stockscalper
Apr 12, 01:00 PM
No matter how much you polish a turd, it's still a turd.
maerlyn
Jan 5, 01:59 AM
Thanks balamw,
I got an answer from the VLC forums. To do this you need to go into the preferences for VLC and select "all"rather than "basic" for the preferences, then select the "Stream Output" heading and uncheck "Enable video stream output".
I also changed the encapsulation method to "Raw" rather than "Quicktime" because for some reason it otherwise wouldn't import the mp3 files into itunes (I'm guessing it's something to do with ID3 tags). this then gives me file sizes around 6mb depending on the bit rate used and song length.
In summary to get the audio from a DVD using VLC change the above preference settings then under the "Open Disc", choose "DVD" and "No DVD Menus" then change the MRL to the chapter of the DVD you want audio from e.g. 1:3 is chapter 3, then select "Streaming/Saving" and go to the "Settings". then in the file space name the file you want to create including .mp3 extension, then choose Raw encapsulation, mp3 transcoding and whatever bit rate and channels you want.
In similar fashion I believe you can use VLC to grab audio mp3 from flash .flv files
I got an answer from the VLC forums. To do this you need to go into the preferences for VLC and select "all"rather than "basic" for the preferences, then select the "Stream Output" heading and uncheck "Enable video stream output".
I also changed the encapsulation method to "Raw" rather than "Quicktime" because for some reason it otherwise wouldn't import the mp3 files into itunes (I'm guessing it's something to do with ID3 tags). this then gives me file sizes around 6mb depending on the bit rate used and song length.
In summary to get the audio from a DVD using VLC change the above preference settings then under the "Open Disc", choose "DVD" and "No DVD Menus" then change the MRL to the chapter of the DVD you want audio from e.g. 1:3 is chapter 3, then select "Streaming/Saving" and go to the "Settings". then in the file space name the file you want to create including .mp3 extension, then choose Raw encapsulation, mp3 transcoding and whatever bit rate and channels you want.
In similar fashion I believe you can use VLC to grab audio mp3 from flash .flv files
Chip NoVaMac
Dec 9, 11:41 PM
RIP Elizabeth Edwards... you deserve the rest from your fight...
twoodcc
Oct 16, 05:14 PM
well i was hoping that the video ipod would be here by the end of November.
more...
kainjow
Oct 26, 09:43 PM
Unfortunately iDisk is as slow as buggery, and always has been. Apple have done nothing to improve performance.
From my experience, it's the Finder that's slow, not iDisk. I access my iDisk (the few times I need to) from Transmit and it is very fast.
I have .Mac, and I know that, but if you just want Mail you still pay the full wack!!
If you want just the email account then yes, .Mac is not worth it. That's the point. .Mac is more than email, and if you want an email address, get Gmail and hook it up into Mail.app....
From my experience, it's the Finder that's slow, not iDisk. I access my iDisk (the few times I need to) from Transmit and it is very fast.
I have .Mac, and I know that, but if you just want Mail you still pay the full wack!!
If you want just the email account then yes, .Mac is not worth it. That's the point. .Mac is more than email, and if you want an email address, get Gmail and hook it up into Mail.app....
alent1234
May 2, 01:49 PM
i bet SJ was hyperventilating and staying up sleepless nights because they white iphone was thicker. finally after months he relented and allowed a thicker phone to go on sale
more...
Misplaced Mage
Jun 22, 01:07 AM
Are people overestimating Apple's motives? Could it perhaps not be a masterplan but just that the new motherboard, etc they are using just happens to have this component so it's been included? That could explain why it's hidden around the back. If being placed on the back is deliberate it could just be for aesthetics sake as ports on the front will look messy.
Entirely possible. If you look at this picture of the new Mini's logic board (http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.net/igi/eBGMrGURJuJjcmlh.huge) from iFixIt's teardown, it looks like the logic board is just wide enough at the front (right side of the board) of the housing to have accommodated the SD card slot. But it looks like it would have been at the expense of either growing the housing so an inserted card sat flush with it, or having the card stick out significantly (and asymmetrically) from the rounded corner.
I really don't get why people who come up with specs don't think ahead. When SD came out it has a 2GB limit. So they updated it, SDHC for a 32GB limit. Now they had to update it again, SDXC for a 2TB limit. They should have just designed the format to scale in the FIRST place.
For example: CompactFlash came out in like 1994 and has scaled all the way up to like 137GB, when the first cards were under 1MB.
Fair point. It could have been a cost-driven design decision to keep the cost of the driver silicon down, similar to those that drove the design of the original USB 1.0 specification.
With regard to booting:
I think a lot of people in here are also looking over the fact that the card reader is on the USB bus. Meaning the speeds you'd be limited to would be that of USB 2.0. Internal 5400rpm boot drive would still be faster.
The card reader doesn't show up on the Mini's USB device tree in System Profiler, hence is not a USB device. The USB device tree lists every device that is currently enumerated on the bus.
I believe its part of the ethernet controller chip.
Correct. Looking at the BCM57765 block diagram, the SD card data is accessed via the PCI Express bus. The SMBus is several orders of magnitude too slow to handle 2.5GT/s, and is likely used for controlling the driver IC.
Entirely possible. If you look at this picture of the new Mini's logic board (http://s1.guide-images.ifixit.net/igi/eBGMrGURJuJjcmlh.huge) from iFixIt's teardown, it looks like the logic board is just wide enough at the front (right side of the board) of the housing to have accommodated the SD card slot. But it looks like it would have been at the expense of either growing the housing so an inserted card sat flush with it, or having the card stick out significantly (and asymmetrically) from the rounded corner.
I really don't get why people who come up with specs don't think ahead. When SD came out it has a 2GB limit. So they updated it, SDHC for a 32GB limit. Now they had to update it again, SDXC for a 2TB limit. They should have just designed the format to scale in the FIRST place.
For example: CompactFlash came out in like 1994 and has scaled all the way up to like 137GB, when the first cards were under 1MB.
Fair point. It could have been a cost-driven design decision to keep the cost of the driver silicon down, similar to those that drove the design of the original USB 1.0 specification.
With regard to booting:
I think a lot of people in here are also looking over the fact that the card reader is on the USB bus. Meaning the speeds you'd be limited to would be that of USB 2.0. Internal 5400rpm boot drive would still be faster.
The card reader doesn't show up on the Mini's USB device tree in System Profiler, hence is not a USB device. The USB device tree lists every device that is currently enumerated on the bus.
I believe its part of the ethernet controller chip.
Correct. Looking at the BCM57765 block diagram, the SD card data is accessed via the PCI Express bus. The SMBus is several orders of magnitude too slow to handle 2.5GT/s, and is likely used for controlling the driver IC.
mstrze
Apr 4, 11:36 AM
I agree that you're taxing the wrong thing. If you tax mileage rather than gas, you're not encouraging higher fuel economy the same way a gas tax would. The ones who burn more fuel should brunt the burden. It's a lot easier to get a more fuel efficient vehicle than it is to make your necessary commute shorter.
But these taxes are historically for funding the construction and upkeep of the highways, not to curb gas usage or to spur efficiency.
A car that gets 60 mpg will do just as much 'damage' to a road surface as a car that get 8 mpg....but the 50mpg car will pay much, MUCH less for upkeep of that road than the other in a gas-tax based situation.
But these taxes are historically for funding the construction and upkeep of the highways, not to curb gas usage or to spur efficiency.
A car that gets 60 mpg will do just as much 'damage' to a road surface as a car that get 8 mpg....but the 50mpg car will pay much, MUCH less for upkeep of that road than the other in a gas-tax based situation.
more...
stagi
Mar 29, 01:10 AM
i love Steve but he looks just awful.
And there's something about Steve jobs drinking Starbucks coffee that doesn't sit right with me. I don't really know why.
It's not starbucks they were at: Calafia
And there's something about Steve jobs drinking Starbucks coffee that doesn't sit right with me. I don't really know why.
It's not starbucks they were at: Calafia
fourthtunz
Sep 14, 03:13 PM
It seems like alot of the folks posting on this thread haven't tried the new Macs with osX.2. I'll admit 3 weeks ago the arguements posted above may have been valid, and thats not to say that apple doesn't have to come out with faster stuff to keep up with pcs but right now the Mac is very fast and a good deal.
$1899 for a dual 867 with a dvd burner and the software is pretty close to a similar pc and the included software is a real deal.
The new Hardware is a real improvement too. 2 optical bays and 4 ide drive bays with included raid software, if you haven't installed anything in the new Macs, believe me this is the best!
I use my Macs fulltime in my audio/video studio and for me it doesn't get any better than this!
Yes Macs initially cost more but the new speed/productivity boost quickly makes up of the slight difference.
So buy an emac if you need a cheap computer, maybe not as fast as the cheap pc but more portable!
Peace
Daniel
$1899 for a dual 867 with a dvd burner and the software is pretty close to a similar pc and the included software is a real deal.
The new Hardware is a real improvement too. 2 optical bays and 4 ide drive bays with included raid software, if you haven't installed anything in the new Macs, believe me this is the best!
I use my Macs fulltime in my audio/video studio and for me it doesn't get any better than this!
Yes Macs initially cost more but the new speed/productivity boost quickly makes up of the slight difference.
So buy an emac if you need a cheap computer, maybe not as fast as the cheap pc but more portable!
Peace
Daniel
more...
.jpg "selena gomez cute pictures.")
jbzoom
Nov 2, 04:38 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
Multiple reports have come in that Apple is researching (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/05/apple-experimenting-with-rfid-enabled-iphone-prototypes/) RFID (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/09/new-apple-iphone-patent-applications-surface-object-and-facial-recognition-messaging-voice-modulation/) integration (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/02/haptic-feedback-fingerprint-identification-and-rfid-tag-readers-in-future-iphones/) into the iPhone, but some may still be wondering what such functionality would bring to the table for consumers.
Firstly, we should note that RFID is a catch-all term that describes a vast array of technologies and standards. RFID tags can be relatively large and battery-powered, such as ones used in toll collection, to small "passive" tags that can be embedded into credit cards, drivers licenses (called "Enhanced Drivers Licenses" in the U.S.), passports, or stuck onto a piece of merchandise.
Currently, cell-phone usage of RFID technology is centered around Near Field Communication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_Field_Communication) (NFC). NFC has three main usage scenarios: a phone acting as an RFID tag; a phone acting as an RFID reader; and peer to peer communication (P2P).
In RFID tag mode, a phone could be used as a payment device (like a credit card), an identity card, or act as a car key. In RFID reader mode the phone would be able to interact with tags in its vicinity. This article and video (http://www.nearfield.org/2009/04/iphone-rfid-nfc) demonstrates how an iPhone with RFID could use physical objects to control media playback. And in P2P mode, Bluetooth pairing can be streamlined.
These are just a few ways that RFID could be used in an iPhone. When or if it becomes a reality isn't clear, but hopefully now you have a better idea of what the potential is for Apple's research in this area.
Article Link: Why an RFID-enabled iPhone? (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
Apple is believed to be working on technologies where your iOS device carries the configuration details of your OSX device, while the OSX device is backed up in the cloud. Then merely placing your iOS device next to another OSX device will enable that OSX device to be temporarily configured as if it were yours. And removing the iOS device will make the OSX device return to its original state. No wonder they are interested in short range radio technologies...
Multiple reports have come in that Apple is researching (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/11/05/apple-experimenting-with-rfid-enabled-iphone-prototypes/) RFID (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/09/new-apple-iphone-patent-applications-surface-object-and-facial-recognition-messaging-voice-modulation/) integration (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/07/02/haptic-feedback-fingerprint-identification-and-rfid-tag-readers-in-future-iphones/) into the iPhone, but some may still be wondering what such functionality would bring to the table for consumers.
Firstly, we should note that RFID is a catch-all term that describes a vast array of technologies and standards. RFID tags can be relatively large and battery-powered, such as ones used in toll collection, to small "passive" tags that can be embedded into credit cards, drivers licenses (called "Enhanced Drivers Licenses" in the U.S.), passports, or stuck onto a piece of merchandise.
Currently, cell-phone usage of RFID technology is centered around Near Field Communication (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_Field_Communication) (NFC). NFC has three main usage scenarios: a phone acting as an RFID tag; a phone acting as an RFID reader; and peer to peer communication (P2P).
In RFID tag mode, a phone could be used as a payment device (like a credit card), an identity card, or act as a car key. In RFID reader mode the phone would be able to interact with tags in its vicinity. This article and video (http://www.nearfield.org/2009/04/iphone-rfid-nfc) demonstrates how an iPhone with RFID could use physical objects to control media playback. And in P2P mode, Bluetooth pairing can be streamlined.
These are just a few ways that RFID could be used in an iPhone. When or if it becomes a reality isn't clear, but hopefully now you have a better idea of what the potential is for Apple's research in this area.
Article Link: Why an RFID-enabled iPhone? (http://www.macrumors.com/iphone/2009/11/05/why-an-rfid-enabled-iphone/)
Apple is believed to be working on technologies where your iOS device carries the configuration details of your OSX device, while the OSX device is backed up in the cloud. Then merely placing your iOS device next to another OSX device will enable that OSX device to be temporarily configured as if it were yours. And removing the iOS device will make the OSX device return to its original state. No wonder they are interested in short range radio technologies...
iAppTime
Nov 27, 06:22 PM
Why ?
If it were genuine White iPhone 4 parts, Apple most likely wants to investigate where they got leaked.
If it were genuine White iPhone 4 parts, Apple most likely wants to investigate where they got leaked.
more...
iGary
Apr 2, 06:19 PM
You don't like to be told how do do things the wrong way but you like Word?
I like it for TYPING. :rolleyes:
I like it for TYPING. :rolleyes:
Pants
Sep 15, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by MisterMe
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 have a recent ibook running jaguar - it has had a clean install (twice) and, quite frankly, its annoyingly slow. This is a current mac, running its current os, and its hardly acceptable - running illustrator? expect the beach ball, the same with large word documents. And I still see the beachball with annoying frequency in the finder. I don't care that this isnt the top of the range 3,000 quid machine - it is stupid to only expect acceptable performance in Word on the top of the line machine. No, don't take my word for it, go have a look at a fully loaded i-book
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?
these machines are 64-bit, with floating point performance that widdles all over apples current offerings. The reason they are used is for this feature alone - and yepI would rather run my simulations on a sparc box than a pc, although the cost of a cheap linux box is pushing us down that route. At some point there is a balance between cost and performance. Yes it is odd that I need the fastest box around to run ut2k3 acceptably, and i agree there is something wrong with the way the market is being driven, but I suppose if thats what customers want (and are prepared to pay for), this is what they'll get....
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.
never intentionally 'crippled' a machine? what about teh video card on teh ibook?
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 have a recent ibook running jaguar - it has had a clean install (twice) and, quite frankly, its annoyingly slow. This is a current mac, running its current os, and its hardly acceptable - running illustrator? expect the beach ball, the same with large word documents. And I still see the beachball with annoying frequency in the finder. I don't care that this isnt the top of the range 3,000 quid machine - it is stupid to only expect acceptable performance in Word on the top of the line machine. No, don't take my word for it, go have a look at a fully loaded i-book
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?
these machines are 64-bit, with floating point performance that widdles all over apples current offerings. The reason they are used is for this feature alone - and yepI would rather run my simulations on a sparc box than a pc, although the cost of a cheap linux box is pushing us down that route. At some point there is a balance between cost and performance. Yes it is odd that I need the fastest box around to run ut2k3 acceptably, and i agree there is something wrong with the way the market is being driven, but I suppose if thats what customers want (and are prepared to pay for), this is what they'll get....
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.
never intentionally 'crippled' a machine? what about teh video card on teh ibook?
more...
gorgeousninja
Mar 25, 11:25 AM
What if I came along and stole all of Apples patents and used them in a way that were above and beyond anything Apple created with them?
You're thought process of this situation is completely horrible.
What are the chances of you creating anything 'exceedingly awesome'?
Slim, or none?
You're thought process of this situation is completely horrible.
What are the chances of you creating anything 'exceedingly awesome'?
Slim, or none?
iJohnHenry
Apr 8, 05:05 PM
Cut defence,
;)
Defence? WTF!!!! Has anyone actually attacked the U.S. mainland since 9/11??
It should be offence, if anything, as in throwing their weight about the World.
And the U.S. taxpayers are working their asses off, to support this endeavour.
Nuts, all nuts.
Defence? WTF!!!! Has anyone actually attacked the U.S. mainland since 9/11??
It should be offence, if anything, as in throwing their weight about the World.
And the U.S. taxpayers are working their asses off, to support this endeavour.
Nuts, all nuts.
more...
.jpg "selena gomez photoshoot.")
awulf
Jul 5, 09:58 AM
The Macintosh SE has a 68000 processor which limits it to the StyleWriter series (I think up to the StyleWriter II works on it). Laser printers are different and to my knowledge all LaserWirters will work on a Mac SE.
THe Mac SE can have up to Mac OS 7.5.5, which includes the LaserWriter 8 driver and other LaserWriter Drivers.
It depends on what ports are available on your LaserWriter. Tell us the model name.
THe Mac SE can have up to Mac OS 7.5.5, which includes the LaserWriter 8 driver and other LaserWriter Drivers.
It depends on what ports are available on your LaserWriter. Tell us the model name.
hakuryuu
Apr 23, 01:11 PM
1. Real men ride Harleys.
If being a real man equals only being able to ride slowly in a straight line and have a "pay attention to me" exhaust, then yes. (This also applies to sportbike riders in long beach, ca)
Otherwise, real men ride Triumphs. :cool:
If being a real man equals only being able to ride slowly in a straight line and have a "pay attention to me" exhaust, then yes. (This also applies to sportbike riders in long beach, ca)
Otherwise, real men ride Triumphs. :cool:
Popeye206
Apr 1, 08:45 AM
Wow... short sighted on the networks part. I'm surprised.... no difference than just having another TV in your house, just on your Tablet. It would be interesting to know more about their motivation behind this... maybe they want to go direct? In other words, maybe Discovery and the other channels want to sell direct subscriptions and not go through channel partners like Time Warner?
If that is the case... I smell disaster for the networks. Who wants to buy individual channels for their computers, iPads or other devices? Not me? It would have to be dirt cheap.
Hummm.... thinking about it... maybe it's not so dumb? If each channel was $.99 and I could pick Ala-carte who I wanted, I know my Cable bill would go from $40 per-month to less than $10. Maybe they are onto something thinking about it?
If that is the case... I smell disaster for the networks. Who wants to buy individual channels for their computers, iPads or other devices? Not me? It would have to be dirt cheap.
Hummm.... thinking about it... maybe it's not so dumb? If each channel was $.99 and I could pick Ala-carte who I wanted, I know my Cable bill would go from $40 per-month to less than $10. Maybe they are onto something thinking about it?
robbieduncan
Mar 29, 07:34 AM
YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF
Go and try it and come back...
Edit to add:
Here is a great little one page explanation of EF vs EF-s (http://jefflynchdev.wordpress.com/2009/01/10/understanding-canons-ef-s-lenses/). I quote from it:
Canon EF-S lenses are designed specifically for the 1.6x FOVCF DSLR bodies but still require the same 1.6x crop factor to be applied as the standard Canon EF Lenses to get the equivalent field of view comparison. Again, this is because the physical focal length of the lens is the same, regardless of which camera it’s mounted on.
Which, once again, agrees with me.
Go and try it and come back...
Edit to add:
Here is a great little one page explanation of EF vs EF-s (http://jefflynchdev.wordpress.com/2009/01/10/understanding-canons-ef-s-lenses/). I quote from it:
Canon EF-S lenses are designed specifically for the 1.6x FOVCF DSLR bodies but still require the same 1.6x crop factor to be applied as the standard Canon EF Lenses to get the equivalent field of view comparison. Again, this is because the physical focal length of the lens is the same, regardless of which camera it’s mounted on.
Which, once again, agrees with me.
menziep
Sep 25, 10:52 AM
The site has been updated!
http://www.apple.com/aperture/
http://www.apple.com/aperture/
DirtySocks85
Mar 28, 03:12 PM
you realise you contradicted yourself?
"I hope iOS 5 is good enough that ill unjailbreak"
"I hope once iOS 5 is out there is a jailbreak soon after"
lols?
Let me attempt to translate the intention there:
If iOS 5 has enough new features, it will be worth giving up some of these jailbreak features that I really like. That being said, I hope that I don't have to make a choice between iOS 5, and a jailbreak for too long.
"I hope iOS 5 is good enough that ill unjailbreak"
"I hope once iOS 5 is out there is a jailbreak soon after"
lols?
Let me attempt to translate the intention there:
If iOS 5 has enough new features, it will be worth giving up some of these jailbreak features that I really like. That being said, I hope that I don't have to make a choice between iOS 5, and a jailbreak for too long.
Snowcat001
Feb 18, 11:26 AM
This is the photo is full size:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse/5455525432/sizes/o/in/photostream/
He does look scarily thin…
Check the exif of that photo, the White House works with Adobe CS5 for mac :D (or at least the photographer that works for them)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse/5455525432/sizes/o/in/photostream/
He does look scarily thin…
Check the exif of that photo, the White House works with Adobe CS5 for mac :D (or at least the photographer that works for them)
iJon
May 22, 10:31 AM
Originally posted by scem0
PCs are great. Macs, IMO, are better, but that is just opinion.
I Does SJ really think that a 16 year old who
has to pay for his own computer will be able to afford a mac?
yeah i think so. i am 17 and i buy my own computers. its called a job and i have one. luckily, i have a job that is easy, fun, and pays well. i find most of my friends who dont have jobs are just lazy.
iJon
PCs are great. Macs, IMO, are better, but that is just opinion.
I Does SJ really think that a 16 year old who
has to pay for his own computer will be able to afford a mac?
yeah i think so. i am 17 and i buy my own computers. its called a job and i have one. luckily, i have a job that is easy, fun, and pays well. i find most of my friends who dont have jobs are just lazy.
iJon
No comments:
Post a Comment