eroyce
Oct 4, 11:10 AM
I went in to check out the product (http://homepage.mac.com/markburgess3/browserTunes/docs.htm), and it actually looks alright. Sure it is early in development, but I think this is a good way for web apps to go.
Step one, build home network
Step two, write neat apps for controlling said home network
Step three, face competition from M$
Step four ...?
Step five, make tons of money.
Step one, build home network
Step two, write neat apps for controlling said home network
Step three, face competition from M$
Step four ...?
Step five, make tons of money.
Sparky's
Jul 10, 10:27 AM
I'm running the exact same WU on my G3 (now with a Sonnet G4-500 CPU installed) and I'm at 2.5% with 12 days left. Friday it said 1.8% with 22 days left. Go figure. I just let it do it's thing and wait for the next one.
I have Increase v2.0 running and I know in the preferences you can limit the size of the work units you allow your CPU to download. I chose "no preference" as opposed to "standard" and "no deadlines". As a result I get these 200+ point Gromaks and Tinkers but also get a few 35-60 point 2 day wonders.
I have been folding since April of 2003 on my "G4" and a few weeks ago added 2 machines at work a G4-800 and our new DELL we use for PC based work (I'm a Graphics professional). I have now seen my "Status" on the team 3446 list go up to #259 right now and rising. I can't wait to ad the other new DELL we just got and I'm waiting arrival of a new G5 Dual :rolleyes:
Fold on
I have Increase v2.0 running and I know in the preferences you can limit the size of the work units you allow your CPU to download. I chose "no preference" as opposed to "standard" and "no deadlines". As a result I get these 200+ point Gromaks and Tinkers but also get a few 35-60 point 2 day wonders.
I have been folding since April of 2003 on my "G4" and a few weeks ago added 2 machines at work a G4-800 and our new DELL we use for PC based work (I'm a Graphics professional). I have now seen my "Status" on the team 3446 list go up to #259 right now and rising. I can't wait to ad the other new DELL we just got and I'm waiting arrival of a new G5 Dual :rolleyes:
Fold on
Chad4Mac
Oct 15, 11:03 PM
Of course. Windows XP-64bit is already running on Hammer.
With the way the PC market is turning over right now, I'm not quite sure that Microsoft, PC manufactures and chip designers are willing to change the format of their sales pitches -- especially AMD. There are a lot of analysis out there (SSB, Schwab, BofA Securities) predicting a very slow turn-around for AMD, and branching out into a new unproven market (i.e., 64-bit technology on the consumer side) would be a big risk, especially when their cash and cash equivalents are low -- can't bail themselves out if they get in trouble. IF anything, I feel they will be months behind IBM -- a much stronger/risk adverse company in this market.
Why of course they do have incentives. One, 64bit sounds good. Two, faster. I'm not sure what you're smoking about 1.8GHz thing (I dunno the exact starting speed, but I do know it's supposed to be rated at "3400+", so perhaps it's indeed 1.8GHz, but labelled 3400+. Don't assume because PPC970 is coming with 1.6 to 1.8GHz that Opterons have to be the same; but feel free to correct me wrong and I'll admit to 1.8GHz).
64-bit sounds good? What, at under 2.0 GHz? Try and sell that to the consumers who are used to -- and don't tend to quickly flock to new technology -- 3-4+ Ghz. I don't know, it sounds like a risky thing to do. Does the consumer really know that it is faster? \
Well gee, they've been doing that for a long time. So what?
If Dell -- the fastest growing PC manufactor -- wants to incorporate this 64-bit into the consumer side, they have to make sure that, one, Microsoft is willing to supply the software (not just on the cutting board), and, two, that they give up Intel contracts (which is quite a big pull). Once again, the three comapnies have to work together (which will cause conflict), as opposed to only two.
I see where you are going, and logically I tend to agree with you. It might be the case that AMD will come out/release the 64-bit chip, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they sell the chip to the consumer (maybe server) at great volume -- based in the market factor.
Apple/IBM on the other hand have great incentive to get this chip out. One, any increase in Mhz/Ghz on the Apple side of things is a good thing. Right now you could release the lower end model of the IBM chip and still make Apple users (pros) see the MHZ/GHZ increase -- not on the PC side. Factor in the 64-bit technology -- and you have a faster pro model, with the idea that the chip with grow and expand. You got a lot of Apple users out there just waiting for that "G5". IBM's incentive is Apple, they could dominate the Apple market for years to come. I just don't see that on the PC side. I think that PC manus will stay with high Ghz compared to the low ghz 64-bit chip from AMD.
