Glideslope
Apr 29, 03:46 PM
Cool!
I wonder if this is part of the labels' strategy to take power away from iTunes.
Interesting point. I'm sure the Department of Justice would love to know about any contact between Labels and Amazon in the past few months. :cool:
I wonder if this is part of the labels' strategy to take power away from iTunes.
Interesting point. I'm sure the Department of Justice would love to know about any contact between Labels and Amazon in the past few months. :cool:
SeaFox
Jul 10, 04:57 PM
Dammit. I misread this article title as "Page 3 features" as in the Page 3 of Macrumors we had for April Fools.
:D
:D
chrmjenkins
Apr 29, 03:50 PM
Me too. Given the theme i was already picturing myself as the marquee artist of the production ;)
anyway, the situation right now is:
eldiablo: 4 (dontpanic, chrmjenkins, aggie, ucfgrad)
chrmjenkins: 1 (jav)
not voted yet: Lbro, eldiablo
not much room to maneouvre for eldiablo, except in deciding who to infect (if he hasn't done it already).
so tomorrow should be 4 vs 1 (or 5 vs 1 if the hunter is successful). with everyone with equal chances of being wolfized.
it's like starting a new game, a tricky one with two shots at finding the wolf
jav is making a good case for it being him already if his vote doesn't change and eldiablojoe does turn out to be a ww.
Ultimate con would be if aggie was/is infected and joe is a ww.
anyway, the situation right now is:
eldiablo: 4 (dontpanic, chrmjenkins, aggie, ucfgrad)
chrmjenkins: 1 (jav)
not voted yet: Lbro, eldiablo
not much room to maneouvre for eldiablo, except in deciding who to infect (if he hasn't done it already).
so tomorrow should be 4 vs 1 (or 5 vs 1 if the hunter is successful). with everyone with equal chances of being wolfized.
it's like starting a new game, a tricky one with two shots at finding the wolf
jav is making a good case for it being him already if his vote doesn't change and eldiablojoe does turn out to be a ww.
Ultimate con would be if aggie was/is infected and joe is a ww.
kevingaffney
Apr 22, 04:46 PM
Before seeing this, I had more or less decided I would skip the next upgrade but I have to admit I love that design. Stick 64 gigs in it and I'll be at the top of the queue
more...
chrmjenkins
Apr 25, 11:00 AM
Who thumbed down every post on this page?
Except one from aggie...
The posts start at 0, not one.
Did you thumb them back up, or were you under a misconception?
Somebody must have thumbed them back up. They were all at -1 except the one from aggie.
That's suspicious... ;)
I feel like I’m being set up here. :confused:
whooossshhhhh
%IMG_DESC_6%
more...
%IMG_DESC_7%
%IMG_DESC_8%
more...
%IMG_DESC_9%
%IMG_DESC_10%
Except one from aggie...
The posts start at 0, not one.
Did you thumb them back up, or were you under a misconception?
Somebody must have thumbed them back up. They were all at -1 except the one from aggie.
That's suspicious... ;)
I feel like I’m being set up here. :confused:
whooossshhhhh
dwd3885
Apr 29, 03:26 PM
With all the improvements made to Amazon MP3 lately, there really is NO reason to buy music from the iTunes store anymore. None.
more...
johndallas999
May 4, 09:35 AM
pfft, this should not be front page news, hell not even second page... just a bunch of hearsay from a CR that knows nothing about it and speculates BS.
No kidding! You'd think this whole site was just based on "rumors". Jeeze!
No kidding! You'd think this whole site was just based on "rumors". Jeeze!
cutsman
Apr 10, 08:51 AM
Downtown Toronto, taken with Nikon D90 + 24-70 f2.8.
http://cman.zenfolio.com/img/s3/v26/p66040576-4.jpg
http://cman.zenfolio.com/img/s3/v26/p66040576-4.jpg
more...
SciFrog
Nov 27, 06:29 AM
We need these bigadv, ClubLexus has raised their production to match ours...
For GPU, it is faster on nvidia...
For GPU, it is faster on nvidia...
