handset. There is no chance of junk. In fact, if you're Apple, you owe it to yourself to get as close to perfection as you can every time, because you only sell ONE phone, and not on every carrier, and your licensing is closed. Every last % of Apple's share is an iPhone. There is no chance for crap or inflated share from the sale of cheap commodity-phones.
Apple's share constitutes the #1-selling handset. Exclusively. Android share constitutes: the good, the bad, and the downright ugly.
How does Android market share look now? I'd wager it looks a bit different than before you looked at what's behind the numbers, that is, the kind of infrastructure that supports those high numbers.
Yes, highest market share for Android. Until you go hunting for the REASON.
If many of your theories that android would disappear if the iPhone was on the same carrier holds no weight. AT&T is still selling millions of Android based phones next to the iPhone (that is was even when AT&T had a piss poor line up android phones.) Right now yes iPhone is selling more then android OS on verizon. But once the honey moon phase is over android based phones will slip back ahead in sells.
And please for the love of all thats good stop going by your personal observations. Watch me do it. In my men of honor meetings on campus I see no iOS devices and half the room has Androids. In my history class there is an equal proportion of Android OS to iOS phones. its based on where and when you look however it does not represent the entire world.
But this does my school did a survey online and we found as March 20 the Ratios look like this- Blackberry 17%, iOS 40, Android 35%, other ties in the rest. Highest selling phone: iPhone 4, iPhone 3gs, Lg Optimus 1 series of phones.
Thanks for the anecdote.
The iPhone sets the bar. Google has to flood the market with a lot of junk to achieve higher share. That's hardly impressive. Google is the MS of mobile. Hardly a compliment. License out your beta OS to anyone that can slam together a box, give it away, and away you go.
The iPhone is still the #1 selling handset. Where are the iPhone killers? There aren't any. Because the competition doesn't know how to make one. Because Apple approaches tech from a totally different place.
The iOS platform still dominates, and given the iPad's success, it'll be that way for the foreseeable future.
Android enjoys highest smartphone market share. Yet the OS is pretty brutal and their ecosystem is a mess. So why do they have greater share? Not because they make a superior product, but because the only alternative to an iPhone was an Android-based device, and Eric T. Mole got to work licensing it out to everyone with no regard for design or User Experience. If you flood the market with what, 70+ (probably a lot more) devices and let everyone and their dog make the devices you'll eventually enjoy force of numbers.
Android is given away free to anyone to manufacture, to make as many POS devices as they wish, to sell for peanuts, in massive volume.
That's all it is. Market flooding at every price point and you get some sort of touchscreen and some sort of app store. And given Google's Microsoftian horizontal business model, that's all it'll ever be.
For instance, THIS is the kind of total junk that Google puts their name to:
http://www.gsmarena.com/zte_racer-reviews-3423.php
And guess what: Dell went ahead and copied it. The DELL XCD28. Same junk. But Android market share just went up!
Here's another amazing Android device:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2010/11/worst-gadget-ever-ars-reviews-a-99-android-tablet.ars
Anything to be proud of? But hey, they're dirt cheap. And uh . . . "open" or whatever.
If Google actually *cared* about what they put the Android name to, if they actually gave a damn about the USER, would they allow this? Ask yourself that. That's the difference. There are some things Apple *will not* allow to exist - namely: garbage.
Google does not care - I'll repeat that - DOES NOT CARE, about what happens to their OS, on what devices it's used, what the result is when someone like ZTE or Dell gets their hands on it. It's a great recipe for pushing huge amounts of volume. It's also a great recipe for manufacturing cheap, poorly-made phones in China. The upshot of all this is you get massively inflated market share, a good chunk owing to phones that should have never seen the light of day. Yes, you have the choice to buy junk. You have the choice to just buy a cheapie. Nothing inherently wrong with this. It's your call, right? HOWEVER, this also contributes to Android market share. That's the catch. The question is not just: how big is your market share? But also: what constitutes your market share?
What constitutes Apple's market share? There's no chance for any confusion here. The iPhone. Same attention to detail in hardware and OS, same high-quality User Experience device to device. All the things that make it the #1 selling handset. There is no chance of junk. In fact, if you're Apple, you owe it to yourself to get as close to perfection as you can every time, because you only sell ONE phone, and not on every carrier, and your licensing is closed. Every last % of Apple's share is an iPhone. There is no chance for crap or inflated share from the sale of cheap commodity-phones.
Apple's share constitutes the #1-selling handset. Exclusively. Android share constitutes: the good, the bad, and the downright ugly.
How does Android market share look now? I'd wager it looks a bit different than before you looked at what's behind the numbers, that is, the kind of infrastructure that supports those high numbers.
Yes, highest market share for Android. Until you go hunting for the REASON.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét