TitoC
Jun 9, 01:44 PM
According to RadioShack's official Twitter account, the electronics chain will be carrying iPhone 4 as of its U.S. launch on June 24th.
That's "THE SHACK" to you sir! Sorry, I still can't over this crappy, crappy branding decision of theirs to call themselves "The Shack." Really?
When I watched basketball performances, it was from "The Shack." When I was 12, I had my porno hidden in "The Shack." And when I was 15 and in the Boy Scouts and I went camping/boating, I took a crap in "The Shack." But, when I was 16 and built a home-made rocket, I got my parts from "RADIO SHACK."
That's "THE SHACK" to you sir! Sorry, I still can't over this crappy, crappy branding decision of theirs to call themselves "The Shack." Really?
When I watched basketball performances, it was from "The Shack." When I was 12, I had my porno hidden in "The Shack." And when I was 15 and in the Boy Scouts and I went camping/boating, I took a crap in "The Shack." But, when I was 16 and built a home-made rocket, I got my parts from "RADIO SHACK."
aafuss1
Apr 5, 05:28 PM
Will FCE get a new release soon-it definitely deserves a new release alongside FCP.
It last had a major new version in 2007 (with a 4.0.1 update in 2008)-a long time and is the entry level version of FCP and used by those looking for something a bit more sophiscated than iMovie-like me but don't want/need the full FCP.
There haven't been any rumors about that one, only FCP.
And will Apple offer the new Final Cut Pro on the Mac App Store?
Haven't even seen any placeholders on Amazon that may imply a release next week.
It last had a major new version in 2007 (with a 4.0.1 update in 2008)-a long time and is the entry level version of FCP and used by those looking for something a bit more sophiscated than iMovie-like me but don't want/need the full FCP.
There haven't been any rumors about that one, only FCP.
And will Apple offer the new Final Cut Pro on the Mac App Store?
Haven't even seen any placeholders on Amazon that may imply a release next week.
dwero
Jun 9, 03:29 AM
When called #639*, I got the news that 16GB for $199 and 32GB for $299.
That's suck
That's suck
wonderspark
Apr 27, 10:08 AM
Depends.
Someone could infer that info, if the cell cache says that around 2am you visited the town Harry's is in, and it's the only store open at that time.
:)
Ever been to NTTC Corry?
Oops, you deleted your PS.
Someone could infer that info, if the cell cache says that around 2am you visited the town Harry's is in, and it's the only store open at that time.
:)
Ever been to NTTC Corry?
Oops, you deleted your PS.
Burger King
Apr 27, 09:23 AM
Just to be clear - you think someone who wants to question what is and what is not being tracked is a whiner?
Did I read you correctly. Nice name calling.
After an issue has arose and been debated to death and then even after the manufacturer has addressed the concerns of the paranoid, it is time to give it a rest.
But then when those who wish to beat what should now be a dead horse into little bitty pieces continue, then yes you are correct. Maybe whiner is not the correct title for these people. ;)
Did I read you correctly. Nice name calling.
After an issue has arose and been debated to death and then even after the manufacturer has addressed the concerns of the paranoid, it is time to give it a rest.
But then when those who wish to beat what should now be a dead horse into little bitty pieces continue, then yes you are correct. Maybe whiner is not the correct title for these people. ;)
ZildjianKX
Aug 7, 03:51 PM
YOU MUST BE KIDDING. Have you actually used System Restore to restore a single file? Oh that's right, you can't. All you can do it reset your system back to a point where the file existed.
This is MUCH more powerful, and more like something users would actually want.
System Restore is great for those times when you want to apply a system patch that could be iffy, and you are willing to "snap" a restore point, apply the patch, and roll back if something didn't fly.
But for the normal user, it is much more useless.
I'd also like to point out I've never actually gotten XP's system restore to work, I've tried about 10 times over the past 5 years. Maybe I'm the exception, but you really can't rely on it.
This is MUCH more powerful, and more like something users would actually want.
System Restore is great for those times when you want to apply a system patch that could be iffy, and you are willing to "snap" a restore point, apply the patch, and roll back if something didn't fly.
But for the normal user, it is much more useless.
I'd also like to point out I've never actually gotten XP's system restore to work, I've tried about 10 times over the past 5 years. Maybe I'm the exception, but you really can't rely on it.
DJMastaWes
Aug 26, 10:12 PM
No. its usually by 6AM Pacific 9AM Eastern. I KNOW - not guessing.
Well, this was not the case for the BT Mighty Mouse.
Anyway, I'm hopeing that we see Merom in a the next few days. That would make me JUMP for joy!
Well, this was not the case for the BT Mighty Mouse.
Anyway, I'm hopeing that we see Merom in a the next few days. That would make me JUMP for joy!
fivepoint
Mar 22, 07:45 AM
Fox News, huh?
That reminds me -- I gotta put some pine cleaner down my toilet.
Which fact do you deny? Pathetic red herring.
How many of those in the first list have the capability of fielding an airforce? I'm just guessing here, but I imagine that Afghanistan, Albania, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Nicaragua and Uzbekistan would be less than useful contributors.
Are you suggesting that Obama has gotten comparable treatment from the media as compared to Bush? The double standard is hilariously transparent... Obama justified, Bush not. Obama builds strong coalition, Bush doesn't. Obama trying to save people, Bush going after the oil. Obama savior, Bush satan.
They pull the same bullcrap, and all the lefties can do is struggle to find some sort of justification to make them feel better about their first black president. To make them feel better about their 'hope' and 'change'. Like I clearly pointed out in the OP, there is no hope and change, it's just more of the same. If you actually want change, vote for Ron Paul, vote for fiscal responsibility, vote for small government and non intervention. Vote for the destruction bailouts, stimulus, subsidies, and all other forms of crony-capitalism.
That reminds me -- I gotta put some pine cleaner down my toilet.
Which fact do you deny? Pathetic red herring.
How many of those in the first list have the capability of fielding an airforce? I'm just guessing here, but I imagine that Afghanistan, Albania, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Nicaragua and Uzbekistan would be less than useful contributors.
Are you suggesting that Obama has gotten comparable treatment from the media as compared to Bush? The double standard is hilariously transparent... Obama justified, Bush not. Obama builds strong coalition, Bush doesn't. Obama trying to save people, Bush going after the oil. Obama savior, Bush satan.
They pull the same bullcrap, and all the lefties can do is struggle to find some sort of justification to make them feel better about their first black president. To make them feel better about their 'hope' and 'change'. Like I clearly pointed out in the OP, there is no hope and change, it's just more of the same. If you actually want change, vote for Ron Paul, vote for fiscal responsibility, vote for small government and non intervention. Vote for the destruction bailouts, stimulus, subsidies, and all other forms of crony-capitalism.
DeathChill
Apr 19, 09:18 PM
I agree, Samsung has copied Apple.
In fact I'm truly impressed with Samsung's expertise. Their Galaxy S is every bit as nice as my iPhone 4.
In fact after doing the research, I decided to add a line to my family plan so I could try the Android powered phone.
Now I have two great phones. However I must say I'm shocked that I like the Galaxy better than the more diminutive iPhone.
Really? Based on all your previous posts which I glanced through I'd only be surprised if the opposite was true.
There's a lot to be said for a spacious and gorgeous 4.0" Super AMOLED display. I had no idea of the advantages it offers.
Then there's a huge advantage with SWYPE. Instead of hammering on a hard glass keyboard when messaging, Swype allows you to glide one finger across the keys to form words. It's the single greatest advancement in touchscreen input technology to date.
Swype submitted their app to Apple nearly a year ago, but it was rejected.
One can only guess, its excellent, trouble free and easy operation triggered Steve's jealousy.
Yet it's important that we give credit to Apple for insisting on a old school slow yet familiar keyboard. I must admit it took me ten minutes of watching the tutorial, and fifteen minutes more to adapt.
That said it quickly has become my favorite.
I really wish Apple would overcome their fear of including it on the iPhone. My Galaxy S gives me the choice of two other keyboards on case I didn't like Swype. Apple could do the same.
I really like Apple, I have many of their products.
Just think of how much greater they could be, if not for their closed minded ways towards anything outside of their comfort zone.
Why is the iPhone's implementation slow?
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/08/24/fastest-texting-in-the-world-actually-on-an-iphone/
EDIT: Not that I think that Apple shouldn't open up more and allow things like Swype; they should.
In fact I'm truly impressed with Samsung's expertise. Their Galaxy S is every bit as nice as my iPhone 4.
In fact after doing the research, I decided to add a line to my family plan so I could try the Android powered phone.
Now I have two great phones. However I must say I'm shocked that I like the Galaxy better than the more diminutive iPhone.
Really? Based on all your previous posts which I glanced through I'd only be surprised if the opposite was true.
There's a lot to be said for a spacious and gorgeous 4.0" Super AMOLED display. I had no idea of the advantages it offers.
Then there's a huge advantage with SWYPE. Instead of hammering on a hard glass keyboard when messaging, Swype allows you to glide one finger across the keys to form words. It's the single greatest advancement in touchscreen input technology to date.
Swype submitted their app to Apple nearly a year ago, but it was rejected.
One can only guess, its excellent, trouble free and easy operation triggered Steve's jealousy.
Yet it's important that we give credit to Apple for insisting on a old school slow yet familiar keyboard. I must admit it took me ten minutes of watching the tutorial, and fifteen minutes more to adapt.
That said it quickly has become my favorite.
I really wish Apple would overcome their fear of including it on the iPhone. My Galaxy S gives me the choice of two other keyboards on case I didn't like Swype. Apple could do the same.
I really like Apple, I have many of their products.
Just think of how much greater they could be, if not for their closed minded ways towards anything outside of their comfort zone.
Why is the iPhone's implementation slow?
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/08/24/fastest-texting-in-the-world-actually-on-an-iphone/
EDIT: Not that I think that Apple shouldn't open up more and allow things like Swype; they should.
NAG
Apr 25, 02:33 PM
Can we officially call this an over reaction? I'm all for Apple explaining what is going on here but a lawsuit is overkill. Where is the proof that this is actually harming people?
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
~Shard~
Aug 25, 04:29 PM
the vocal minority are always the ones who have problems :rolleyes:
So in other words, the squeaky wheel gets the grease? ;)
So in other words, the squeaky wheel gets the grease? ;)
wtmcgee
Mar 26, 03:46 PM
Wouldn't surprise me if Lion and iOS 5 are one and the same... if that's the case, and since Apple really needs to get iOS in the 21st century, I can believe this...
So much hilarity in this comment.
So much hilarity in this comment.
EricNau
Aug 17, 09:49 AM
I have to say, I actually expected the woodcrest results to be better. It really shows that the G5 was years ahead of the competition. :cool:
SevenInchScrew
Nov 26, 07:46 PM
You need to level up quite a bit before the damage is fully introduced.
Gran Turismo: The REAL driving simulator ....as long as you've grinded long enough. :rolleyes:
Gran Turismo: The REAL driving simulator ....as long as you've grinded long enough. :rolleyes:
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:25 PM
Apple will never ship a desktop machine so close in size to the mini. Impractical and too much market confusion. I'm expecting a ~25% decrease in size of the current G5 tower, making it more mid-tower sized. This would still be an improvement to the current behemoths.
Wow, you're pulling out my deep cuts with your sig. They never did fit a G5 in a notebook, I guess that was my intention with that quote. The G4 was never a great chip. It ran hot and the only way to make it faster was to make it run hotter, Apple needed a new chip and they knew it. Because they couldn't find a producer of efficient PPC chips, they switched to Intel, and I don't think anyone saw that coming.
Sometimes, chip makers move backwards to an architecture that works. Look at Intel's latest chips, they're an evolution of the Pentium M architecture and a departure from what previously was their "best" and fastest, the Pentium 4.
Wow, you're pulling out my deep cuts with your sig. They never did fit a G5 in a notebook, I guess that was my intention with that quote. The G4 was never a great chip. It ran hot and the only way to make it faster was to make it run hotter, Apple needed a new chip and they knew it. Because they couldn't find a producer of efficient PPC chips, they switched to Intel, and I don't think anyone saw that coming.
Sometimes, chip makers move backwards to an architecture that works. Look at Intel's latest chips, they're an evolution of the Pentium M architecture and a departure from what previously was their "best" and fastest, the Pentium 4.
jeanlain
Apr 5, 05:14 PM
Strange, I thought that Apple had decided to ignore such meetings, and that they would showcase new products only during their own events.
peharri
Jul 14, 03:11 PM
Some of this makes sense, some of it not.
I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.
Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
It's also kind of easy to see where this rumour might have originated, in some garbled communication where the rumourmonger says "Two optical drive formats", or "Two bays", or "Multiple media readers" (hey, why not put an SD/CF/MS reader on the front? Pretty much everyone uses them these days, especially the prosumer-market Apple is after. Bet there are more people who'd use an SD card reader than a Firewire port.)
I've been wrong before, but I'm going to go for a traditional PowerMac G5 enclosure, and a single optical drive which may, or may not, support Blu-ray in some shape or form.
I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.
Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
It's also kind of easy to see where this rumour might have originated, in some garbled communication where the rumourmonger says "Two optical drive formats", or "Two bays", or "Multiple media readers" (hey, why not put an SD/CF/MS reader on the front? Pretty much everyone uses them these days, especially the prosumer-market Apple is after. Bet there are more people who'd use an SD card reader than a Firewire port.)
I've been wrong before, but I'm going to go for a traditional PowerMac G5 enclosure, and a single optical drive which may, or may not, support Blu-ray in some shape or form.
Mattie Num Nums
Mar 31, 02:33 PM
Lol, the fragmentation that "doesnt exist".
I knew it would bite them in the ass someday.
It was bound to happen. Apple makes the hardware and the phone and distributes it to providers.
Google makes the software, distributes it to manufacturers, who than distribute to providers.
Its a different model and Apples model works best however, the super closed ecosystem will always present some sort of issues amongst users. Either way you slice it Android isn't going anywhere and neither is iOS. Both are great platforms and the people that bash either without acknowledging that are uninformed fanboys/fandroids.
I knew it would bite them in the ass someday.
It was bound to happen. Apple makes the hardware and the phone and distributes it to providers.
Google makes the software, distributes it to manufacturers, who than distribute to providers.
Its a different model and Apples model works best however, the super closed ecosystem will always present some sort of issues amongst users. Either way you slice it Android isn't going anywhere and neither is iOS. Both are great platforms and the people that bash either without acknowledging that are uninformed fanboys/fandroids.
tny
Aug 7, 05:57 PM
I really hope you're joking, Time Machine is not equivalent to something like System Restore.
Actually, from what I saw, Time Machine looks like a combo of System Restore, ShadowCopies (but better), and Backup.
Actually, from what I saw, Time Machine looks like a combo of System Restore, ShadowCopies (but better), and Backup.
�algiris
Apr 27, 08:51 AM
Why did it take so long for Apple to release a statement?
Because they hoped people will grow up and educate themselfs. That never happened obviously.
Because they hoped people will grow up and educate themselfs. That never happened obviously.
radesousa
Sep 13, 11:40 AM
So the question I have is can the latest iMac be CPU upgraded like the MacPro?
Bleubird2
Apr 27, 08:51 AM
Sleep walking a lot lately?
Do you have a kid or someone using your phone while you're asleep?
Do you have a kid or someone using your phone while you're asleep?
skunk
Mar 23, 06:41 PM
Well, I suppose it really should have been ad homines — the (proper) plural would I think mitigate the gender.I'll go with that. :)
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind.Indeed, the prospect of half a million or more refugees flooding neighbouring and hard-pressed countries begs the question of how much such events do in fact impact on world security.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind.Indeed, the prospect of half a million or more refugees flooding neighbouring and hard-pressed countries begs the question of how much such events do in fact impact on world security.
No comments:
Post a Comment