SpinThis!
Mar 31, 12:11 PM
If Adobe provides comprehensive .psd support, I can see this being useful as a companion to Photoshop. It obviously isn't intended to "be" Photoshop.
Let's say you got a meeting with a client who wants to see your work. Photoshop is pretty heavy handed and can get in the way if you need to demo something. But on an iPad.... a client could say "what would it look like if our logo was down there..." or that "type was a shade darker" or whatever and you can prototype on it. So when you get back to your underground design lair the change already comes across just by opening the original .psd.
Let's say you got a meeting with a client who wants to see your work. Photoshop is pretty heavy handed and can get in the way if you need to demo something. But on an iPad.... a client could say "what would it look like if our logo was down there..." or that "type was a shade darker" or whatever and you can prototype on it. So when you get back to your underground design lair the change already comes across just by opening the original .psd.
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 12:27 PM
Apple's attitude about this stuf has always been very positive. I'm totally willing to believe that all this stuff was an oversight since believing that matches what they've said in the past.
Agreed. More often than not, Apple has tried to side with the user's interests. It's good business practice for them since an angry customer is not a good customer. And since their business model depends on people spending hard-earned cash for products, they need to make their users happy.
Wall Street and the marketplace seem to think they are doing an overall good job.
Agreed. More often than not, Apple has tried to side with the user's interests. It's good business practice for them since an angry customer is not a good customer. And since their business model depends on people spending hard-earned cash for products, they need to make their users happy.
Wall Street and the marketplace seem to think they are doing an overall good job.
Apple Expert
Apr 4, 10:37 AM
So it looks like when I upgrade every year, I will have to pay an additional $50? :mad: F U AT&T. If you weren't giving me 3+ downloads I would of dropped you in a second!
celticpride678
Apr 23, 12:00 AM
Use Disk Utility and a S.M.A.R.T. status checker.
more...
miles01110
Apr 12, 01:31 PM
You're probably using a 5-GHz 802.11n network, which usually has a shorter range than a 2.4 GHz 802.11g network.
EBreakingWave
Oct 3, 01:24 PM
:)
more...
KALLT
Apr 4, 11:54 AM
This is the very reason why I think that Apple's policy should be reconsidered. Why would content providers such as the Financial Times be compelled to offer their content on iOS, when Apple requires them to (additionally) use the in-app purchases by which the providers lose the advantage of using their own register and keeping the entire revenue, without having to share it with Apple. The position of the Financial Times is completely understandable, regardless of the business decisions that provider has made. I still doubt whether the true motive of Apple to enforce this measure is not consumer protection but receiving profits from the content of others.
sinsin07
Apr 27, 08:19 PM
So since there is no answer to my earlier question, I take it that the posters who take issue with the tracking have not bothered to correct the issue on their phone and desktop, which would seem like they care more about posting complaints than being tracked.
more...
AP_piano295
May 6, 01:55 AM
Where are we with Mugabe (Who I'd argue is definitely as evil as Osama)? Where are we with Darfur? Or some other various countries in Africa that have some really evil people in it.
It's only evil if they're killing Americans, when non American's get killed well no one talks about that much.
It's only evil if they're killing Americans, when non American's get killed well no one talks about that much.
samiwas
Mar 3, 04:37 PM
I know you WANT to give your solution... you're so close... c'mon... say it: "I think we should drastically increase taxation on wealthy Americans to fix this problem."
What I want to know is how exactly you expect businesses to grow jobs, expand operations, etc. in this type of situation. It seems fairly clear based on the facts that A) this wouldn't be near enough money to solve the problem B)that the end result in the long run will almost certainly be less growth, fewer jobs, and less government 'revenue' than before. C) that you'd kill what chance we have left at regaining a strong economy as large businesses would do whatever they could to get their assets in locations of lower tax burden.
Can you point me to a time in history where lower taxes led to more growth? Can you point me to the time when high taxes meant things were not progressing? As I seem to recall from the history classes I mostly failed, the mid-20th century was quite a boom for this country, right? Since I'm not so good at history, I looked up tax rates.
The last time tax rates were as low as they are now started in about 1925. What followed 5 years later? The Great Depression and massive unemployment. Shortly after 1930, tax rates skyrocketed. You know what else happened around that time? Massive growth and employment. Then, since 1981 when taxes started getting much lower, the economy slowly started to go downhill. Many people were still making gobs of money, but the middle class started to see things going away. There must be some huge factor I'm missing. Maybe you can fill me, and everyone else here, in.
And as for me wanting to "drastically increase taxes on wealthy Americans", you can stop right there. I want to get rid of the TAX BREAKS, the TAX CUTS...for everyone, and especially for excessively wealthy people.
'turned into' a a profit machine? As opposed to... when?
Providing health services and goods has always been a for-profit enterprise. This is exactly what has lead to the amazing growth in medical technology in the past 100 years.
While the advances in medical technology are great, let's not for one second think that the massive profit machine known as the health care industry is not as corrupt as can be. You take a service that by it's very definition is essential for life, and turn it into a profit operation...nothing good can come from that. That's why a Tylenol in a hospital costs $14 and you go in for a bad cough and walk out with a $21,000 bill. Ludicrous.
I tend to agree. Cut programs until our expenses match our current 'revenues.' When the two are equal or are in the black, let's immediately pass an balanged-budget amendment so this problem never happens again.
I think we definitely need to include in the cuts the health care and pensions for all senators, congressmen, house members, and any other "lawmaker" types.
For the record, they are paying their fair share. The top 50% of wage earners pay over 95% of the income tax.
And as pointed out above, they also make and have the vast majority of the money in this country.
If 90 people make $1,000 each, and 10 people make $50,000 each and they were evenly taxed on income, you'd still have 10% of the people paying 84.7% of the taxes. Is that unfair? No, it's not. Not in the slightest. And once you take out even a basic cost-of-living exemption, which should be the start of any tax system, that number would increase dramatically. Like, just over 95% maybe?
In this free market, you have the choice to make more money. And if you want to make metric ass-tons of money, you can pay the taxes that go along with that. Free market capitalism.
I agree. I would start with a MASSIVE simplification of the tax code, and virtual elimination of all government subsidies over the next 5-10 years.
Probably the only thing I agree with you on. Individual tax returns should require a post card and nothing else. Corporate taxes, well...I don't know enough about them to know how to simplify them, but I'm sure they are ridiculously complex.
I tend to agree. Reduce the budget by half, let them become more efficient and more reliant on technology. Take a more defensive posture around the globe and avoid entangling alliances, etc. abroad. That being said, I believe its important for us to maintain a strong national DEFENSE. We do have enemies... and defense is one of the primary constitutional roles of the federal government.
OK, two things.
If the top 50% are declaring earnings equivalent to 88% of the total, it seems entirely proportionate that they should be paying 95% of the total tax. Their true earnings are probably vastly more in percentage terms, anyway.
Yep.
What I want to know is how exactly you expect businesses to grow jobs, expand operations, etc. in this type of situation. It seems fairly clear based on the facts that A) this wouldn't be near enough money to solve the problem B)that the end result in the long run will almost certainly be less growth, fewer jobs, and less government 'revenue' than before. C) that you'd kill what chance we have left at regaining a strong economy as large businesses would do whatever they could to get their assets in locations of lower tax burden.
Can you point me to a time in history where lower taxes led to more growth? Can you point me to the time when high taxes meant things were not progressing? As I seem to recall from the history classes I mostly failed, the mid-20th century was quite a boom for this country, right? Since I'm not so good at history, I looked up tax rates.
The last time tax rates were as low as they are now started in about 1925. What followed 5 years later? The Great Depression and massive unemployment. Shortly after 1930, tax rates skyrocketed. You know what else happened around that time? Massive growth and employment. Then, since 1981 when taxes started getting much lower, the economy slowly started to go downhill. Many people were still making gobs of money, but the middle class started to see things going away. There must be some huge factor I'm missing. Maybe you can fill me, and everyone else here, in.
And as for me wanting to "drastically increase taxes on wealthy Americans", you can stop right there. I want to get rid of the TAX BREAKS, the TAX CUTS...for everyone, and especially for excessively wealthy people.
'turned into' a a profit machine? As opposed to... when?
Providing health services and goods has always been a for-profit enterprise. This is exactly what has lead to the amazing growth in medical technology in the past 100 years.
While the advances in medical technology are great, let's not for one second think that the massive profit machine known as the health care industry is not as corrupt as can be. You take a service that by it's very definition is essential for life, and turn it into a profit operation...nothing good can come from that. That's why a Tylenol in a hospital costs $14 and you go in for a bad cough and walk out with a $21,000 bill. Ludicrous.
I tend to agree. Cut programs until our expenses match our current 'revenues.' When the two are equal or are in the black, let's immediately pass an balanged-budget amendment so this problem never happens again.
I think we definitely need to include in the cuts the health care and pensions for all senators, congressmen, house members, and any other "lawmaker" types.
For the record, they are paying their fair share. The top 50% of wage earners pay over 95% of the income tax.
And as pointed out above, they also make and have the vast majority of the money in this country.
If 90 people make $1,000 each, and 10 people make $50,000 each and they were evenly taxed on income, you'd still have 10% of the people paying 84.7% of the taxes. Is that unfair? No, it's not. Not in the slightest. And once you take out even a basic cost-of-living exemption, which should be the start of any tax system, that number would increase dramatically. Like, just over 95% maybe?
In this free market, you have the choice to make more money. And if you want to make metric ass-tons of money, you can pay the taxes that go along with that. Free market capitalism.
I agree. I would start with a MASSIVE simplification of the tax code, and virtual elimination of all government subsidies over the next 5-10 years.
Probably the only thing I agree with you on. Individual tax returns should require a post card and nothing else. Corporate taxes, well...I don't know enough about them to know how to simplify them, but I'm sure they are ridiculously complex.
I tend to agree. Reduce the budget by half, let them become more efficient and more reliant on technology. Take a more defensive posture around the globe and avoid entangling alliances, etc. abroad. That being said, I believe its important for us to maintain a strong national DEFENSE. We do have enemies... and defense is one of the primary constitutional roles of the federal government.
OK, two things.
If the top 50% are declaring earnings equivalent to 88% of the total, it seems entirely proportionate that they should be paying 95% of the total tax. Their true earnings are probably vastly more in percentage terms, anyway.
Yep.
more...
applefan289
Mar 7, 07:58 AM
lol
partyBoy
Feb 2, 09:07 PM
One day i will have this...
http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee187/colombian_pride69/Geektool%20themes/Screenshot2011-02-02at.png
http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee187/colombian_pride69/Geektool%20themes/Screenshot2011-02-02at.png
more...
eawmp1
May 4, 06:57 AM
It is true that some information that came from normal interrogation approaches at Guantanamo did lead to information that was beneficial in this instance. But it was not harsh treatment and it was not waterboarding.”
-Donald Rumsfield, May 2, 2011
OP - You prove to us how torture has consistently provided useful, actionable intelligence. Then you still try to make a moral case for its use. The burden of proof is on those who wish to use toeture, not on those who question its use.
-Donald Rumsfield, May 2, 2011
OP - You prove to us how torture has consistently provided useful, actionable intelligence. Then you still try to make a moral case for its use. The burden of proof is on those who wish to use toeture, not on those who question its use.
MacRumors
Mar 23, 08:55 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/23/craig-federighi-succeeding-bertrand-serlet-as-apples-svp-of-mac-software/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/23/095149-serlet.jpg
Bertrand Serlet (Apple)
Apple today announced (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/03/23serlet.html) that Bertrand Serlet, senior vice president of Mac Software Engineering, will be departing the company in order to "focus less on products and more on science", although his specific destination remains unknown. Serlet joined Steve Jobs at NeXT in 1989, and transitioned to Apple in 1997 when NeXT was acquired and Jobs brought back to lead Apple."I've worked with Steve for 22 years and have had an incredible time developing products at both NeXT and Apple, but at this point, I want to focus less on products and more on science," said Bertrand Serlet, Apple's senior vice president of Software Engineering.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/23/095149-federighi_lion.jpg
Craig Federighi demoing Mac OS X Snow Leopard (Reuters)
Serlet will be replaced by Craig Federighi, currently Apple's vice president of Mac Software Engineering and who has led Mac OS X engineering for the past two years. Federighi is another former NeXT and Apple employee who spent ten years at Ariba before returning to Apple in 2009. Serlet notes that the transition should be seamless given Federighi's role in leading the current Mac OS X team."Craig has done a great job managing the Mac OS team for the past two years, Lion is a great release and the transition should be seamless."Serlet has occasionally appeared at Apple keynote and media events over the years to introduce Mac OS X-related features, and thus well known to longtime Apple followers. Federighi has made a couple of on-stage appearances since his return to Apple, demoing Mac OS X Snow Leopard at WWDC 2009 and showing off some of the features of Apple's forthcoming Mac OS X Lion at last October's "Back to the Mac" event (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/20/live-coverage-of-apples-back-to-the-mac-media-event/).
Article Link: Craig Federighi Succeeding Bertrand Serlet as Apple's SVP of Mac Software (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/23/craig-federighi-succeeding-bertrand-serlet-as-apples-svp-of-mac-software/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/23/095149-serlet.jpg
Bertrand Serlet (Apple)
Apple today announced (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/03/23serlet.html) that Bertrand Serlet, senior vice president of Mac Software Engineering, will be departing the company in order to "focus less on products and more on science", although his specific destination remains unknown. Serlet joined Steve Jobs at NeXT in 1989, and transitioned to Apple in 1997 when NeXT was acquired and Jobs brought back to lead Apple."I've worked with Steve for 22 years and have had an incredible time developing products at both NeXT and Apple, but at this point, I want to focus less on products and more on science," said Bertrand Serlet, Apple's senior vice president of Software Engineering.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/23/095149-federighi_lion.jpg
Craig Federighi demoing Mac OS X Snow Leopard (Reuters)
Serlet will be replaced by Craig Federighi, currently Apple's vice president of Mac Software Engineering and who has led Mac OS X engineering for the past two years. Federighi is another former NeXT and Apple employee who spent ten years at Ariba before returning to Apple in 2009. Serlet notes that the transition should be seamless given Federighi's role in leading the current Mac OS X team."Craig has done a great job managing the Mac OS team for the past two years, Lion is a great release and the transition should be seamless."Serlet has occasionally appeared at Apple keynote and media events over the years to introduce Mac OS X-related features, and thus well known to longtime Apple followers. Federighi has made a couple of on-stage appearances since his return to Apple, demoing Mac OS X Snow Leopard at WWDC 2009 and showing off some of the features of Apple's forthcoming Mac OS X Lion at last October's "Back to the Mac" event (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/20/live-coverage-of-apples-back-to-the-mac-media-event/).
Article Link: Craig Federighi Succeeding Bertrand Serlet as Apple's SVP of Mac Software (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/23/craig-federighi-succeeding-bertrand-serlet-as-apples-svp-of-mac-software/)
more...
kainjow
Apr 24, 12:18 AM
Second result in google for "How To Access Battery Information in Cocoa" got me here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/272552/battery-status-in-osx
TuffLuffJimmy
Apr 26, 11:30 AM
Your out of luck. Under no circumstances will Apple EVER replace a product with another one that is not exactly the same! Period!
While I agree that under those circumstances Apple is unlikely to make the swap I have to disprove your claim. My mom's 14 inch iBook's screen broke when our dog pulled the cord it was plugged into and knocked it to the floor (pre-magsafe days). She sent it into Apple where they so sweetly said they would repair it free of charge even though they didn't have to. It ended up taking a few weeks when they said they would have a new one for her in a couple of days. After a few times calling in to check on the status that never seemed to change, Apple sent her a brand new updated 12 inch powerbook! Another time a friend of mine spilled wine on the keyboard of his 2009 15 inch top of the line Macbook Pro. It worked for a few more months until it finally kaput. He took it into Apple just to see what they would do, not too optimistic. The Genius was awesome and gave him a brand new 2011 top of the line 15 incher!
While I agree that under those circumstances Apple is unlikely to make the swap I have to disprove your claim. My mom's 14 inch iBook's screen broke when our dog pulled the cord it was plugged into and knocked it to the floor (pre-magsafe days). She sent it into Apple where they so sweetly said they would repair it free of charge even though they didn't have to. It ended up taking a few weeks when they said they would have a new one for her in a couple of days. After a few times calling in to check on the status that never seemed to change, Apple sent her a brand new updated 12 inch powerbook! Another time a friend of mine spilled wine on the keyboard of his 2009 15 inch top of the line Macbook Pro. It worked for a few more months until it finally kaput. He took it into Apple just to see what they would do, not too optimistic. The Genius was awesome and gave him a brand new 2011 top of the line 15 incher!
more...
paul4339
Apr 13, 10:48 AM
thanks for continuing to screw us 3gS owners over Apple...
My phone is on its last leg, dropping calls all of the time, have to charge it 3 times a day. If I had known this, I would have already bought a 4...
why can't you buy an iPhone 4 right now and enjoy it?
Apple did not promise or confirm any release date... it could be in 1 month or 8 months or more... if you pay too much credence to these rumors from Taiwan and blogs from 'analysts' that forecasts dates end features then you'll be disappointed.
(BTW, Apple did not confirm any features either, so if you do wait for the ip5, hoping that'll it'll be alot better in some way, you still may disappointed).
P.
My phone is on its last leg, dropping calls all of the time, have to charge it 3 times a day. If I had known this, I would have already bought a 4...
why can't you buy an iPhone 4 right now and enjoy it?
Apple did not promise or confirm any release date... it could be in 1 month or 8 months or more... if you pay too much credence to these rumors from Taiwan and blogs from 'analysts' that forecasts dates end features then you'll be disappointed.
(BTW, Apple did not confirm any features either, so if you do wait for the ip5, hoping that'll it'll be alot better in some way, you still may disappointed).
P.
ViciousShadow21
Dec 15, 08:12 AM
Kate from Lost
future ex-wife
i believe she is currently dating a hobbit named Merry, so you dont have much competition.
future ex-wife
i believe she is currently dating a hobbit named Merry, so you dont have much competition.
tehpwnerer19
Apr 25, 11:09 AM
Why is there no option "No, it is ugly" ? Because that would be the correct answer.
paul4339
Apr 13, 11:54 AM
For people who own the iPhone 4 and are happy with iPhone 5 being pushed back (so your phone still feel 'new'), this delay only means the iPhone 6 (the one that most of the iPhone 4 owners will be upgrading to) will also be pushed back when it comes to 2012. If Apple is going to release the iPhone 5 in September or later, the iPhone 6 will be out September 2012 at the earliest.
So basically, the whole timeline for bi-annual upgrade got screwed… (well, only for early buyers anyway.)
things are 'pushed back' only if there is an original promised date - which there isn't. But let's say there is an 'expected' mid-summer release, and the product actually came out in Sept; there's still nothing to say apple won't release another iPhone in mid-summer in 2012.
Basically it's all guess-work.
So basically, the whole timeline for bi-annual upgrade got screwed… (well, only for early buyers anyway.)
things are 'pushed back' only if there is an original promised date - which there isn't. But let's say there is an 'expected' mid-summer release, and the product actually came out in Sept; there's still nothing to say apple won't release another iPhone in mid-summer in 2012.
Basically it's all guess-work.
Mechcozmo
Oct 31, 09:02 AM
Seriously thinking about picking one of these up. That clip makes it all worthwhile.
anothernewbie
Feb 2, 04:03 PM
My ISP has a website that allows me to access my mail from a browser. Your incoming mail may still be there, if your ISP hasn't deleted it. With mine I can specify how long the mail will stay there before automatic deletion.
likemyorbs
May 5, 10:42 AM
That doesn't make it right. Retribution, revenge, anger, fear etc are not good emotions. Try to overcome these basic desires.
I overheard someone on the bus say something like this-
"So Bin Laden committed an awful crime, no denying that. But in response the US imprisoned people without trial for years in Gitmo, tortured some of them for information, then shot Bin Laden when he was unarmed. They both seem pretty bad to me."
I can see where this view comes from. Many times I've heard Americans complain that Europeans "look down their noses at them" and "maybe they would understand when planes fly into some of their buildings". However, when the US response to a disaster is detention and torture what do you expect? The US has lost the moral high ground, and these human rights violations only serve to encourage more people to fight against the US.
It times of difficulty many governments bend the rules, and it is how the courts and the public respond that matters. In the UK we detained some people, but they started a court case and won. We had a report of MI6 feeding questions to Moroccan security forces to get them to get information out of someone. However, MI6 was tripping over itself to say they don't condone torture and the courts constantly ruled more information on the subject should be released.
Detention without trial and torture are the methods used by dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, and the world will always look down on the US government so long as they are used.
Guess the world will just have to look down on us then. The US actually has a pair of balls, and we do what we need to do, unlike Europe who's militaries are a joke. Shooting bin laden while he was unarmed?? Seriously?? Who gives a crap? That's like being against shooting hitler while he was unarmed. Of course your solution would be to put him in jail for the rest of his life, but that doesn't fly here. Again, we are not europe and never will be, thankfully. You guys could look your noses down at us, but don't forget who's going to be there protecting your asses when you get into a war with an arab country (and that is possible, remember they don't like you either, and you're an easier target than us). I'm sorry, but their needs to be at least one nation that does what we do, and i'm glad we do it.
Still too squeamish to call it torture? The fundamental difference between terrorist organizations and authoritarian regimes on the one hand, and the civilized world on the other, is the latter's unwillingness to have recourse to violence. Policies of torture are unbecoming of a nation of people who purport to uphold the US constitution, regardless of the extreme methods adopted by our enemies. Once we sink to their level, we lose all our moral superiority and become victims of our own hate and fear as much as victims of the machinations of our opponents.
Nope, not too squeamish just going by the thread title. It's torture, there you happy? Again, we are not europe. So europe doesn't torture and where has that gotten them? They still get attacked by terrorists, even sweden, go figure. Moral superiority or not, safety of our nation and other western nations is more important. If torture is needed to get that information and save thousands of lives, then we should do it. Someone has to do the dirty work, and it's always us. But that's ok, that's how it's always been and it's why we're such a proud nation.
I overheard someone on the bus say something like this-
"So Bin Laden committed an awful crime, no denying that. But in response the US imprisoned people without trial for years in Gitmo, tortured some of them for information, then shot Bin Laden when he was unarmed. They both seem pretty bad to me."
I can see where this view comes from. Many times I've heard Americans complain that Europeans "look down their noses at them" and "maybe they would understand when planes fly into some of their buildings". However, when the US response to a disaster is detention and torture what do you expect? The US has lost the moral high ground, and these human rights violations only serve to encourage more people to fight against the US.
It times of difficulty many governments bend the rules, and it is how the courts and the public respond that matters. In the UK we detained some people, but they started a court case and won. We had a report of MI6 feeding questions to Moroccan security forces to get them to get information out of someone. However, MI6 was tripping over itself to say they don't condone torture and the courts constantly ruled more information on the subject should be released.
Detention without trial and torture are the methods used by dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, and the world will always look down on the US government so long as they are used.
Guess the world will just have to look down on us then. The US actually has a pair of balls, and we do what we need to do, unlike Europe who's militaries are a joke. Shooting bin laden while he was unarmed?? Seriously?? Who gives a crap? That's like being against shooting hitler while he was unarmed. Of course your solution would be to put him in jail for the rest of his life, but that doesn't fly here. Again, we are not europe and never will be, thankfully. You guys could look your noses down at us, but don't forget who's going to be there protecting your asses when you get into a war with an arab country (and that is possible, remember they don't like you either, and you're an easier target than us). I'm sorry, but their needs to be at least one nation that does what we do, and i'm glad we do it.
Still too squeamish to call it torture? The fundamental difference between terrorist organizations and authoritarian regimes on the one hand, and the civilized world on the other, is the latter's unwillingness to have recourse to violence. Policies of torture are unbecoming of a nation of people who purport to uphold the US constitution, regardless of the extreme methods adopted by our enemies. Once we sink to their level, we lose all our moral superiority and become victims of our own hate and fear as much as victims of the machinations of our opponents.
Nope, not too squeamish just going by the thread title. It's torture, there you happy? Again, we are not europe. So europe doesn't torture and where has that gotten them? They still get attacked by terrorists, even sweden, go figure. Moral superiority or not, safety of our nation and other western nations is more important. If torture is needed to get that information and save thousands of lives, then we should do it. Someone has to do the dirty work, and it's always us. But that's ok, that's how it's always been and it's why we're such a proud nation.
jrko
Apr 5, 03:39 AM
Since they are used they may have the older version.
The 2 port card was used but the 4 port is brand spanking new - not bad for AU$105 including shipping from Oz :D
The 2 port card was used but the 4 port is brand spanking new - not bad for AU$105 including shipping from Oz :D
0 comments:
Post a Comment