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 20, 10:40 AM
If you don't address those very good reasons, your argument won't be very convincing. We do not want the CPU suck, the identity leaking, the UI inconsistencies, and the very real risk of "zero day" Adobe bugs.
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
more...
%IMG_DESC_11%
%IMG_DESC_12%
more...
%IMG_DESC_13%
%IMG_DESC_14%
more...
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
more...
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
Whom am I trying to convince? Illogical and irrational people who worship Steve Jobs and hate what he hates? Such people will not care or listen to any form of reason. That's why the word fanatic is in fanboy. No, I talk about an option to turn Flash on or off at will and you find it offensive to even offer an option. That is irrational at best.
Everything you fear would be avoided if someone just turned Flash OFF (or it could default to off and have to be turned on). I've said since the first post the word OPTION. You don't seem to comprehend that word or understand why those of us that would want the choice of having Flash are not asking you to give up anything in the process. You could always turn it off if it were present. We cannot turn it on if it's not present.
In other words, you are not competent to carry on a rational discussion. You're just here to vent.
No, I just don't see any point in trying to carry on a logical, rational discussion with someone whose "argument" is based purely on emotion. If it weren't, you wouldn't object to an option for those of us that don't agree with Steve Jobs point of view because an option satisfies all your arguments against having Flash because you can always just leave it OFF. It cannot do harm if it's off no matter how paranoid you may become about having it on your device.
Many millions of people have Flash installed on their Macs (let alone those using Windows and Linux) and they could remove it. They know that if they do, some web sites will cease to function properly and thus they leave it on. The security concerns you mentioned will be addressed as all security bugs are in both OSX and Windows.
Users of those 120M+ devices don't have to hope. They are already free of Flash!
Free of Flash? You say that in a tone that sounds like they're free of slavery or something. No, what they're free of is the ability to access millions of web sites that require Flash to view them or much of their content and I do not see that as a good thing. But my point of view doesn't require you to see it. I said from the first post I wanted an option to use Flash. You could still choose to turn it off if it were there. I cannot turn on what is not present nor should I have to buy some absurd 3rd party converter that requires their web site to be running to use it.
The analogy makes no sense. Nobody is forcing you to use any Apple product.
And so that makes it OK for him to behave as he does? A lot of us like Apple products, but we would like them a lot better if Steve would just stick to making the products unfettered instead of trying to force his opinions and world view on people in the process. He doesn't like Flash so he decides for everyone they should not use Flash. What if Steve decided iOS shall no longer support MP3 files, only AAC? I suppose you would accept that as OK too? Update iOS and your MP3s no longer function. Yes, that would be just wonderful if they did that. After all, AAC is superior to MP3, so why should Apple support a legacy inferior heavily pirated format? By your logic, they should not.
If you really want the "full web experience" of zero-day Adobe bugs, get an Android phone. Note: Android phones were vulnerable to the last zero-day Adobe bug. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I don't want a phone period guy. I only want and use an iPod Touch. Is there an Android iPod Touch? Android didn't exist when Apple made the claims of accessing the full Internet either and it doesn't make that any less a lie.
The fact that I can't catch zero-day Adobe attacks on my iPhone is a great reason to praise Apple's decision.
You act as if Apple has no vulnerabilities to attack. That is extremely naive to the point of emotionalism once again. In fact it's just the opposite. Apple's security is rated as bad compared to Windows and only the fact that there are so few Mac users compared to Windows has saved it thus far. As the popularity of iOS devices has exploded, it's inevitable that it will start attracting malware. It's only a matter of time. Will you wish you never bought an iPhone on that day or will you recognize that companies simply have to find and patch vulnerabilities. Apple has patched numerous security flaws in OSX over the years. Should we plug our ears and say there is no such thing?
Do tell: what exact sites are you talking about? What exact legacy flash applications are running on those sites to which you can find no substitute?