Just an opinion...
With the way the PC market is turning over right now, I'm not quite sure that Microsoft, PC manufactures and chip designers are willing to change the format of their sales pitches -- especially AMD. There are a lot of analysis out there (SSB, Schwab, BofA Securities) predicting a very slow turn-around for AMD, and branching out into a new unproven market (i.e., 64-bit technology on the consumer side) would be a big risk, especially when their cash and cash equivalents are low -- can't bail themselves out if they get in trouble. IF anything, I feel they will be months behind IBM -- a much stronger/risk adverse company in this market.
Why of course they do have incentives. One, 64bit sounds good. Two, faster. I'm not sure what you're smoking about 1.8GHz thing (I dunno the exact starting speed, but I do know it's supposed to be rated at "3400+", so perhaps it's indeed 1.8GHz, but labelled 3400+. Don't assume because PPC970 is coming with 1.6 to 1.8GHz that Opterons have to be the same; but feel free to correct me wrong and I'll admit to 1.8GHz).
64-bit sounds good? What, at under 2.0 GHz? Try and sell that to the consumers who are used to -- and don't tend to quickly flock to new technology -- 3-4+ Ghz. I don't know, it sounds like a risky thing to do. Does the consumer really know that it is faster? \
Well gee, they've been doing that for a long time. So what?
If Dell -- the fastest growing PC manufactor -- wants to incorporate this 64-bit into the consumer side, they have to make sure that, one, Microsoft is willing to supply the software (not just on the cutting board), and, two, that they give up Intel contracts (which is quite a big pull). Once again, the three comapnies have to work together (which will cause conflict), as opposed to only two.
I see where you are going, and logically I tend to agree with you. It might be the case that AMD will come out/release the 64-bit chip, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they sell the chip to the consumer (maybe server) at great volume -- based in the market factor.
Apple/IBM on the other hand have great incentive to get this chip out. One, any increase in Mhz/Ghz on the Apple side of things is a good thing. Right now you could release the lower end model of the IBM chip and still make Apple users (pros) see the MHZ/GHZ increase -- not on the PC side. Factor in the 64-bit technology -- and you have a faster pro model, with the idea that the chip with grow and expand. You got a lot of Apple users out there just waiting for that "G5". IBM's incentive is Apple, they could dominate the Apple market for years to come. I just don't see that on the PC side. I think that PC manus will stay with high Ghz compared to the low ghz 64-bit chip from AMD.
Just an opinion...
sb58
Mar 21, 04:51 PM
mine's somewhat cold actually...
trainguy77
Nov 15, 11:00 PM
Just a quick question... I downloaded the SMP Intel version for my MacBook Pro, but I can't figure out how to pause it! Last night I did a ctrl-c (quit) and it closed out... but this morning it started all over! What on earth is the "pause" command?
(yes I know I don't need to stop it for most things, but I like to at night and while I study because of the extra noise it creates.)
Well since its beta there is bound to be problems. For example in the last version (non-public beta) there was problems with check points BIG problems so the current version does not have them, so i you stop it, it will start over. Of coarse this will be fixed in time. Also another bug if you disable airport folding stops......
(yes I know I don't need to stop it for most things, but I like to at night and while I study because of the extra noise it creates.)
Well since its beta there is bound to be problems. For example in the last version (non-public beta) there was problems with check points BIG problems so the current version does not have them, so i you stop it, it will start over. Of coarse this will be fixed in time. Also another bug if you disable airport folding stops......
jsw
Jan 26, 02:39 PM
Sorry about the thread jack, but I'm looking into hooking a mini up to my TV. I don't have DVI on my TV, so I was thinking about getting the adapter that Apple sells and just going the component or S-Video route. Is this the approach you used? Does it look good enough for games/video/etc.?
Oh, yeah - this is a really cool plug in. I'm not usually a plug-in kind of guy, but this one I like. Makes for a great contest to see who can spin it the fastest.I've seen the adapter used - it looks good enough for games (sort of) and video (definitely), not really useful for anything else.
Oh, yeah - this is a really cool plug in. I'm not usually a plug-in kind of guy, but this one I like. Makes for a great contest to see who can spin it the fastest.I've seen the adapter used - it looks good enough for games (sort of) and video (definitely), not really useful for anything else.
Nermal
Oct 9, 01:20 AM
The LOTR DVDs are all in DTS.
While on the topic, I haven't been able to play DTS with Apple's DVD player. I just get no sound. It works in VLC though.
While on the topic, I haven't been able to play DTS with Apple's DVD player. I just get no sound. It works in VLC though.
Gaz
Aug 31, 09:06 PM
Just a thought but given that Apple has obviously been working on this for sometime and also given that Apple are extremely secretive, is it possible that a solution for this carbon problem has been thought of.
Also if Apple is stopping supporting OS 9 then the idea of moving to a platform that doesn't support this isn't as big a deal. Obviously then the main problem from what I can see is supporting carbon.
Also if Apple is stopping supporting OS 9 then the idea of moving to a platform that doesn't support this isn't as big a deal. Obviously then the main problem from what I can see is supporting carbon.
mduser63
Jun 26, 05:30 PM
I abhor what's going on in China with Apple's supplier(s) if the allegations are true. That said, it's not really fair to single Apple out because they're far from the only company using the same set of OEM suppliers. I'm hopeful that Apple will do what is right and see that Hon Hai fixes the problems or punish them by canceling their contract.
jefhatfield
Aug 31, 09:13 PM
Originally posted by King Cobra
>(beez7777) hmm, its been a while now, what happened to ptrauber?:confused:
He signed a letter to Apple about a non-disclosure agreement. You won't seem him posting here legally, unless it's in the Community discussion and NOT about Apple.
>(scem0) It couldnt be named an eBook, because e stands for education, and if all students in Maine have iBooks, then they will feel bad :D.
At least I won't have to worry for another year. :p
i am a network techie and i could trace his ip and see if he's here...not
i would never do that anymore than i would steal a food from a homeless man or a poodle from an old lady
i am sure he is taking some time off, i wouldn't think apple would have brought him on just that quick
i congratulate him and hope he will help apple move forward which the company desparately needs to do
good luck, ptrauber:D
>(beez7777) hmm, its been a while now, what happened to ptrauber?:confused:
He signed a letter to Apple about a non-disclosure agreement. You won't seem him posting here legally, unless it's in the Community discussion and NOT about Apple.
>(scem0) It couldnt be named an eBook, because e stands for education, and if all students in Maine have iBooks, then they will feel bad :D.
At least I won't have to worry for another year. :p
i am a network techie and i could trace his ip and see if he's here...not
i would never do that anymore than i would steal a food from a homeless man or a poodle from an old lady
i am sure he is taking some time off, i wouldn't think apple would have brought him on just that quick
i congratulate him and hope he will help apple move forward which the company desparately needs to do
good luck, ptrauber:D
BornAgainMac
May 3, 12:48 PM
They need to include Access with the next Mac Office. Even if it requires more work on their part. (They seem spend way to much time with minor changes to MSN Messager). Also merge the features of Entourage and Outlook and call it the same for both platforms. I have mixed feelings about VBA because it seems to be more of a virus writing and distribution tool than something to help me. I love the language and I have done some cool stuff that saved me time.
Catfish_Man
Oct 31, 11:58 PM
...
Reasons for Apple to switch to an x86 processor (Hammer, or Pentium 4):
1) Speed advantage until 2H03
2) Easier Windows emulation
3) High MHz numbers for marketing
Reasons for Apple to not switch to an x86 processor:
1) All PowerPC optimizations would have to be thrown out (including all Altivec code)
2) All software would have to be recompiled (at the very least)
3) The speed advantage would be negligible after the PowerPC 970 comes out (more on this at the end)
4) PC hackers would almost inevitably reverse engineer the "won't boot on a generic PC" protections that Apple would put into OSX
5) New versions of all software would have to be bought
6) Many developers wouldn't switch (since they just went through one switch, from 9 to X), they'd just develop for Windows instead
7) Having to support two different processors for a long time would be a major drain on their budget (especially since they'd have to optimize for two different architectures)
8) Intel and AMD are both trying to get rid of x86 (Intel with IA-64, AMD with x86-64), why would Apple switch to it now?
9) easier speed comparisons would highlight any low performance areas (and we know OSX still isn't that fast)
PowerPC 970 vs. Prescott Pentium 4:
970 has 6.4GB/sec of memory bandwidth
Prescott has 5.3GB/sec
970 uses 42 watts of power
Prescotts power consumption is unknown, but will likely be similar
970 is on .13 micron SOI
Prescott is on .09 micron
970 starts at 1.8GHz
Prescott will likely be at 3.6GHz
970 will likely get about 4 IPC
Prescott will probably get about 2 IPC
970 is built for multiprocessing and multicore
Prescott can't do multiprocessing
970's memory bus runs at 1/2 the processor frequency
Prescott's is 667MHz.
Overall performance will likely be similar, with the Pentium 4 taking a lead in single precision integer and double precision vector, and the 970 leading in double precision integer, floating point, and single precision vector. In multiprocessor systems, the 970 will crush the Pentium 4, but will be more expensive. When the 970 switches to .09 micron circuitry (which should be well before Intel switches to .065), dual core 970s become practical, the clock frequency can go higher (the bus frequency would go up with it), the power consumption is lower, and it's cheaper and smaller.
Any comparisons to the Intel Itanium or Itanium2 processors, or AMD Opteron processors are useless as they are intended for entirely different markets (and VERY different price ranges). Useful comparisons will be against AMD Athlon64s, and Intell Pentium 4s (or they may call it the Pentium 5 by then).
Reasons for Apple to switch to an x86 processor (Hammer, or Pentium 4):
1) Speed advantage until 2H03
2) Easier Windows emulation
3) High MHz numbers for marketing
Reasons for Apple to not switch to an x86 processor:
1) All PowerPC optimizations would have to be thrown out (including all Altivec code)
2) All software would have to be recompiled (at the very least)
3) The speed advantage would be negligible after the PowerPC 970 comes out (more on this at the end)
4) PC hackers would almost inevitably reverse engineer the "won't boot on a generic PC" protections that Apple would put into OSX
5) New versions of all software would have to be bought
6) Many developers wouldn't switch (since they just went through one switch, from 9 to X), they'd just develop for Windows instead
7) Having to support two different processors for a long time would be a major drain on their budget (especially since they'd have to optimize for two different architectures)
8) Intel and AMD are both trying to get rid of x86 (Intel with IA-64, AMD with x86-64), why would Apple switch to it now?
9) easier speed comparisons would highlight any low performance areas (and we know OSX still isn't that fast)
PowerPC 970 vs. Prescott Pentium 4:
970 has 6.4GB/sec of memory bandwidth
Prescott has 5.3GB/sec
970 uses 42 watts of power
Prescotts power consumption is unknown, but will likely be similar
970 is on .13 micron SOI
Prescott is on .09 micron
970 starts at 1.8GHz
Prescott will likely be at 3.6GHz
970 will likely get about 4 IPC
Prescott will probably get about 2 IPC
970 is built for multiprocessing and multicore
Prescott can't do multiprocessing
970's memory bus runs at 1/2 the processor frequency
Prescott's is 667MHz.
Overall performance will likely be similar, with the Pentium 4 taking a lead in single precision integer and double precision vector, and the 970 leading in double precision integer, floating point, and single precision vector. In multiprocessor systems, the 970 will crush the Pentium 4, but will be more expensive. When the 970 switches to .09 micron circuitry (which should be well before Intel switches to .065), dual core 970s become practical, the clock frequency can go higher (the bus frequency would go up with it), the power consumption is lower, and it's cheaper and smaller.
Any comparisons to the Intel Itanium or Itanium2 processors, or AMD Opteron processors are useless as they are intended for entirely different markets (and VERY different price ranges). Useful comparisons will be against AMD Athlon64s, and Intell Pentium 4s (or they may call it the Pentium 5 by then).
Mac2006
Sep 3, 09:36 PM
my bad posted to quickly
im sure they will adapt this technolgy in more or less than 10 years
im sure they will adapt this technolgy in more or less than 10 years
Wes
Aug 27, 05:18 AM
Yeah just running OS X server, more ram as standard and bigger (120gb) hard drives.
cb911
Nov 9, 11:07 PM
whoa. i didn't even know this forum existed! :eek:
can i be old skool? well at least i know i'm older skool than the newbies & regulars. :p
BTW, i also remember shrek and cleo. :)
can i be old skool? well at least i know i'm older skool than the newbies & regulars. :p
BTW, i also remember shrek and cleo. :)
![wallpaper games 2010. Tekken [2010] DvDrip-aXXo](http://www.topdg.com/uploads/posts/2010-08/1281738302_tekken-2010-wallpaper-2.jpg "Tekken [2010] DvDrip-aXXo")
alexstein
Mar 28, 07:42 AM
i would wipe it clean with a fresh install of XP
I agree. It might take ours to do. But it is still faster to reinstall then trying to get rid of all this adware/spyware junk.
..and I hope you guys learned your lesson...
I agree. It might take ours to do. But it is still faster to reinstall then trying to get rid of all this adware/spyware junk.
..and I hope you guys learned your lesson...
MacBytes
Jan 21, 02:26 PM
Category: 3rd Party Software
Link: Native OpenOffice for Mac Still a Long Way Off (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20050121152649)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug
Link: Native OpenOffice for Mac Still a Long Way Off (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20050121152649)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug
theman2004
Jan 20, 04:39 PM
Several days before Apple's announced iLife and iWork release, the applications are available for purchase at a cost of $39 each at University Bookstores.
Timepass
Apr 18, 02:08 PM
well I could see a lot of that happening.
But that being said some of you list of software is kind of off. M$ already has a calandar like progrom out there.
Which is Outlook. And like apple's side it has email calandard and contacts all tied together in it. (And it even ties in to MSN Messager)
But that being said some of you list of software is kind of off. M$ already has a calandar like progrom out there.
Which is Outlook. And like apple's side it has email calandard and contacts all tied together in it. (And it even ties in to MSN Messager)
Wes
Aug 27, 10:23 AM
Originally posted by aromac
Just to let you know. The fan on my machine is also HELLA DAMN LOUD!!! ..however, ONLY when running on 0s9. On osx, the machine is virtuallly silent.
I can see it now, "New Dual Powermacs, Fans now optimised for OS X."
Just to let you know. The fan on my machine is also HELLA DAMN LOUD!!! ..however, ONLY when running on 0s9. On osx, the machine is virtuallly silent.
I can see it now, "New Dual Powermacs, Fans now optimised for OS X."
tristan
May 10, 04:46 PM
Will office 2004 have a universal binary or just office 2007?
Of course I'm still on v.X, which I'm very happy with. But I will spring for iWork later this year just to check it out.
Of course I'm still on v.X, which I'm very happy with. But I will spring for iWork later this year just to check it out.
Backtothemac
Oct 8, 08:26 AM
Originally posted by ryme4reson
I for one think the current lines of macs are MUCH slower than the current comparable PCs. And to Back to the Mac, you may have heard of piplines and branches etc.. but do you have any idea what you are talking about?
"25 years old arch... the x86 sucks" Well you enjoy OS X and that's 25+ architecture also, so whats your point? Also, I think it is very hard to compare a Dual 1.25 to a single 2 Gig processor. Especially when the price difference is 500-1000+ I mean I would pay for performance, but the Macs are more than that. I am on a 1.6Athlon at school right now and it kicks the **** out of my 933. This 1.6 has 512 Ram I have 1.28GIGS. Simple things like starting Explorer to read macrumors is executed with NO DELAY. Bringing up Control Panels is also instantanious. I dont mind the fact my G-4 is slower, I enjoy OSX and my mac, but as far as speed I think you BACKTOTHEMAC needs to open your eyes.
Why is the PC faster? It is the OS, not the processor. Windblows uses .dll's Dynamic link libraries. They allow programs to load only what is needed (GUI, and primary API's) and then load pieces of the program as the user uses it. Macs on the other hand load all of the program into memory because, Mac's don't use dll files. So. It takes longer to load a program on a Mac, however once loaded the program will actually perform faster.
As far as Macs being slower at everything. Dude, you obviously have not put a PowerBook up against a PC based notebook recentlly have you? See we sell IBM and Apple. We recently put my 667 up against a 2.0GHZ IBM laptop. The 667 was faster at everything in photoshop than the PC, encoded MP3's faster, and the only it did slower was render HTML. Now you say how much faster? Doesn't matter. If it was .1 seconds faster, it still shows the superiority of the PPC design.
Sure OS X is a 25 year old architecture. My reference is to the flaws of the X86 vs the PPC architecture. If you would like to discuss the flaws in Windows compared to OSX. Well, arn would have to make a dedicated topic for us to discuss it.
Macs run slower than winblows machines. So what. Would you really like to run winblows fast? That would be cool. Sure my machine goes 2.8GHZ, but it crashes once a day. I have never crashed X. Not even when it was a PB. Oh, and btw. I am an MCP, and Apple certified, so yes, I do know what I am talking about.
I for one think the current lines of macs are MUCH slower than the current comparable PCs. And to Back to the Mac, you may have heard of piplines and branches etc.. but do you have any idea what you are talking about?
"25 years old arch... the x86 sucks" Well you enjoy OS X and that's 25+ architecture also, so whats your point? Also, I think it is very hard to compare a Dual 1.25 to a single 2 Gig processor. Especially when the price difference is 500-1000+ I mean I would pay for performance, but the Macs are more than that. I am on a 1.6Athlon at school right now and it kicks the **** out of my 933. This 1.6 has 512 Ram I have 1.28GIGS. Simple things like starting Explorer to read macrumors is executed with NO DELAY. Bringing up Control Panels is also instantanious. I dont mind the fact my G-4 is slower, I enjoy OSX and my mac, but as far as speed I think you BACKTOTHEMAC needs to open your eyes.
Why is the PC faster? It is the OS, not the processor. Windblows uses .dll's Dynamic link libraries. They allow programs to load only what is needed (GUI, and primary API's) and then load pieces of the program as the user uses it. Macs on the other hand load all of the program into memory because, Mac's don't use dll files. So. It takes longer to load a program on a Mac, however once loaded the program will actually perform faster.
As far as Macs being slower at everything. Dude, you obviously have not put a PowerBook up against a PC based notebook recentlly have you? See we sell IBM and Apple. We recently put my 667 up against a 2.0GHZ IBM laptop. The 667 was faster at everything in photoshop than the PC, encoded MP3's faster, and the only it did slower was render HTML. Now you say how much faster? Doesn't matter. If it was .1 seconds faster, it still shows the superiority of the PPC design.
Sure OS X is a 25 year old architecture. My reference is to the flaws of the X86 vs the PPC architecture. If you would like to discuss the flaws in Windows compared to OSX. Well, arn would have to make a dedicated topic for us to discuss it.
Macs run slower than winblows machines. So what. Would you really like to run winblows fast? That would be cool. Sure my machine goes 2.8GHZ, but it crashes once a day. I have never crashed X. Not even when it was a PB. Oh, and btw. I am an MCP, and Apple certified, so yes, I do know what I am talking about.
jefhatfield
Feb 2, 09:09 PM
Originally posted by ShaolinMiddleFinger
I don't hate pda's. I hate how everyone just always hyped up the Apple PDA and nothing really happened. I would definately buy a Apple PDA when it comes out again.
I don't hate pda's. I hate how everyone just always hyped up the Apple PDA and nothing really happened. I would definately buy a Apple PDA when it comes out again.
RogueLdr
Sep 24, 02:50 AM
Originally posted by Shadowfax
why the heck did they cut the L3 on the new dual 1 GHz? that doesn't sound like progress!
The faster system bus in the new dual 1Ghz machine compensates for the halving of the L3 cache, according to the MacWorld test. While it would be nice to still have the larger cache, cutting it seems to allow Apple to reduce the cost of the dual 1GHz PowerMac without hampering performance and at the same time enhancing the expandability of the machine.
Just an opinion.
RL
why the heck did they cut the L3 on the new dual 1 GHz? that doesn't sound like progress!
The faster system bus in the new dual 1Ghz machine compensates for the halving of the L3 cache, according to the MacWorld test. While it would be nice to still have the larger cache, cutting it seems to allow Apple to reduce the cost of the dual 1GHz PowerMac without hampering performance and at the same time enhancing the expandability of the machine.
Just an opinion.
RL
No comments:
Post a Comment