I tried replying on Slashgear, but too many replies there I guess? Anyways, I agree with you on every point you made. But you can jailbreak and do 80-90% to an iPhone what you can do to a rooted phone. But getting into the technical, coding aspect, Android definitely wins there.

But look at membership numbers on something like XDA, probably the most visited Android modding site, besides CM. XDA has just barely over 4 million members. Lets give CM the benefit and say they have 8 million. That’s not even enough to cover just the Galaxy S II, let alone the hundreds of others. The same goes for iPhone forums.

The web makes it seem like there are tons and tons (I guess there are ) people out there, but look at iOS. Over 250 million iOS devices sold, but even if they have 5 times the number of XDA members, that’s barely 8% of users jailbreaking. Net time I’ll use 90-95%, but 95% is probably a pretty close number.

Here’s the link back to your original comment for easy access for you lol

http://www.slashgear.com/apple-iphone-4s-a5-processor-vs-1-5-ghz-dual-core-galaxy-s-ii-in-browser-tests-video-12187504/#comment-334371931

Critics have reiterated that if there was anything positive to say over the years they would have said so. Critics have forecast with an exponentially greater degree of accuracy than even analysts to what Nortel feeds them in their relentless optimism and fire side chats when ongoing cuts are just not enough. Happy talk has proven false and misleading over these 3 to 5 years, Nortel lacks credibility in endless contradictions, not the observers that post critical facts that are simply bad, bad ongoing news in this saga.

Nortel contradictions have it lacking credibility from bonusgate fraud to extreme reverse splits to draw institutions, mega-revisions after fraud settlement, BSNL, PEC, Neptune, 3 to 5 years, $20 buys, promoting pals, WiMax, Putian, etc… heck we can go on forever… now what worked… endless contradictions… and headed to zero to with green team pumping more hype and PR craze than ever. How can anyone remain silent.
==============
re
Proto, you are so right
Bulls try to kill the messenger anytime we post our analysis from the Bear side.
Yes, we deserve celebration of winning that game on the stock market. We protected our families and friends who trusted our DD. Another drop of NT stock is just a proof how wrong all the Bulls_hypers have been.
I was able to see from outside_and_from_a_distance revenues dropping this year and new job cuts /huge/ coming as well. So I asked why CEO did not see that a month ago /Q2 cc/?
Why he preached single digit growth of the business when new orders have been declined 25% in just one quarter? Patching the hole with deferred revenues and cloud the picture was the answer. That's what it was during Q2 cc.
Job cuts, confirmed!
Lower new orders, confirmed!
Lower revenues, confirmed!
Selling more assets, confirmed!
Mike Z a liar, I think so /my opinion/
What about those margins? Why the margins are better each quarter but EBITa losses tripled? Is it too much for Mike to explain simple thing. OK what about you, Mark Evans.
Can you explain that contradiction?
Take your time, think about that and when you find the answer, please share with us.
I know how other companies report deferred revenues if they had restatements similar to NT. Nortel deferred more than $3.5 bill revenues during restatements /years 1999-2003/
Those revenues have to be recognized one day or another.
Why public does not know how those revenues change Nortel's numbers/ margins, how they change picture of current Nortel business?
Did Nortel defer optical revenues during restatements? I think so. So how recognizing that revenue now misinform public about current optical sales? Same in each and every division. I have articles, which show that up to 2007 Nortel did not recognize much of that revenue. It means that current CFO has been doing that.
$680 mill recognized in H1 2008
more that $1 bill will be recognized in 2008.
Bo Gowan says that's as good revenue as any other. Oh ya, sure, not for a shareholder, specially if it was revenue from the years 1999-2003!
Look at your post Mark E.
Any new ideas about IBM buying NT without MEN?
.

Critics have reiterated that if there was anything positive to say over the years they would have said so. Critics have forecast with an exponentially greater degree of accuracy than even analysts to what Nortel feeds them in their relentless optimism and fire side chats when ongoing cuts are just not enough. Happy talk has proven false and misleading over these 3 to 5 years, Nortel lacks credibility in endless contradictions, not the observers that post critical facts that are simply bad, bad ongoing news in this saga.

Nortel contradictions have it lacking credibility from bonusgate fraud to extreme reverse splits to draw institutions, mega-revisions after fraud settlement, BSNL, PEC, Neptune, 3 to 5 years, $20 buys, promoting pals, WiMax, Putian, etc… heck we can go on forever… now what worked… endless contradictions… and headed to zero to with green team pumping more hype and PR craze than ever. How can anyone remain silent.
==============
re
Proto, you are so right
Bulls try to kill the messenger anytime we post our analysis from the Bear side.
Yes, we deserve celebration of winning that game on the stock market. We protected our families and friends who trusted our DD. Another drop of NT stock is just a proof how wrong all the Bulls_hypers have been.
I was able to see from outside_and_from_a_distance revenues dropping this year and new job cuts /huge/ coming as well. So I asked why CEO did not see that a month ago /Q2 cc/?
Why he preached single digit growth of the business when new orders have been declined 25% in just one quarter? Patching the hole with deferred revenues and cloud the picture was the answer. That's what it was during Q2 cc.
Job cuts, confirmed!
Lower new orders, confirmed!
Lower revenues, confirmed!
Selling more assets, confirmed!
Mike Z a liar, I think so /my opinion/
What about those margins? Why the margins are better each quarter but EBITa losses tripled? Is it too much for Mike to explain simple thing. OK what about you, Mark Evans.
Can you explain that contradiction?
Take your time, think about that and when you find the answer, please share with us.
I know how other companies report deferred revenues if they had restatements similar to NT. Nortel deferred more than $3.5 bill revenues during restatements /years 1999-2003/
Those revenues have to be recognized one day or another.
Why public does not know how those revenues change Nortel's numbers/ margins, how they change picture of current Nortel business?
Did Nortel defer optical revenues during restatements? I think so. So how recognizing that revenue now misinform public about current optical sales? Same in each and every division. I have articles, which show that up to 2007 Nortel did not recognize much of that revenue. It means that current CFO has been doing that.
$680 mill recognized in H1 2008
more that $1 bill will be recognized in 2008.
Bo Gowan says that's as good revenue as any other. Oh ya, sure, not for a shareholder, specially if it was revenue from the years 1999-2003!
Look at your post Mark E.
Any new ideas about IBM buying NT without MEN?
.

Nothing.

Now Nortel is prime picking for Enterprise players… IBM and MS included.

I can appreciate your interest in transparency and full disclosure. In this case, I’ll politely say that the source who told me about the IBM-Nortel rumors was credible, and that the post clearly positioned as a rumor as opposed to news.

Mark