A quick search (you do know how to do that don't you?) reveals offhand a few example sites that don't use HTML5 video (which could and may in the future, but that doesn't help someone today):
Gametrailers
GiantBomb
Vimeo
Playstation Blog
Stiq of Joy
Engadget
Try some of these effects on this site this with HTML5:
http://superior-web-solutions.com/
Maybe read this article on Flash. Most HTML5 is just a video player. Flash isn't just a video player and it didn't even start as one.
http://www.andrewgreig.com/2010/06/html5-is-not-a-flash-replacement-and-shouldnt-be-seen-that-way/
Perhaps you want an open standard? So when does Apple stop requiring Quicktime on their web sites? :rolleyes:
Nobody is holding a gun to your head. Nobody is holding you hostage.
If you don't like the choices that Apple made, then ditch your iOS device and get an Android. Simple.
No, they're just boring me to death with emotional arguments why everyone should either worship Steve Jobs or leave the platform and get an Android instead similar to the "love OSX or leave it" arguments the fanboys regularly produce.
This is the first little lie in your rant. The iOS users don't find it inconvenient. If Flash were so damn important to them, they would have bought some device that could run Flash.
The fact that you think my statement is a "lie" based on a subjective opinion tells me you cannot even tell fact from fiction let alone lies from opinions. Trying to see someone else's point of view is completely foreign to you. You view the world through tinted lenses. What you say is akin to if you don't like something about OSX, go buy a Windows machine, as if there aren't any compromises along the way on that platform either (not to mention having to replace possibly thousands and thousands of dollars worth of software for a given platform to do so). Not liking something about a given platform and wanting to change it doesn't mean another platform is more viable in ALL areas or that a person may wish to spend a lot of money to make that change just because of that one issue. Perhaps you'd like to send me a free Android phone to replace my aging 1st Gen iPod Touch that I bought before Android even existed? I'd happily consider such an offer. Of course I'll need replacement apps as well.
The people who bought those 120M+ devices disagree with you.
You seem to forge that I and others that actually want Flash are part of those people dude. Get over yourself. Just because you don't like Flash doesn't mean the rest of us have hatred for it. Some of us simply don't like our iPhones, iPads and iPod Touches crippled for no reason. Besides, how you try to turn my initial argument that I'd prefer to see an option to use Flash for those of us that want it rather than no option into this flipping crusade against all things Apple and Flash alike is beyond me. You are making mountains out of mole hills and lies out of opinions. For what? I can't make you see things the way I see them. I never wanted to try. That's why I said OPTION. But you would deny everyone who wants that option to have it just like Steve Jobs. Steve does it because he's a control freak (he was once ousted from Apple for this very reason). I imagine you do it because you love Apple. Sadly, I actually prefer Steve's reason.
This is the second little lie. Apple did provide a choice: they approved the SkyFire App. They didn't have to do that.
Didn't they? It doesn't violate their rules for an app so how could they not approve it without being outright liars? Oh wait. They have done that before so I can see your point. ;)
Apple has also announced they will approve Flash Apps using Adobe's cross-compiler for iOS. If there actually are crucial Flash apps -- you haven't named a single specific one so far -- the owners of those apps should be able to easily cross-compile their apps for the iOS App Store.
Apple formerly announced they would NOT support it. Why did they change their minds? Could it have something to do with the Justice Department starting an investigation into anti-trust behaviors by Apple policies? Noooo....it couldn't be that. Apple is allowed to single out companies it doesn't like and compete with to just willy-nilly throw specifically into their license agreements.
And that is the third little lie. Flash is a proprietary and legacy platform. It's on the way down now.
I say if you don't have Flash you don't have the full Internet and you call that a "lie" based on the above quote? What freaking UNIVERSE do you live in??????? ROTFLMAO. You cannot tell a statement of fact from an idea in your head that somehow says that the "full internet" doesn't include sites that use "propriety" formats. Come on man. That position not only ignore reality it even invalidiates Apple's own web site as being part of the "full Internet" !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You need to try harder. Calling someone a liar when they are obviously stating facts and/or opinions just makes you look immature.
because accusing someone of lying when it's obvious
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
First of all, you are the one that is calling it a "bankrupt strategy". I see nothing in that thread by Adobe that even addresses the matter. Adobe is simply trying to sell products and if they can easily sell more products to Apple users by providing an easy way to convert their hard work Flash sites into HTML5, they are going to do so and laugh all the way to the bank. That in NO WAY invalidates the fact that there are still plenty of Flash only sites out there and plenty of flash uses (e.g. Flash games) that HTML5 is no simple substitute for regardless. Until the Internet is Flash free, there is going to be a need and a will by people to have the option to view Flash.
The mere fact that this Skyfire app has raked in over $1 MILLION in sales already shows just how big that will is. Yet you reject the desire to be able to use Flash web sites as meaningless and unnecessary while the thread title alone proves you wrong.
more...
Islandz
Apr 13, 08:59 PM
Spec bump?
32 and 64?
32 and 64?
Adidas Addict
Apr 28, 03:57 PM
Someone get a micrometer or vernier caliper and check this, looks the same size on the photos to me.
more...
JesterJJZ
Jul 24, 06:12 PM
Has the lag problem been fixed at all on the BT mice? Last time I used a BT mouse I found it to be useless. Unless it's JUST LIKE using a wired mouse I really could care less for it.
Doctor Q
Dec 1, 02:02 PM
iAdware apparently works by silently installing a system library. That sounds like a vulnerability that Apple could easily fix, by requiring Admin privileges, issuing a warning, and/or prompting for an Admin password.
more...
kiljoy616
Apr 21, 11:30 PM
Really? How come I never saw anything like the iPhone GUI before 2007.
Or are you suggesting Apple invented the smart phone :D
They did not invent it but dam they made it hip and cool which if you look around has everyone doing the "Me Too" dance. :)
Or are you suggesting Apple invented the smart phone :D
They did not invent it but dam they made it hip and cool which if you look around has everyone doing the "Me Too" dance. :)
foodle
Apr 14, 12:57 PM
A sure way to tell when a technology is running out of steam and nearing saturation is when the big new thing is a different colored case. Just look at Dell laptops or the iPod line. Not a good sign from Apple.
more...
CarlosMotoza
Apr 12, 02:09 PM
I have been under the impression that the iphone would be released sometime at the end of the year, with verzion having had gotten the iphone 4 in febuary, i couldn't see it coming out any time soon
Mattlike
Sep 14, 09:56 AM
Thanks. Watch for my YouTube� unboxing later. :p
haha, I look forward to it. :)
haha, I look forward to it. :)
robtarren
May 3, 09:08 AM
Just ordered mine, can't wait as my 2008 model is starting to struggle, especially with some of the photo editing software that plugs in to Photoshop, and Premiere Pro CS5 dies a death when trying to do anything remotely exciting!
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
8GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
2TB Serial ATA Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
Apple Magic Mouse
Apple Wireless Keyboard
As with Zomberunner, I will upgrade memory to 16GB at a later date from Crucial.
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
8GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x4GB
2TB Serial ATA Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
Apple Magic Mouse
Apple Wireless Keyboard
As with Zomberunner, I will upgrade memory to 16GB at a later date from Crucial.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 15, 02:26 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Reports indicate that ... Front Row are exactly the same as the Tiger versions, suggesting that unannounced improvements could be in store for them by Leopard's final release.
Hmmm, why would an update of Front Row be deemed top secret...
Could this suggest that the mythical iHome might be coming soon?
Reports indicate that ... Front Row are exactly the same as the Tiger versions, suggesting that unannounced improvements could be in store for them by Leopard's final release.
Hmmm, why would an update of Front Row be deemed top secret...
Could this suggest that the mythical iHome might be coming soon?
spicyapple
Dec 3, 10:34 AM
Judging by the progression in the poll numbers, looks like FUD is gaining traction.
stroked
Apr 27, 02:36 PM
Nope, the thing you haven't understood is that I thought it was a Clever idea, as right after, the attackers left. Nothing "crappy" about acknowledging something which saved her from further sufferance. Of course, you interpreted my post as being insincere and cold, but it was merely an observation and never did I have the intention to be hurtful.
No, but he assumed your intention was hurtful
No, but he assumed your intention was hurtful
TheReef
Apr 13, 03:53 AM
http://img571.imageshack.us/img571/5368/wtr4.jpg
reflex
Oct 24, 09:06 AM
No where on the sites does it mention 64-bit capabilities, unless i'm missing it. Can 64-bit be safely assumed?
Yes.
Yes.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق