What analysis has shown that people are not doing this? All I have seen is that there aren't a significant number of convictions, but that doesn't really hold wait if you aren't actually trying to catch/prevent people from doing it. If it never happened, there wouldn't be a standard well known practice of casting a provisional ballot if you have already "voted".
> did the us held elections while world war 2 was happening?
> Elections were held on November 7, 1944, during the final stages of World War II. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was easily re-elected to an unprecedented fourth term, and the Democratic Party retained their majorities in both chambers of Congress.
Depends on who does the removing. It could go a lot of different ways, but even if it's someone from his own government who is hostile to the west, they're still likely to use it as an excuse to end the war.
The crazy thing is, it's not that long ago that Irish and Italian immigrants were not discriminated against. They didn't even consider Italian immigrants to be white.
Ballmer, the person who pushed for and created the entire Microsoft Enterprise focus, is not an idea guy that understood what made Microsoft successful? This idea that Ballmer was some goof when he was actually considered a co-founder by Bill Gates which is why he received like 17% of the company when he joined.
Also, they put plenty of effort into getting developers to onboard windows phone. They even created multiple platforms that allowed devs to create a single app that worked across all windows devices(pc, phone, xbox) but developers decided, with some very influential devs being extremely vocal, that is was some sort of power grab to force devs to only deliver their software through the windows store.
I think it was actually a good idea. I think they correctly predicted the Android market and saw Windows Phone was a good way to differentiate their phones from everybody else. If you look at the history of Android manufacturers, it was a long slog of brands trading off popularity and hardly making any profit until Samsung eventually became the only mainstream player.
They decided they want to actually get paid for their work and changed their pricing structure so large companies need to pay for their software and apparently that's terrible and everybody started being very vocal about alternatives despite still being able to use it for free.
I would love it if I could have different natural scrolling settings for mouse and trackpad, but that's apparently too much to ask for despite it being supported by every other os.
I'm also feel Apple announced a bunch of feature that doesn't make the platform more useful in any general way. Like, I don't NEED iOS to pick my watch background photo or recolor my icons.
Android has long had more aesthetic customization, but I doubt a statistically significant number of people make buying decisions based on it.
They are features people use, but they're refinements rather than significant advancements. I think the root of the situation here is that smartphones are mostly feature-complete.
Somewhere a tailor is sad that people care more about what color their T-shirt is, rather than the type of weave and stitch pattern. But phones, like T-shirts, are now just commodities.
