Talk:BT clients: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Wouldn't it be better to order it from Good -> Bad instead of Bad/Good/Acceptable as it's now? And maybe undercategories within each section by OS...? [[User:Deimon|Deimon]] 11:02, 24 August 2008 (UTC) | Wouldn't it be better to order it from Good -> Bad instead of Bad/Good/Acceptable as it's now? And maybe undercategories within each section by OS...? [[User:Deimon|Deimon]] 11:02, 24 August 2008 (UTC) | ||
- I've changed it, looks better now. [[User:Deimon|Deimon]] 12:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
Why is '''Shareza''' not suggested? I know that there is a false Shareza V4 which is bundled with adware but the real V2 doesn't have that. [[User:Deimon|Deimon]] 12:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:27, 24 August 2008
Could use more descriptive editing and formatting. --Tsikura 08:28, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Still needs a lot of information. I like how its organized now. i wish i could say the same about the Windows playback page, but thats under hot debate right now. --MarchHare 08:53, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be better to order it from Good -> Bad instead of Bad/Good/Acceptable as it's now? And maybe undercategories within each section by OS...? Deimon 11:02, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
- I've changed it, looks better now. Deimon 12:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Why is Shareza not suggested? I know that there is a false Shareza V4 which is bundled with adware but the real V2 doesn't have that. Deimon 12:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)