Nermal
Apr 22, 05:34 PM
After reading that, I think I'm supposed to be using Windows...
MisterMe
Sep 14, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by bullrat
I'm a potential "switcher" that wants to buy an iMac now but I keep reading all the posts on the various Mac boards about how even the latest 17 inch iMac looks "choppy" or "jerky" when resizing or moving windows and how much slower browsing the Web is than bad old MS on Wintel.
I have not seen those posts, but then I have seen a lot of other bitching and moaning about one thing or another. Point No. 1: Although I don't have access to a 17" iMac, I do have Jaguar installed on my 2000 Firewire PowerBook G3. I don't see any of that choppiness and jerkiness that you mentioned. I would be astonished to find it on a faster machine like the 17" iMac. Point No. 2: Don't take anybody's word for it. Drive down to your nearest Apple retailer. Look at the machines yourself. That should end all arguments.
I'm so bored reading all the MHz doesn't matter blather. It does matter. When a brand new $2000 computer looks choppy using a brand new OS, then something is not right. It should be blazing on all basic functions. Flame away if you like, I see a lot of that on the Mac boards whenever someone happens to disagree with the party line but I'd wager I speak for a lot of potential switchers.
Again, have your actually seen this "choppiness" on that $2000 machine with the brand new OS? Now for the issue of MHz, browse the web sites of the expensive UNIX workstations and servers. Look at the clock speeds of the offerings from IBM, HP, SGI, and Sun. For the most part, you will see that their machines have clock speeds in the sub-GHz range. Yet these are the machines of choice when price is no object and the job must get done. Just think about this: these boards are filled with laments that effectively tell you that you need substaintially higher clock speeds to run a computer game than you need to simulate the gas flow in a jet engine. Don't you think that something is just a bit warped here?
I guess what really blows me away is that Apple appears to be *purposely* cripppling their systems. From what I understand it's possible for Apple to upgrade the processor, bus, memory and other components without any technical difficulties.
Think. Think. Think. Apple does not "appear" to be purposesly crippling its systems. The entirity of the corporation orbits about the Macintosh. No company would purposely cripple its central product. The fact that Apple is only one of two profitable personal computer manufacturers serve as loud testimony to the contrary. Just because a bunch of idle college students post things on the Internet does not make them so.
Okay, you can flame away now -- but all I'm saying is there are a lot of potential switchers waiting to plunk down their hard earned cash if Apple would get it together. I see more and more Apple folks waking up, no longer satisfied to let Apple off the hook for getting further and further behind the rest of the computer world.
If you are serious, then nobody wants to see you flamed. But again, think. Exactly how is Apple behind? If you are talking about the race toward bankruptcy, then I would agree with you. Apple is second to last in that race among personal computer makers.
The best OS deserves the best hardware or at least a lot better hardware than being currently used. You want premium prices? Then give us premium hardware. Geez, drop Motorola if they can't deliver the goods and go with IBM (don't go with Intel or AMD to keep that Apple distinction). But pul-leeze do it soon. I want to buy!
-bullrat
I cannot agree more that the best OS deserves the best currently available hardware. However, the machine has to be affordable. For many years, Apple has ranked among the highest quality hardware manufactures. I am not just talking about microprocessors. I've endured conditions that put Dells out to pasture while my Mac chugged along like a champ.
As for all this business about Motorola this, IBM that, and AMD the other thing, I will leave it to Apple to make the best decision. It knows the players and its own business better than any nitwit posting on an Internet bulletin board.
I'm a potential "switcher" that wants to buy an iMac now but I keep reading all the posts on the various Mac boards about how even the latest 17 inch iMac looks "choppy" or "jerky" when resizing or moving windows and how much slower browsing the Web is than bad old MS on Wintel.
I have not seen those posts, but then I have seen a lot of other bitching and moaning about one thing or another. Point No. 1: Although I don't have access to a 17" iMac, I do have Jaguar installed on my 2000 Firewire PowerBook G3. I don't see any of that choppiness and jerkiness that you mentioned. I would be astonished to find it on a faster machine like the 17" iMac. Point No. 2: Don't take anybody's word for it. Drive down to your nearest Apple retailer. Look at the machines yourself. That should end all arguments.
I'm so bored reading all the MHz doesn't matter blather. It does matter. When a brand new $2000 computer looks choppy using a brand new OS, then something is not right. It should be blazing on all basic functions. Flame away if you like, I see a lot of that on the Mac boards whenever someone happens to disagree with the party line but I'd wager I speak for a lot of potential switchers.
Again, have your actually seen this "choppiness" on that $2000 machine with the brand new OS? Now for the issue of MHz, browse the web sites of the expensive UNIX workstations and servers. Look at the clock speeds of the offerings from IBM, HP, SGI, and Sun. For the most part, you will see that their machines have clock speeds in the sub-GHz range. Yet these are the machines of choice when price is no object and the job must get done. Just think about this: these boards are filled with laments that effectively tell you that you need substaintially higher clock speeds to run a computer game than you need to simulate the gas flow in a jet engine. Don't you think that something is just a bit warped here?
I guess what really blows me away is that Apple appears to be *purposely* cripppling their systems. From what I understand it's possible for Apple to upgrade the processor, bus, memory and other components without any technical difficulties.
Think. Think. Think. Apple does not "appear" to be purposesly crippling its systems. The entirity of the corporation orbits about the Macintosh. No company would purposely cripple its central product. The fact that Apple is only one of two profitable personal computer manufacturers serve as loud testimony to the contrary. Just because a bunch of idle college students post things on the Internet does not make them so.
Okay, you can flame away now -- but all I'm saying is there are a lot of potential switchers waiting to plunk down their hard earned cash if Apple would get it together. I see more and more Apple folks waking up, no longer satisfied to let Apple off the hook for getting further and further behind the rest of the computer world.
If you are serious, then nobody wants to see you flamed. But again, think. Exactly how is Apple behind? If you are talking about the race toward bankruptcy, then I would agree with you. Apple is second to last in that race among personal computer makers.
The best OS deserves the best hardware or at least a lot better hardware than being currently used. You want premium prices? Then give us premium hardware. Geez, drop Motorola if they can't deliver the goods and go with IBM (don't go with Intel or AMD to keep that Apple distinction). But pul-leeze do it soon. I want to buy!
-bullrat
I cannot agree more that the best OS deserves the best currently available hardware. However, the machine has to be affordable. For many years, Apple has ranked among the highest quality hardware manufactures. I am not just talking about microprocessors. I've endured conditions that put Dells out to pasture while my Mac chugged along like a champ.
As for all this business about Motorola this, IBM that, and AMD the other thing, I will leave it to Apple to make the best decision. It knows the players and its own business better than any nitwit posting on an Internet bulletin board.
spillproof
Apr 14, 02:55 PM
Glad to see they are getting someone with experience. I would hate to see the data center flop becasue no one knows how to properly run it.
Page 2?
This site needs a new section!
MacRumors: From Apple Human Resources
281315
Page 2?
This site needs a new section!
MacRumors: From Apple Human Resources
281315
Dave Braine
Apr 30, 03:34 PM
No matter what the quality/resolution of the source video, a dvd will not match it:
http://hometheater.about.com/od/blurayandhddvd/f/blurayhddvd2.htm
Don't know about you audio problem, I suggest you just go through your project and reset the volume levels.
http://hometheater.about.com/od/blurayandhddvd/f/blurayhddvd2.htm
Don't know about you audio problem, I suggest you just go through your project and reset the volume levels.
more...
Eorlas
Nov 17, 10:40 PM
I'm pretty sure these are all of the covers where the tint wasn't "just right" for Apple's standards. If that's the case, I can understand why they'd care, but they shouldn't.
I hope nothing legal happens to him, all he's doing is making a business off of something that wasn't going to be used but people wanted that specific customization that Apple suggested they would provide twice, but didn't.
Good for him! Wish I could come up with something like that and pay for school...
I hope nothing legal happens to him, all he's doing is making a business off of something that wasn't going to be used but people wanted that specific customization that Apple suggested they would provide twice, but didn't.
Good for him! Wish I could come up with something like that and pay for school...
(DL)*DARK*
Mar 26, 03:36 PM
Two questions:
1) Is that an iPad on the table?
2) Who paid for the coffee? :D
-Kevin
1: I believe so.
2: Jobs, probably.
1) Is that an iPad on the table?
2) Who paid for the coffee? :D
-Kevin
1: I believe so.
2: Jobs, probably.
more...
akhomerun
Oct 9, 04:54 PM
gee, the retail stores would speak out against something that would hurt their sales, wouldn't they?
apple is providing an alternative just like retail stores provided alternatives to going out to a theater when VHS was released. im certainly not saying it's better, i would never download an itunes movie, because i'd rather have a physical dvd. but now i have the choice.
apple is providing an alternative just like retail stores provided alternatives to going out to a theater when VHS was released. im certainly not saying it's better, i would never download an itunes movie, because i'd rather have a physical dvd. but now i have the choice.
jayP1201
Jan 6, 07:52 PM
Does anybody get sounds when receiving notifications?
No I have the same problem too....
No I have the same problem too....
more...
peschomd
Nov 12, 04:36 PM
These are awesome, www.CaffeineMarketing.com has some too of the japanese version get a mac ads
saving107
Oct 6, 10:39 AM
No way in hell. They've already asked their developers to change app resolutions once. 3 screen sizes will never fly with developers.
99.999% likelihood of this being total nonsense.
its possible to have a 10" iPad and a 7" inch iPad, as long as they both have the same resolution, screen size doesn't really matter to developers, they wouldn't have to change anything on their apps. Same goes for the iPhone/iPod touch, Apple could have multiple screen sizes, but still keep the same resolution for all of their devices.
that being said, I don't believe Apple will make multiple sizes.
99.999% likelihood of this being total nonsense.
its possible to have a 10" iPad and a 7" inch iPad, as long as they both have the same resolution, screen size doesn't really matter to developers, they wouldn't have to change anything on their apps. Same goes for the iPhone/iPod touch, Apple could have multiple screen sizes, but still keep the same resolution for all of their devices.
that being said, I don't believe Apple will make multiple sizes.
more...
Popeye206
Mar 25, 08:44 AM
Before all you Apple fannies disagree with this; just remember Apple is trying to sue everyone else too.
It's all ridiculous.
Disagree. It's not ridiculous. Valid patent protection is great. That's the whole point of a patent to protect your invention. Any company with a valid invention and patent should pursue any and all infringements.
However, there are many high-tech patents that are BS or weak. Plus, I think patent holders should have to make claims of infringement in a reasonable amount of time after a potential infringement. Sitting back and waiting for products to be wildly successful before pursuing a case is nothing but settlement bloat. Finally, there is patent trolling which should be illegal as it's just lawyers looking to cash in on settlements and costs consumers. Patent trolling is like ambulance chasers. Lowest form of greed.
It's all ridiculous.
Disagree. It's not ridiculous. Valid patent protection is great. That's the whole point of a patent to protect your invention. Any company with a valid invention and patent should pursue any and all infringements.
However, there are many high-tech patents that are BS or weak. Plus, I think patent holders should have to make claims of infringement in a reasonable amount of time after a potential infringement. Sitting back and waiting for products to be wildly successful before pursuing a case is nothing but settlement bloat. Finally, there is patent trolling which should be illegal as it's just lawyers looking to cash in on settlements and costs consumers. Patent trolling is like ambulance chasers. Lowest form of greed.
yorkshire
Dec 16, 01:56 PM
Not sure why no one's commented on this yet, but yes, I've bought RATM. Hopefully we can wipe the smile off that smug t*** Cowell!
more...
MisterMe
Sep 14, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by bullrat
I'm a potential "switcher" that wants to buy an iMac now but I keep reading all the posts on the various Mac boards about how even the latest 17 inch iMac looks "choppy" or "jerky" when resizing or moving windows and how much slower browsing the Web is than bad old MS on Wintel.
I have not seen those posts, but then I have seen a lot of other bitching and moaning about one thing or another. Point No. 1: Although I don't have access to a 17" iMac, I do have Jaguar installed on my 2000 Firewire PowerBook G3. I don't see any of that choppiness and jerkiness that you mentioned. I would be astonished to find it on a faster machine like the 17" iMac. Point No. 2: Don't take anybody's word for it. Drive down to your nearest Apple retailer. Look at the machines yourself. That should end all arguments.
I'm so bored reading all the MHz doesn't matter blather. It does matter. When a brand new $2000 computer looks choppy using a brand new OS, then something is not right. It should be blazing on all basic functions. Flame away if you like, I see a lot of that on the Mac boards whenever someone happens to disagree with the party line but I'd wager I speak for a lot of potential switchers.
Again, have your actually seen this "choppiness" on that $2000 machine with the brand new OS? Now for the issue of MHz, browse the web sites of the expensive UNIX workstations and servers. Look at the clock speeds of the offerings from IBM, HP, SGI, and Sun. For the most part, you will see that their machines have clock speeds in the sub-GHz range. Yet these are the machines of choice when price is no object and the job must get done. Just think about this: these boards are filled with laments that effectively tell you that you need substaintially higher clock speeds to run a computer game than you need to simulate the gas flow in a jet engine. Don't you think that something is just a bit warped here?
I guess what really blows me away is that Apple appears to be *purposely* cripppling their systems. From what I understand it's possible for Apple to upgrade the processor, bus, memory and other components without any technical difficulties.
Think. Think. Think. Apple does not "appear" to be purposesly crippling its systems. The entirity of the corporation orbits about the Macintosh. No company would purposely cripple its central product. The fact that Apple is only one of two profitable personal computer manufacturers serve as loud testimony to the contrary. Just because a bunch of idle college students post things on the Internet does not make them so.
Okay, you can flame away now -- but all I'm saying is there are a lot of potential switchers waiting to plunk down their hard earned cash if Apple would get it together. I see more and more Apple folks waking up, no longer satisfied to let Apple off the hook for getting further and further behind the rest of the computer world.
If you are serious, then nobody wants to see you flamed. But again, think. Exactly how is Apple behind? If you are talking about the race toward bankruptcy, then I would agree with you. Apple is second to last in that race among personal computer makers.
The best OS deserves the best hardware or at least a lot better hardware than being currently used. You want premium prices? Then give us premium hardware. Geez, drop Motorola if they can't deliver the goods and go with IBM (don't go with Intel or AMD to keep that Apple distinction). But pul-leeze do it soon. I want to buy!
-bullrat
I cannot agree more that the best OS deserves the best currently available hardware. However, the machine has to be affordable. For many years, Apple has ranked among the highest quality hardware manufactures. I am not just talking about microprocessors. I've endured conditions that put Dells out to pasture while my Mac chugged along like a champ.
As for all this business about Motorola this, IBM that, and AMD the other thing, I will leave it to Apple to make the best decision. It knows the players and its own business better than any nitwit posting on an Internet bulletin board.
I'm a potential "switcher" that wants to buy an iMac now but I keep reading all the posts on the various Mac boards about how even the latest 17 inch iMac looks "choppy" or "jerky" when resizing or moving windows and how much slower browsing the Web is than bad old MS on Wintel.
I have not seen those posts, but then I have seen a lot of other bitching and moaning about one thing or another. Point No. 1: Although I don't have access to a 17" iMac, I do have Jaguar installed on my 2000 Firewire PowerBook G3. I don't see any of that choppiness and jerkiness that you mentioned. I would be astonished to find it on a faster machine like the 17" iMac. Point No. 2: Don't take anybody's word for it. Drive down to your nearest Apple retailer. Look at the machines yourself. That should end all arguments.
I'm so bored reading all the MHz doesn't matter blather. It does matter. When a brand new $2000 computer looks choppy using a brand new OS, then something is not right. It should be blazing on all basic functions. Flame away if you like, I see a lot of that on the Mac boards whenever someone happens to disagree with the party line but I'd wager I speak for a lot of potential switchers.
Again, have your actually seen this "choppiness" on that $2000 machine with the brand new OS? Now for the issue of MHz, browse the web sites of the expensive UNIX workstations and servers. Look at the clock speeds of the offerings from IBM, HP, SGI, and Sun. For the most part, you will see that their machines have clock speeds in the sub-GHz range. Yet these are the machines of choice when price is no object and the job must get done. Just think about this: these boards are filled with laments that effectively tell you that you need substaintially higher clock speeds to run a computer game than you need to simulate the gas flow in a jet engine. Don't you think that something is just a bit warped here?
I guess what really blows me away is that Apple appears to be *purposely* cripppling their systems. From what I understand it's possible for Apple to upgrade the processor, bus, memory and other components without any technical difficulties.
Think. Think. Think. Apple does not "appear" to be purposesly crippling its systems. The entirity of the corporation orbits about the Macintosh. No company would purposely cripple its central product. The fact that Apple is only one of two profitable personal computer manufacturers serve as loud testimony to the contrary. Just because a bunch of idle college students post things on the Internet does not make them so.
Okay, you can flame away now -- but all I'm saying is there are a lot of potential switchers waiting to plunk down their hard earned cash if Apple would get it together. I see more and more Apple folks waking up, no longer satisfied to let Apple off the hook for getting further and further behind the rest of the computer world.
If you are serious, then nobody wants to see you flamed. But again, think. Exactly how is Apple behind? If you are talking about the race toward bankruptcy, then I would agree with you. Apple is second to last in that race among personal computer makers.
The best OS deserves the best hardware or at least a lot better hardware than being currently used. You want premium prices? Then give us premium hardware. Geez, drop Motorola if they can't deliver the goods and go with IBM (don't go with Intel or AMD to keep that Apple distinction). But pul-leeze do it soon. I want to buy!
-bullrat
I cannot agree more that the best OS deserves the best currently available hardware. However, the machine has to be affordable. For many years, Apple has ranked among the highest quality hardware manufactures. I am not just talking about microprocessors. I've endured conditions that put Dells out to pasture while my Mac chugged along like a champ.
As for all this business about Motorola this, IBM that, and AMD the other thing, I will leave it to Apple to make the best decision. It knows the players and its own business better than any nitwit posting on an Internet bulletin board.
jclardy
Feb 18, 10:51 AM
Notice Steve is the only guy without wine?
Not from the full size picture, it appears Obama is drinking water as well.
Actually, I only see two glasses of wine at the table...
Not from the full size picture, it appears Obama is drinking water as well.
Actually, I only see two glasses of wine at the table...
more...
matthewroth
Sep 1, 06:52 AM
Taking THIS many people to court would be a PV (public view) suicide.
I know it is protected by copyright and it is not for public use but to prosecute all these people for a beta! Not worth it
I know it is protected by copyright and it is not for public use but to prosecute all these people for a beta! Not worth it
QuarterSwede
Jan 6, 03:51 PM
You may want to turn off wall posts notifications. Yeah, I certainly don't want to be notified every 5 minutes.
more...
pdpfilms
Sep 6, 08:10 PM
Hahaha, some of these are really funny...
mrcammy
Nov 12, 10:33 AM
In any language, it ain't funny...
horsepowerpro
Apr 1, 08:47 AM
Well, it was pretty great while it lasted, but we all kind of saw this coming I think. At least they're replacing these channels with equal alternatives... Comedy Central = Jewelry Television and FX = Home Shopping Network, right? Points for effort at least... After years of bending over its customers, at least TW did do something cool; if only for a couple weeks...
Huntn
Apr 9, 07:47 AM
Have the idiots said why exactly they want to kill Planned Parenthood? Is it because they claim most of Planned Parenthood's budget goes towards abortion, (which is not true)? I was watching Bill Mahr last night and the conservative on his panel said that originally the Tea Bagger movement claimed to be about money, budget issues, taxes. But the PP show down over the federal budget shows that they also have a social agenda.
If they are truly worried about paying for welfare, you'd think they'd be thrilled if the low income families were popping out less babies by means of contraception...
If they are truly worried about paying for welfare, you'd think they'd be thrilled if the low income families were popping out less babies by means of contraception...
smartbot
Oct 6, 01:40 PM
One possibility is that they could go to a 3.7" and still keep the 960x640 resolution. This would allow for a larger screen and it could still maintain it's "retina" display at ~311 pixels per inch (if I did my math right :o). I'm sure they could tweak some apps like Safari to take advantage of the larger screen size (without breaking 3rd party apps that are already built for the 960x640 resolution).
Enigma55
Mar 20, 02:52 PM
I'm not sure if many of us have grasped just how significant this product really is, and equally how important it is that it succeeds.
Yes, this is obviously the case for Apple. I would contend that they're betting a huge proportion of their reputation, and therefore Apple's future success, on the iPad's success.
But it's equally important for the rest of us. For decades MS has had a virtual monopoly in large areas of education sector. This hasn't been good for education and it surely hasn't been good for students.
Apple need to get it right. And pricing is a part of that. The deal is a part of that. But it will be the nature of the whole package that makes or breaks iPad. And in the case of education, it's the deals Apple signs with text book publishers that will make all the difference.
We buy iPods because the interface is great and buying music through iTunes is easy. [Yes, I know it's not the only way to get music on an iPod].
We buy iPhones because the interface is great and buying apps through the App Store is easy [Yes, I know you can jailbreak an iPhone], and getting on the net is easy.
