Don't panic
May 4, 11:36 AM
Did you ever define who is in your group?
since no one split up, everyone is.
we are just waiting for raven or chris to tell us if we found anything in the start room, and (with the caveat above) to know what happens when we enter the next room
since no one split up, everyone is.
we are just waiting for raven or chris to tell us if we found anything in the start room, and (with the caveat above) to know what happens when we enter the next room
Akme
Mar 30, 08:23 PM
Yes I did, it was still grayed out.
And yes, you can remove Launchpad from the dock.
And yes, you can remove Launchpad from the dock.
AidenShaw
Mar 29, 08:36 PM
You are talking about imposing beliefs to a guy sporting a gay marriage signature (which I am all for, but I wouldn't want to push it down people's throats via my signature here, which btw is a political issue and the only way he gets away with is is because he's best pals with the moderators here)?
Political signatures are quite common on MacRumours (look up a few posts for a sig "Alright Republicans, if you act as stupid as the guys you replaced... your a$$ will be on the street as well!" and others publicizing a Japanese college). I don't agree with calling a "civil rights" issue a "political" issue - although political pressure is needed to ensure that civil rights are respected.
If I were "best pals" with the mods, I wouldn't be getting the occasional timeouts due to crossing the fuzzy line between debate and bickering.
All of a sudden people can't offer their prayers to people suffering in Japan, because Aiden Shaw doesn't believe in God...whatever lola wants, as the song goes...:rolleyes: I would have banned this .... on the spot for calling someone's God a "spaghetti monster", it's one thing not to believe, and quite another to mock what someone holds sacred, but this guy is apparently un-bannable here...
You complain about "imposing beliefs", but asking people to "say a prayer" on the forum is certainly pushing one's beliefs on others. I suggested "best wishes" and "keeping them in your thoughts" as an alternative that doesn't involve supernatural beings.
And, by the way, the "flying spaghetti monster" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster) is part of a well-known movement (sometimes called the "Pastafarians") to preserve the concept of "separation of church and state" embodied in the US Constitution.
If you ever see the FSM emblem
http://www.evolvefish.com/fish/media/E-FlyingSpaghettiEmblem.gif
on the car in front of you, you're behind a Pastafarian.
Political signatures are quite common on MacRumours (look up a few posts for a sig "Alright Republicans, if you act as stupid as the guys you replaced... your a$$ will be on the street as well!" and others publicizing a Japanese college). I don't agree with calling a "civil rights" issue a "political" issue - although political pressure is needed to ensure that civil rights are respected.
If I were "best pals" with the mods, I wouldn't be getting the occasional timeouts due to crossing the fuzzy line between debate and bickering.
All of a sudden people can't offer their prayers to people suffering in Japan, because Aiden Shaw doesn't believe in God...whatever lola wants, as the song goes...:rolleyes: I would have banned this .... on the spot for calling someone's God a "spaghetti monster", it's one thing not to believe, and quite another to mock what someone holds sacred, but this guy is apparently un-bannable here...
You complain about "imposing beliefs", but asking people to "say a prayer" on the forum is certainly pushing one's beliefs on others. I suggested "best wishes" and "keeping them in your thoughts" as an alternative that doesn't involve supernatural beings.
And, by the way, the "flying spaghetti monster" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster) is part of a well-known movement (sometimes called the "Pastafarians") to preserve the concept of "separation of church and state" embodied in the US Constitution.
If you ever see the FSM emblem
http://www.evolvefish.com/fish/media/E-FlyingSpaghettiEmblem.gif
on the car in front of you, you're behind a Pastafarian.
Hisdem
Mar 29, 01:40 PM
I'd pay a premium for products manufactured in the US.
Products might be more expensive, but there would be more Americans employed. As much are there is a downside to producing here, there is also an upside.
Yeah, but you have to think that Apple also sells outside the US. And then their products would be more expensive worldwide. I would not pay a premium to have a product that was built in the US. And I don't think the Europeans or Asians would either, to be honest.
Products might be more expensive, but there would be more Americans employed. As much are there is a downside to producing here, there is also an upside.
Yeah, but you have to think that Apple also sells outside the US. And then their products would be more expensive worldwide. I would not pay a premium to have a product that was built in the US. And I don't think the Europeans or Asians would either, to be honest.
Eduardo1971
Apr 23, 04:25 PM
Enough already!!!
Tattoos of 08#39; - Sugar Skull
tattoo of a sugar skull
Sugar Skull Tattoo
I am proud of every tattoo job
sugar skull
Sugar Skull Tattoos by
sugar skull · tattoo
frowning sugar skull and a
American Sugar Skull
Sugar Skull Tattoo
Sugar skull tattoo sugar 6
Gray Sugar Skull tattoo
Labels: Sugar Skull Tattoo
sugar skull praying hands.jpg
mrelwood
Mar 29, 03:37 PM
Nanobots in the bloodstream!
Ooh... iBot Nano! I want to line up for one of THOSE!
I suppose we'll have to sync via IV drip?
Nah, Jobs has been working on WiFi sync for atleast a year now. It'll be ready by then. In WHITE!
Ooh... iBot Nano! I want to line up for one of THOSE!
I suppose we'll have to sync via IV drip?
Nah, Jobs has been working on WiFi sync for atleast a year now. It'll be ready by then. In WHITE!
twoodcc
Aug 2, 01:54 PM
Ah, you're buying it at that tax-free thing right? This is a nice idea.
yeah i am. but it's going to be hard just looking at the box all day. and i already have 2GB of RAM here for it as well :o
yeah i am. but it's going to be hard just looking at the box all day. and i already have 2GB of RAM here for it as well :o
1080p
Apr 7, 09:33 AM
Money talks... :apple:
0815
Apr 5, 02:47 PM
Maybe now Apple realizes that they must allow some things on their devices like themes. Or not...
What makes you think this? Because Toyota pulled it after Apple asked them friendly to do so?
What makes you think this? Because Toyota pulled it after Apple asked them friendly to do so?
balamw
Apr 14, 10:06 AM
You can always donate to the federal reserve. Don't let me stop you!
US Treasury not Federal Reserve. https://www.pay.gov/paygov/forms/formInstance.html?agencyFormId=23779454
B
US Treasury not Federal Reserve. https://www.pay.gov/paygov/forms/formInstance.html?agencyFormId=23779454
B
bhtooefr
Apr 30, 10:56 PM
OK, so a few things about this that I'm seeing...
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
heisetax
Aug 2, 02:59 PM
Then, unless it is a pharmaceutical, national security, or some other VII, the company needs to get with the times. So called intellectual property is so last century and quite honestly patents are pretty useless in these fast changing times.
My take is that Steve will spend much time on numbers (how many units sold, how well the Intel switch is going) and then introduce the Pro Line. Expect a bit on Leopard and probably a jab at Vista. Although, that might not happen if Steve has what's-her-name out again to introduce the Universal Office. I would not be suprised if Steve has someone from Adobe out to introduce a Universal suite... for sometime in the future.
Wouldn't it be something if Apple came out with a new piece of hardware. Maybe there will be a new strategic alliance introduced.
I thought that MS said they they would have separate versions of Office for the PPC & Intel Macs. That's what I expect from them when you look bak at Office X, which was really only a side grade from OS 9 to OS 10 support. So no Universal Office, just a PPC Office & an Intel Office. Then in a year when Steve Jobs declares the PPC Mac a dead item, the PPC version will be gone.
I'd rather see an UB version as then if I do get an Intel Mac I could move the software over. But then MS couldn't sell me a new copy. Maybe a special price of $10 or so off if you purchase both versions together.
Bill the TaxMan
My take is that Steve will spend much time on numbers (how many units sold, how well the Intel switch is going) and then introduce the Pro Line. Expect a bit on Leopard and probably a jab at Vista. Although, that might not happen if Steve has what's-her-name out again to introduce the Universal Office. I would not be suprised if Steve has someone from Adobe out to introduce a Universal suite... for sometime in the future.
Wouldn't it be something if Apple came out with a new piece of hardware. Maybe there will be a new strategic alliance introduced.
I thought that MS said they they would have separate versions of Office for the PPC & Intel Macs. That's what I expect from them when you look bak at Office X, which was really only a side grade from OS 9 to OS 10 support. So no Universal Office, just a PPC Office & an Intel Office. Then in a year when Steve Jobs declares the PPC Mac a dead item, the PPC version will be gone.
I'd rather see an UB version as then if I do get an Intel Mac I could move the software over. But then MS couldn't sell me a new copy. Maybe a special price of $10 or so off if you purchase both versions together.
Bill the TaxMan
archipellago
Apr 26, 04:34 PM
That's a narrow and erroneous view. Are there some parallels? Sure. There are however some important differences.
First, market share is not anywhere near as important as revenue share. Apple is absolutely trouncing Google and everyone else in this area.
Second, developers are not making any money on Android, as it's user base appears to be comprised of spend-thrifts. It doesn't matter how many people you have using the platform, if developers can't sell applications that well then the lure isn't as strong. Combine that with the exceedingly frustrating fragmentation and inconsistent experience from device to device that makes the task of even writing an Android application that much harder, and it is less appealing still. Will that slow Android down? No, as there will always be customers for the Wal-Mart of mobile operating systems. It does, however limit them as any sort of real 'threat'.
Third, let us not forget that absolute whoring out of hardware at 2 or even 3 for 1 deals is a huge factor in this surge in usage. It's quite easy to inflate your numbers when you hand stuff out for free. Again, in reference to my previous point, they really aren't doing the platform any favors long term, as it will bring down the revenue curve.
Fourth, these numbers are for the US only. The worldwide picture is very different.
Why wouldn't he? iPod touch and iPad run the exact same mobile OS. Just because there is no real competition to either of these devices in the Android space, doesn't devalue their presence. Truthfully, I always take a skeptical stance on the motives of any 'report' on mobile OS usage which conveniently leaves these devices out. Smacks of fomenting, it does.
Yeah, cause that's been working out really well for them so far. Look, you can have your irrational "I hate Apple cause they are cool, and I rail against anything popular, cause I'M NOT A CONFORMIST!!!" BS all you want to. It doesn't change for one second the fact that Apple innovates, and everyone else imitates and tries to make all the money they can on the back of Apple's IP.
Personally, I'd say enjoy it while you can. Apple has been establishing precedent with its patent litigation against smaller targets. Now they are taking on a medium-sized one in Samsung, and once that victory is complete, Google will be the next to fall.
Look, I'm all for good old fashioned competition. But somebody besides Apple has to step up to the plate and actually create something. This whole me-too copycat crap is wearing thin.
I have no clue how to respond to this tripe.
The last time someone was this wrong, he was waving a piece of paper and calling it 'peace in our time'
First, market share is not anywhere near as important as revenue share. Apple is absolutely trouncing Google and everyone else in this area.
Second, developers are not making any money on Android, as it's user base appears to be comprised of spend-thrifts. It doesn't matter how many people you have using the platform, if developers can't sell applications that well then the lure isn't as strong. Combine that with the exceedingly frustrating fragmentation and inconsistent experience from device to device that makes the task of even writing an Android application that much harder, and it is less appealing still. Will that slow Android down? No, as there will always be customers for the Wal-Mart of mobile operating systems. It does, however limit them as any sort of real 'threat'.
Third, let us not forget that absolute whoring out of hardware at 2 or even 3 for 1 deals is a huge factor in this surge in usage. It's quite easy to inflate your numbers when you hand stuff out for free. Again, in reference to my previous point, they really aren't doing the platform any favors long term, as it will bring down the revenue curve.
Fourth, these numbers are for the US only. The worldwide picture is very different.
Why wouldn't he? iPod touch and iPad run the exact same mobile OS. Just because there is no real competition to either of these devices in the Android space, doesn't devalue their presence. Truthfully, I always take a skeptical stance on the motives of any 'report' on mobile OS usage which conveniently leaves these devices out. Smacks of fomenting, it does.
Yeah, cause that's been working out really well for them so far. Look, you can have your irrational "I hate Apple cause they are cool, and I rail against anything popular, cause I'M NOT A CONFORMIST!!!" BS all you want to. It doesn't change for one second the fact that Apple innovates, and everyone else imitates and tries to make all the money they can on the back of Apple's IP.
Personally, I'd say enjoy it while you can. Apple has been establishing precedent with its patent litigation against smaller targets. Now they are taking on a medium-sized one in Samsung, and once that victory is complete, Google will be the next to fall.
Look, I'm all for good old fashioned competition. But somebody besides Apple has to step up to the plate and actually create something. This whole me-too copycat crap is wearing thin.
I have no clue how to respond to this tripe.
The last time someone was this wrong, he was waving a piece of paper and calling it 'peace in our time'
Multimedia
Sep 16, 10:02 AM
MacBook please.C2D MB by Thanksgiving Nov 23 :D
Kingsly
Aug 11, 12:42 PM
About. Freaking. Time.
This is one rumor that I cant afford to miss.
This is one rumor that I cant afford to miss.
twoodcc
Aug 3, 11:48 PM
Yes! This Would Favor Steve Announcing Full Line Shift To Core 2 ASAP Monday. My favorite scenario may come true. :)
didn't i read this exact same thing earlier today?
anyways, i hope your right, but for some reason i don't think it will. only time will tell.....
didn't i read this exact same thing earlier today?
anyways, i hope your right, but for some reason i don't think it will. only time will tell.....
juicedropsdeuce
Apr 26, 02:49 PM
.
This would be a GREAT time to delay the release of the next iPhone until September. Actually that's optimistic, it took them almost a year to get the white one right. :rolleyes:
This would be a GREAT time to delay the release of the next iPhone until September. Actually that's optimistic, it took them almost a year to get the white one right. :rolleyes:
Tunster
Apr 20, 03:37 AM
Agreed. I moved from my good ol' 3Gs to a ZTE-Blade a few months ago and have to say that despite the general black/grey colors that android apps seem to be forced to use with the UI, the 'desktop' of the phone is much more elegant and usable than the iPhone's. I'd really like to see Apple open up the API's a little more and maybe even allow us to completely swap out their homescreen for custom app based ones. It works well on the droids.
And then we'd lose much more battery life :rolleyes:. Don't see why people want more control over pointless things and want more complexity/layers. That's why iOS currently works efficiently as it is. It'll likely won't ever happen because it's the Apple way.
I'm sure we'll see iOS5 push things way beyond customisable homescreens. Better notification, fresh UI and some new touch-based features will keep the iPhone ahead of the rest IMO.
And then we'd lose much more battery life :rolleyes:. Don't see why people want more control over pointless things and want more complexity/layers. That's why iOS currently works efficiently as it is. It'll likely won't ever happen because it's the Apple way.
I'm sure we'll see iOS5 push things way beyond customisable homescreens. Better notification, fresh UI and some new touch-based features will keep the iPhone ahead of the rest IMO.
Micjose
Apr 18, 05:07 PM
might aswell sue everyone else in the tech industry :p
GGJstudios
Jan 12, 10:42 AM
I'yes I'm a Mac user, and yes it has detected files with problems.
What kind of problems, exactly? Windows malware? Mac malware?
What kind of problems, exactly? Windows malware? Mac malware?
rtdunham
Mar 27, 09:38 AM
I've read the music-in-the-cloud might store only iTMS-purchased music. I hope that' s not the case. If I'm storing my music I want to store all of it, not have to keep track of which part of it's in the cloud and which remains hardware-based. Ditto for other media, for that matter.
inlovewithi
Apr 26, 03:45 PM
You might be interesting reading this (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/04/25/is-reasoning-built-for-winning-arguments-rather-than-finding-truth/). MR makes so much more sense after having read it.
Thanks. I like to call it denial of what makes a person uncomfortable, which creates tunnel vision.
Thanks. I like to call it denial of what makes a person uncomfortable, which creates tunnel vision.
IntelliUser
Nov 28, 03:10 AM
awful program
locked up my mac multiple times and possibly was the cause of my bootcamp partition getting completely ruined
was working fine until i ran this
I wouldn't mess with the Bootcamp partition, regardless of the AV.
http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Slow-down-when-scanning-Work-around-now-available/td-p/295
locked up my mac multiple times and possibly was the cause of my bootcamp partition getting completely ruined
was working fine until i ran this
I wouldn't mess with the Bootcamp partition, regardless of the AV.
http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Slow-down-when-scanning-Work-around-now-available/td-p/295
Benjy91
Mar 27, 05:56 AM
Going to be fun on my 500MB data limit.
0 comments:
Post a Comment