or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by derekmorr

 You're arguing about semantics, so I'm done.
 That's just wrong. Android compiles and runs on multiple ARM platforms (ARM11, ARMv7, ARMv8), x86, and MIPS. Intel is actively working on x32 and x64. For example, here are two patches from Intel for multi-arch support:x86_64/x32: Add arch/bionic and arch/include/machine Extend x86 to have different arch variantsThese were picked just by looking at today's AOSP Gerrit front page. Further, APK files support multiple architectures. The installer extracts the appropriate...
 You missed the part of my post where I said that APKs already support multiple architectures. You only need multi-APK if you run into a size limit. The new Gradle build system in Android Studio makes supporting multi-APKs easier.
 Android already has fat binary support; the APK format allows multiple architectures. If you run into the APK size limits, you can use the multiple-APK support Google rolled out last year. But this shouldn't be an issue for most apps which use Dalvik because it's platform-independent
 The Linux kernel has run on multiple 64-bit architectures for years, since the 2.6 days at least. Of course, there will be some work involved in porting to ARMv8, but Linaro has already started on that. The first bit of support was merged into Linux 3.7 almost a year ago. Many of the low-level user-space libraries on Android are shared with common Linux distributions and already support 64-bit. I suspect the only real sticking points would be bionic (Android's libc) and...
Good to see. I've been waiting for the Haswell Pros to upgrade - my 2010 Core2Duo-based Air is really long in the tooth.
This is really getting tedious.The data, such as it is, doesn't support the conclusions. Hence, the conclusions are garbage.As for density, can you provide screenshots showing density differences that support your claims?Since you can't be bothered to read Lyon's post, I'll summarize. He was responding to the "Android is for poor people" meme by saying it's just another way for Apple users to feel elite, privileged and superior to everyone else. It's classism, plain and...
I find that extremely hard to believe. If they did, they'd just use it as clickbait to wind up the faithful into raging against Google and "Lamesung"/"Scumsung"/"Samesung" in the comments.But, yes, I do care about bad stories, and I regularly call out pro-Google/Android stories on other social networks. Of course, all of this is getting pretty far off topic.
Here's a better question -- Would AppleInsider even have publishing this "story" if it did? It's really telling that AI constantly runs hit pieces trashing not just Android phones but Android users. I don't see that happen on non-Apple sites.I'm not sure why I'm bothering to respond to you, since your posts are just baseless personal attacks against entire categories of people who dare to use a different type of phone, but here goes. You're confusing the issue. Let's say...
You missed the point. Yes, there are questions about where this data came from. That's exactly why you shouldn't draw strong conclusions from it.But putting that aside, the maps don't support Dilger and Evans' claim that iOS is for the affluent and Android for the poor. The maps show that both platforms have very similar geographic distribution. So, yes, the claim "Twitter heat map shows iPhone use by the affluent, Android by the poor" is garbage.Again, that's not the...
New Posts  All Forums: