Talk:Non-android devices: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Revoke n-android |
No edit summary |
||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
-- [[User:SoySoy|SoySoy]] ([[User talk:SoySoy|talk]]) 07:00, 25 Dec 2022 (UTC) | -- [[User:SoySoy|SoySoy]] ([[User talk:SoySoy|talk]]) 07:00, 25 Dec 2022 (UTC) | ||
i turned this page to a mostly empty page lol. | |||
-- [[User:exkc|exkc]] ([[User talk:exkc|talk]]) 18:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC+8) |
Revision as of 10:04, 20 April 2023
I'm not sure this page needs to exist as the main devices page contains everything on it. -- Nobodywasishere (talk) 23:57, 24 January 2020
Revoke n-android
I suggest to make an OS category, doing so will be more informative and precise.
- Some devices might have two OSs at the same time, albeit some are branded forks.
- Devices shipped with bada and EMUI may be classified under bada and Android categories)
- Volla[1] is shipped with Android or Linux, so
n-android
is both compatible and incompatible at the same time for Volla, hence, both, the absense and presence of,n-android
for Volla is missleading.
P.S. Marketing the opposite
It is Real Linux we want to market, not otherwise.
By having n-android
tag we, in fact, marketing Android, but I don't think we should.
Assumming we have 1M devices NOT running Android and 1K devices running Android. then we market Android 1M times where it is not even a matter to consider.
- Is the company behind Android pays pmOS to do so?
- No.
- Is it a sponsor of pmOS in any way?
- No.
Then why do we provide it marketing for FREE?
Why are we marketing a brand which goes against our interest?
-- SoySoy (talk) 07:00, 25 Dec 2022 (UTC)
i turned this page to a mostly empty page lol.