The only thing I can tell is that you apparently need to spend about $200 ($361 on average vs. $137 on average) more to get
I think a lot of people assume it's a Samsung ecosystem they're switching out of, not Android.
That wouldn't surprise me. My mother doesn't really know or care to understand what Android is, but when she needs a new phone she's pretty insistent on getting another Motorola phone, so it's just a matter of finding one that they make that suits her needs. I recall seeing this a lot back in the early days of PC's where people would insist they needed another Compaq or $brand without really understanding that it didn't matter as the operating system was still the same and they could transfer their files and programs over. Even after explaining this to some people they're just overly hesitant to make a switch, even if they could be getting something more suited to their needs.
I also think a lot of people, myself included, assume analysts are full of hot air.
That goes without saying. Anyone who really understood how the market would behave wouldn't be blabbing about it for free on the internet. Instead they'd be keeping their mouth shut and buying and selling stocks and getting progressively more wealthy.
Who in their right mind would think this would stop terrorists?
I'm kind of worried it will have the opposite effect because, if anything, the sloppy controls make me want to send a bomb to person responsible.
Why the f*ck would you allow actual 3rd party code to run inside your own software, to display an advert?
Most savvy users wouldn't which is why they use some kind of ad blocker or no script plugin. Even if asa weren't vectors for malware infection, video ads and trackers tend to chew through bandwidth and batteries as well.
If websites limited themselves to static images without the massive number of trackers, I'd be far more likely to turn off the blocker. But for whatever reason, advertisers pay websites more if they use the world's most annoying shit.
Center meeting at 4pm in 2C-543.