We will buy iPads because the interface is great and buying books through iBookstore will be as easy as music and apps.
When Steve Jobs said "We're standing on the shoulders of Amazon�s Kindle..." he wasn't kidding.
In as many ways as the Kindle is revolutionary [the screen, the process of buying books etc], it is also equally crippled and retarded. The absence of colour makes it useless for text books. Books were printed with colour plates over 100 years ago. Imagine trying to study the use of colours in a artist's work, or studying anatomy... in B&W!
No, Apple have to drown the Kindle before Amazon perfect colour. It's a race in which Apple already have a head start, and a serious competitive edge, in the form of their OS and entire business model, which is much more diverse and competent and than Amazon's.
But we shouldn't ignore the other options:
15 years after Amazon revolutionized the way we buy books [and arguably saved reading books as an idea], in 2009 Barnes & Noble finally started to catch on and announced it is to Launch a Kindle Competitor... in Color! And Fujitsu is set to release its Flepia color e-book reader in Japan with a $1,000 price tag.
Whilst these are not competitors for the iPad in the real sense, they are indicators of how their market could be dinted, and where the technology might be going.
Apple's are not the only fruit, but the iPad is looking increasingly like the most credible education companion. We need to get beyond the package pricing and examine the real benefits of a ubiquitous Apple device in the education sector.
I agree. You people just don't get it. What is good for Apple is good for America. We need to support them and help Apple change the world through this magical product. Buy it!
Yes, this is obviously the case for Apple. I would contend that they're betting a huge proportion of their reputation, and therefore Apple's future success, on the iPad's success.
But it's equally important for the rest of us. For decades MS has had a virtual monopoly in large areas of education sector. This hasn't been good for education and it surely hasn't been good for students.
Apple need to get it right. And pricing is a part of that. The deal is a part of that. But it will be the nature of the whole package that makes or breaks iPad. And in the case of education, it's the deals Apple signs with text book publishers that will make all the difference.
We buy iPods because the interface is great and buying music through iTunes is easy. [Yes, I know it's not the only way to get music on an iPod].
We buy iPhones because the interface is great and buying apps through the App Store is easy [Yes, I know you can jailbreak an iPhone], and getting on the net is easy.
We will buy iPads because the interface is great and buying books through iBookstore will be as easy as music and apps.
When Steve Jobs said "We're standing on the shoulders of Amazon�s Kindle..." he wasn't kidding.
In as many ways as the Kindle is revolutionary [the screen, the process of buying books etc], it is also equally crippled and retarded. The absence of colour makes it useless for text books. Books were printed with colour plates over 100 years ago. Imagine trying to study the use of colours in a artist's work, or studying anatomy... in B&W!
No, Apple have to drown the Kindle before Amazon perfect colour. It's a race in which Apple already have a head start, and a serious competitive edge, in the form of their OS and entire business model, which is much more diverse and competent and than Amazon's.
But we shouldn't ignore the other options:
15 years after Amazon revolutionized the way we buy books [and arguably saved reading books as an idea], in 2009 Barnes & Noble finally started to catch on and announced it is to Launch a Kindle Competitor... in Color! And Fujitsu is set to release its Flepia color e-book reader in Japan with a $1,000 price tag.
Whilst these are not competitors for the iPad in the real sense, they are indicators of how their market could be dinted, and where the technology might be going.
Apple's are not the only fruit, but the iPad is looking increasingly like the most credible education companion. We need to get beyond the package pricing and examine the real benefits of a ubiquitous Apple device in the education sector.
I agree. You people just don't get it. What is good for Apple is good for America. We need to support them and help Apple change the world through this magical product. Buy it!
daygoKid19
Apr 20, 09:37 AM
thanks for welcoming me. i had a windows box running SETI all day but saw that Macrumors had a folding@home team so decided to join in. i have a question though, does having a dedicated GPU help out alot? Right the computer only has integrated graphics.
davidjearly
Dec 18, 10:39 AM
^ oh well, you disprove.
I along with hundreds of thousands of others don't think it's such an awfully "sad" thing to do spending 10 seconds of our day purchasing a track that may very well give us all a good chuckle over Christmas.
Oh I guess you must be right then. :rolleyes:
I along with hundreds of thousands of others don't think it's such an awfully "sad" thing to do spending 10 seconds of our day purchasing a track that may very well give us all a good chuckle over Christmas.
Oh I guess you must be right then. :rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment