polyesterlester
Aug 7, 03:55 PM
From the Xcode 3.0 (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/xcode.html) page:
"Project Snapshots
"Record the state of your project anytime, and restore it instantly. Experiment with new features without spending time or brain cells committing them to a source control system. Like saving a game in Civilization 4, Xcode 3.0 lets you go back in time without repercussions. If only reality worked this way at the Pentagon..."
I love you, Apple.
"Project Snapshots
"Record the state of your project anytime, and restore it instantly. Experiment with new features without spending time or brain cells committing them to a source control system. Like saving a game in Civilization 4, Xcode 3.0 lets you go back in time without repercussions. If only reality worked this way at the Pentagon..."
I love you, Apple.
fivepoint
Apr 27, 03:00 PM
Really guys? We're going to argue it may be a forgery now. :rolleyes:
Can you name ONE person here who suggested its a forgery? Please provide the quote assuming of course you're not simply making crap up for the sake of argument... attempting to label people instead of discussing the actual issues. NAWWW!!!
BTW- just opened the same file- no layers. So you tell me what I'm missing here.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
Can you name ONE person here who suggested its a forgery? Please provide the quote assuming of course you're not simply making crap up for the sake of argument... attempting to label people instead of discussing the actual issues. NAWWW!!!
BTW- just opened the same file- no layers. So you tell me what I'm missing here.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
leekohler
Apr 27, 03:01 PM
Wait until he tells us which right-wing fringe website he was on so you can go read the instructions and try to recreate this silly pointless endeavor.
(edit) Whack-a-doodle website with Illustrator instructions (http://www.nkyvoice.com/2011/04/long-form-birth-certificate.html). Is this it Fivepoint?
Or is it this other nutty site (http://www.patrioticdissent.net/2011/04/obama-long-form-birth-certificate-fake.html)?
Oh boy. Fivepoint, you wouldn't have happened to visit any such site, now would you?
The birthers have moved on to say that because Obama "doesn't have allegiance to America" or some BS like that, he is now no longer a natural born citizen (http://www.birthers.org/). :rolleyes:
Oh boy.
EDIT- Oh looky! Fivepoint, you never disappoint.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
And why are you concerning yourself with this? Because you're unbiased?
(edit) Whack-a-doodle website with Illustrator instructions (http://www.nkyvoice.com/2011/04/long-form-birth-certificate.html). Is this it Fivepoint?
Or is it this other nutty site (http://www.patrioticdissent.net/2011/04/obama-long-form-birth-certificate-fake.html)?
Oh boy. Fivepoint, you wouldn't have happened to visit any such site, now would you?
The birthers have moved on to say that because Obama "doesn't have allegiance to America" or some BS like that, he is now no longer a natural born citizen (http://www.birthers.org/). :rolleyes:
Oh boy.
EDIT- Oh looky! Fivepoint, you never disappoint.
Am I a liar? I have no idea if you're doing it right, or if you are even using Illustrator, or if the PDF was replaced with a single-layer/object one. Just do a Google search for 'obama birth certificate layers' and you'll see that I'm not the only one who downloaded a file with multiple layers or objects or whatever.
And why are you concerning yourself with this? Because you're unbiased?
ariechel
Sep 19, 02:51 AM
I still think it's funny that everyone thinks these Macbook Pros are "long overdue" - when, exactly, did the FIRST Dell laptop with C2D ship? I thought it was supposed to be around tomorrow...but surely it couldn't have been before last Monday or so at the earliest.
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
Both the Sony AR and FE series are available with Core 2 Duo processors and are showing as "usually ships next business day" on the Sonystyle website (though admittedly "usually" could really mean anything). The FE series has already been shipping with Core 2 Duo processors for at least a week now.
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
Both the Sony AR and FE series are available with Core 2 Duo processors and are showing as "usually ships next business day" on the Sonystyle website (though admittedly "usually" could really mean anything). The FE series has already been shipping with Core 2 Duo processors for at least a week now.
skunk
Mar 1, 04:55 PM
The legal definition of marriage according to the government of the United States of America "...'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife..."I can't help it if you live in a backward country. I was talking about civilised norms. And whatever your cockeyed definition, it is still not equality.
gnasher729
Jul 27, 05:59 PM
but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
DStaal
Sep 13, 09:35 AM
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
How much more 'blind' do you want it? All the programmer has to do at this point is use multiple threads. Even if they don't, multiple cores will be automatically used for system and other processes.
Splitting one thread so that it ran cocurent with itself is a recipie for massive trouble. Mac OS X is about as blind as any system out there for the programmer. There may be some more optimizations that the system could make in it's own handling of multiprocessing, but from a programmer's perspective it doesn't matter how many cores the system has. (Unless you really want it to.)
How much more 'blind' do you want it? All the programmer has to do at this point is use multiple threads. Even if they don't, multiple cores will be automatically used for system and other processes.
Splitting one thread so that it ran cocurent with itself is a recipie for massive trouble. Mac OS X is about as blind as any system out there for the programmer. There may be some more optimizations that the system could make in it's own handling of multiprocessing, but from a programmer's perspective it doesn't matter how many cores the system has. (Unless you really want it to.)
Chundles
Aug 11, 10:33 AM
Two stories so far on the front page and we have:
"chineese"
"upcomming"
Looks like arn's keyboard is stickiiing. :D
iPhone = bad idea and difficult to implement beyond the USA.
"chineese"
"upcomming"
Looks like arn's keyboard is stickiiing. :D
iPhone = bad idea and difficult to implement beyond the USA.
generik
Sep 19, 06:08 AM
Why do you even visit this site? You are doing nothing but criticising Apple and their products. Please leave.
Ps. If I was Admin I would ban you :p
Apple is beyond critique! Omg! :rolleyes:
Ps. If I was Admin I would ban you :p
Apple is beyond critique! Omg! :rolleyes:
mcgillmaine
Jun 23, 01:48 PM
Now the two stores that were getting phones are saying they haven't got any in yet. so i'm going to pass on RS. Maybe i'll just trade my old phone for a case or something else.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 05:47 PM
Mac Pro $1999
2x Woodcrest 2.0Ghz
1GB DDR667
That price point for a quad would not be easy. A dual processor Xeon 2GHz woodcrest Dell workstationwith 1GB FB-DIMM 533 running Linux (cheaper than the windoze version) with a 750W power supply is nearly $2900. And even though I did my best to equalize some of the things to be more like the features of the powermac (ports, vid cards etc.), it still has the potential to be much more expensive.
2x Woodcrest 2.0Ghz
1GB DDR667
That price point for a quad would not be easy. A dual processor Xeon 2GHz woodcrest Dell workstationwith 1GB FB-DIMM 533 running Linux (cheaper than the windoze version) with a 750W power supply is nearly $2900. And even though I did my best to equalize some of the things to be more like the features of the powermac (ports, vid cards etc.), it still has the potential to be much more expensive.
patrick0brien
Jul 20, 12:28 PM
There might be rare exceptions in the professinal area and of course it makes lots of sense for a server, but for a single user machine?
-satty
I just kicked of a 6450 frame render on Gabriel (see specs below). According to the average frame time, it'll take until August 4th to complete.
I'd reeeeeally like this alleged machine.
-satty
I just kicked of a 6450 frame render on Gabriel (see specs below). According to the average frame time, it'll take until August 4th to complete.
I'd reeeeeally like this alleged machine.
orangerizzla
Apr 6, 10:37 AM
I'm just guessing but it's possible that Apple will announce the new FCS and ship it when Lion ships, perhaps around the June WWDC.
I think your probably right but I sure hope they announce something. I certainly didn't buy my brand new MacPro to run the leather clad iCal... ;-)
I think your probably right but I sure hope they announce something. I certainly didn't buy my brand new MacPro to run the leather clad iCal... ;-)
Super Dave
Aug 6, 01:43 PM
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Admittedly trademark law isn't my specialty, but I suspect Apple has a trademark on the word "Mac," and adding a generic word like "Pro" to it does not seem like something you could claim any originality with. Especially since it's based on their trademarked word in the first place. Is there something I'm missing?
Oh, and a computer and computer store aren't exactly the same thing. How are you going to claim consumer confusion?
David :cool:
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Admittedly trademark law isn't my specialty, but I suspect Apple has a trademark on the word "Mac," and adding a generic word like "Pro" to it does not seem like something you could claim any originality with. Especially since it's based on their trademarked word in the first place. Is there something I'm missing?
Oh, and a computer and computer store aren't exactly the same thing. How are you going to claim consumer confusion?
David :cool:
smithrh
Apr 25, 01:43 PM
The Feds are bored.
I understand that you didn't read the article then.
It wasn't filed by the Feds.
I understand that you didn't read the article then.
It wasn't filed by the Feds.
boshii
Apr 11, 11:32 AM
If it's been pushed that far back, LTE better be included.
I can't imagine we see our first LTE iPhone in 2013.
I can't imagine we see our first LTE iPhone in 2013.
Koufax80
Apr 25, 02:41 PM
Damnit! I just looked outside and saw Steve Jobs with a clipboard... Apple must have sent him to track my location since I turned my phone off...
milo
Jul 27, 01:03 PM
this would be smart because as of right now the mac book pro doesnt WOW me over the macbook. Do you think the "core 3" will also have the same pin structure as the 2's?
The next gen of chips has 4 core versions of conroe and woodcrest, each with the same sockets as the ones they're replacing. Not sure if there will be a 4 core merom.
How about a new Mac at WWDC?
Lower Model:
CConroe E6300 - 1.86 GHz � FSB1066 � 2 MB cache - ($185)
1GB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
One open PCI-Express expansion slot
One open Optical drive slot [maybe] (i.e. for 2nd DVD drive)
Graphics Card with 128MB SDRAM
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0, USB/FW800
Remote [(?] I think this box will still be small enough to fit into home entertainment setups.]
Keyboard, Mighty Mouse...................................................... $999
Some Options:
Conroe E6600 - 2.40 GHz � FSB1066 � 4 MB cache � (+$100)
Wireless Keyboard/Mouse +$60
Add DVD/CD ROM drive (in 2nd slot) + $50
250GB SATA hard drive +$75
+1GB RAM (2GB total) +$100
+3GB RAM (4GB total) +$300
Slightly Better Graphics Card with 256MB SDRAM + $50
Much Better Graphics Card +$200+
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
Pretty cool, but it needs a real name, MAC won't cut it. Maybe Mac Express?
And it wouldn't have FW800 or a second optical slot. Probably a second HD slot instead. And I'd guess it would be more of a pizza box enclosure, but that's wild speculation. Your price is probably way too low, too.
The next gen of chips has 4 core versions of conroe and woodcrest, each with the same sockets as the ones they're replacing. Not sure if there will be a 4 core merom.
How about a new Mac at WWDC?
Lower Model:
CConroe E6300 - 1.86 GHz � FSB1066 � 2 MB cache - ($185)
1GB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
One open PCI-Express expansion slot
One open Optical drive slot [maybe] (i.e. for 2nd DVD drive)
Graphics Card with 128MB SDRAM
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0, USB/FW800
Remote [(?] I think this box will still be small enough to fit into home entertainment setups.]
Keyboard, Mighty Mouse...................................................... $999
Some Options:
Conroe E6600 - 2.40 GHz � FSB1066 � 4 MB cache � (+$100)
Wireless Keyboard/Mouse +$60
Add DVD/CD ROM drive (in 2nd slot) + $50
250GB SATA hard drive +$75
+1GB RAM (2GB total) +$100
+3GB RAM (4GB total) +$300
Slightly Better Graphics Card with 256MB SDRAM + $50
Much Better Graphics Card +$200+
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
Pretty cool, but it needs a real name, MAC won't cut it. Maybe Mac Express?
And it wouldn't have FW800 or a second optical slot. Probably a second HD slot instead. And I'd guess it would be more of a pizza box enclosure, but that's wild speculation. Your price is probably way too low, too.
mjsanders5uk
Apr 5, 05:02 PM
and Mac Pros!
and entry level MacBook!
and Mac minis!
and ...
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
and entry level MacBook!
and Mac minis!
and ...
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
AlligatorBloodz
Apr 8, 02:30 AM
I heard galaxy tab is better than Ipad. Is it true??
Technically it is a safer product. No one is going to mug you for your galaxy tab.
Technically it is a safer product. No one is going to mug you for your galaxy tab.
janstett
Oct 23, 11:44 AM
Unfortunately not many multithreaded apps - yet. For a long time most of the multi-threaded apps were just a select few pro level things. 3D/Visualization software, CAD, database systems, etc.. Those of us who had multiprocessor systems bought them because we had a specific software in mind or group of software applications that could take advantage of multiple processors. As current CPU manufacturing processes started hitting a wall right around the 3GHz mark, chip makers started to transition to multiple CPU cores to boost power - makes sense. Software developers have been lazy for years, just riding the wave of ever-increasing MHz. Now the multi-core CPUs are here and the software is behind as many applications need to have serious re-writes done in order to take advantage of multiple processors. Intel tried to get a jump on this with their HT (Hyper Threading) implementation that essentially simulated dual-cores on a CPU by way of two virtual CPUs. Software developers didn't exactly jump on this and warm up to it. But I also don't think the software industry truly believed that CPUs would go multi-core on a mass scale so fast... Intel and AMD both said they would, don't know why the software industry doubted. Intel and AMD are uncommonly good about telling the truth about upcoming products. Both will be shipping quad-core CPU offerings by year's end.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
What you're saying isn't entirely true and may give some people the wrong idea.
First, a multicore system is helpful when running multiple CPU-intensive single-threaded applications on a proper multitasking operating system. For example, right now I'm ripping CDs on iTunes. One processor gets used a lot and the other three are idle. I could be using this CPU power for another app.
The reality is that to take advantage of multiple cores, you had to take advantage of threads. Now, I was doing this in my programs with OS/2 back in 1992. I've been writing multithreaded apps my entire career. But writing a threaded application requires thought and work, so naturally many programmers are lazy and avoid threads. Plus it is harder to debug and synchronize a multithreaded application. Windows and Linux people have been doing this since the stone age, and Windows/Linux have had usable multiprocessor systems for more than a decade (it didn't start with Hyperthreading). I had a dual-processor 486 running NT 3.5 circa 1995. It's just been more of an optional "cool trick" to write threaded applications that the timid programmer avoids. Also it's worth noting that it's possible to go overboard with excessive threading and that leads to problems (context switching, thrashing, synchronization, etc).
Now, on the Mac side, OS 9 and below couldn't properly support SMP and it required a hacked version of the OS and a special version of the application. So the history of the Mac world has been, until recently with OSX, to avoid threading and multiprocessing unless specially called for and then at great pain to do so.
So it goes back to getting developers to write threaded applications. Now that we're getting to 4 and 8 core systems, it also presents a problem.
The classic reason to create a thread is to prevent the GUI from locking up while processing. Let's say I write a GUI program that has a calculation that takes 20 seconds. If I do it the lazy way, the GUI will lock up for 20 seconds because it can't process window messages during that time. If I write a thread, the calculation can take place there and leave the GUI thread able to process messages and keep the application alive, and then signal the other thread when it's done.
But now with more than 4 or 8 cores, the problem is how do you break up the work? 9 women can't have a baby in a month. So if your process is still serialized, you still have to wait with 1 processor doing all the work and the others sitting idle. For example, if you encode a video, it is a very serialized process. I hear some work has been done to simultaneously encode macroblocks in parallel, but getting 8 processors to chew on a single video is an interesting problem.
centauratlas
Apr 6, 04:39 PM
You both ignored HOT DOGS! Sheesh, hot dogs rule. The only problem is kids under 6 choking on them unless you cut them right. But that will be fixed in the v3.0 hot dog, they will come pre-sliced.
You busted me.
I am a hamburger fanboi, and will turn into a raving lunatic, foam at the mouth and make up opinions based on nothing all to defend my beloved hamburgers. After all they're lighter, slimmer and tastier than cheesburgers!!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
You busted me.
I am a hamburger fanboi, and will turn into a raving lunatic, foam at the mouth and make up opinions based on nothing all to defend my beloved hamburgers. After all they're lighter, slimmer and tastier than cheesburgers!!!
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
wmmk
Aug 16, 10:42 PM
Was there any doubt it wouldn't be a lot faster? I mean, I know it was already plenty fast, but come on...
Well, not all gigahertz are created equally, and not apps are universal.
Well, not all gigahertz are created equally, and not apps are universal.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 31, 05:35 PM
I completely agree, but let's be honest, Apple and Microsoft fans are no different.
One important fact to consider:
"If there were no fans, there would be no game!"
One important fact to consider:
"If there were no fans, there would be no game!"
By using Car Rental 8 you can find the cheapest car rental from over 50,000 locations globally.
ResponderEliminar