Sparky8
Apr 14, 05:03 AM
Anyone else looking forward to this?
jamdr
May 26, 02:23 PM
I used to have a HyperCard stack that was full of old icons of all different kinds. The first page was an index of all the categories. I think it was just called Icon Stack. Does anyone still have a copy they could upload on rapidshare? I would really appreciate it.
inkswamp
Apr 1, 08:29 PM
I don't think that barmann was making a case against a new technology that didn't fit the old ways like when mice were first introduced.
Sounded like it to me. May not have been the gist, but unwittingly, he was making that argument.
His point was that as much as iPad fanboys want it to be the coolist thing ever that will replace all those old-fashioned computers there are differences in machines between consumer ones and those used by professionals.
This is the exact argument made against the mouse and GUI. Exact. Mouse and GUI-based machines were scoffed at by geeks back in the 80s as "toys." That's the same rhetoric I'm hearing now about the iPad and touch-based devices. "It won't do for real work done by professionals." "It's fun but I can't get things done on it." That may be true for some lines of work at this stage, but it's going to change fast so declaring it useless or a plaything at this stage is shortsighted.
And BTW, nobody is saying the iPad will replace computers. Just like the mouse and GUI, this approach is going to continue evolving until ways are found for it to enhance computers and become an essential part of it. But it's insane for people to write off touch-based tablets as fanboy cheerleading
Sounded like it to me. May not have been the gist, but unwittingly, he was making that argument.
His point was that as much as iPad fanboys want it to be the coolist thing ever that will replace all those old-fashioned computers there are differences in machines between consumer ones and those used by professionals.
This is the exact argument made against the mouse and GUI. Exact. Mouse and GUI-based machines were scoffed at by geeks back in the 80s as "toys." That's the same rhetoric I'm hearing now about the iPad and touch-based devices. "It won't do for real work done by professionals." "It's fun but I can't get things done on it." That may be true for some lines of work at this stage, but it's going to change fast so declaring it useless or a plaything at this stage is shortsighted.
And BTW, nobody is saying the iPad will replace computers. Just like the mouse and GUI, this approach is going to continue evolving until ways are found for it to enhance computers and become an essential part of it. But it's insane for people to write off touch-based tablets as fanboy cheerleading
Chundles
Oct 18, 01:37 PM
http://att.macrumors.com/contest/B9D13D.jpg
Just a really dodgy 2 second job.
Just a really dodgy 2 second job.
more...
techfreak85
Jan 26, 12:39 PM
Droooll....
Those 2600ks are pretty tempting. Was it hard to get to 4.8ghz?
Those 2600ks are pretty tempting. Was it hard to get to 4.8ghz?
dwishbone
Jan 9, 04:04 PM
Poor
Reasons:
iPhone awesome. locking in an exclusive 2 year deal with cingular...horrible.
iTV great but a bit overpriced or underfeatured i think. i really wanted to buy one, but when i figure i can put another $100 or so on it and get a full fledged mini that will do the same things and more...i just don't see it's value.
name change makes sense to me since noone ever called them Apple Computer anymore anyway. it also shows they are more device focused now.
i was hoping for more than 2 products.
Reasons:
iPhone awesome. locking in an exclusive 2 year deal with cingular...horrible.
iTV great but a bit overpriced or underfeatured i think. i really wanted to buy one, but when i figure i can put another $100 or so on it and get a full fledged mini that will do the same things and more...i just don't see it's value.
name change makes sense to me since noone ever called them Apple Computer anymore anyway. it also shows they are more device focused now.
i was hoping for more than 2 products.
more...
Popeye206
Apr 28, 06:37 AM
I was really excited about the Verizon iPhone because I absolutely hate AT&T. I had Verizon for 7 years, and never dropped a single call. But I switched to AT&T when the iPhone 3GS came out, and now I drop the call on about 90% of the calls I make (no joke).
When the Verizon iPhone was announced, I was planning to decide whether to pay the ETF to AT&T and switch immediately, or wait until June when my contract was up. When I saw that the Verizon iPhone was just the iPhone 4 with a new wireless chip, it made my decision to wait a little easier.
That was Apple's first attempt at stretching the life of the iPhone 4, and apparently, people didn't bite (since CDMA phone sales didn't meet expectations). Now, they are making their second stab at extending the life of the iPhone 4 by finally releasing the white models. The problem is that they are trying to get longevity out of a design that was heavily flawed to begin with. Not only does the death grip reduce signal strength, but Apple is stubbornly refusing to integrate LTE.
I will not make the switch back to Verizon until Apple releases an iPhone with a 4G chip in it AND completely re-designs the antenna so that I can hold the phone any way I damn well please and still have good signal. It looks like I may not get that until September or Q1 2012. Well, so be it.
Apple is starting to get the attitude that they cannot make a mistake, and Android device makers are capitalizing on Apple's arrogance.
Dude... if you're dropping 90% of your calls on the iPhone 3G then you should have talked to AT&T. They would have given you a personal cell tower to fix your signal issue. Your iPhone has nothing to do with your poor signal strength.
When the Verizon iPhone was announced, I was planning to decide whether to pay the ETF to AT&T and switch immediately, or wait until June when my contract was up. When I saw that the Verizon iPhone was just the iPhone 4 with a new wireless chip, it made my decision to wait a little easier.
That was Apple's first attempt at stretching the life of the iPhone 4, and apparently, people didn't bite (since CDMA phone sales didn't meet expectations). Now, they are making their second stab at extending the life of the iPhone 4 by finally releasing the white models. The problem is that they are trying to get longevity out of a design that was heavily flawed to begin with. Not only does the death grip reduce signal strength, but Apple is stubbornly refusing to integrate LTE.
I will not make the switch back to Verizon until Apple releases an iPhone with a 4G chip in it AND completely re-designs the antenna so that I can hold the phone any way I damn well please and still have good signal. It looks like I may not get that until September or Q1 2012. Well, so be it.
Apple is starting to get the attitude that they cannot make a mistake, and Android device makers are capitalizing on Apple's arrogance.
Dude... if you're dropping 90% of your calls on the iPhone 3G then you should have talked to AT&T. They would have given you a personal cell tower to fix your signal issue. Your iPhone has nothing to do with your poor signal strength.
unlinked
Apr 6, 12:57 PM
Pity those who live a long way from the server, ouch! I notice a difference when I switch content providers from Manchester to London (I'm based in Manchester) on Steam. I don't think this data centre is for use outside the US...
Steam seem to have a fair few data centers themselves. I guess the Apple equivalent will have a drop down with one entry.
more...
elisha cuthbert hot. Elisha Cuthbert, Hot and; Elisha Cuthbert, Hot and. Erasmus. Aug 26, 07:36 PM
Elisha Cuthbert Canadian
more...
elisha cuthbert hot. ELISHA CUTHBERT - HOT BIKINI; ELISHA CUTHBERT - HOT BIKINI. ~Shard~. Sep 10, 02:05 PM
elisha cuthbert hot. Elisha Cuthbert Hot. Elisha Cuthbert Hot. eeboarder. Jul 27, 07:44 PM. With those frequent speed bumps I begin to worry that my G5 imac
more...
Elisha Cuthbert
http://www.elisha-cuthbert.biz
more...
Sexy Elisha Cuthbert TOO Hot
Elisha Cuthbert,
more...
elisha cuthbert hot. Elisha Cuthbert hot snap; Elisha Cuthbert hot snap. firestarter. Apr 12, 03:10 PM. Would not excluding capture from tape
Elisha Cuthbert Sexy Picture
Elisha Cuthbert Wallpaper
Steam seem to have a fair few data centers themselves. I guess the Apple equivalent will have a drop down with one entry.
more...
sishaw
Apr 7, 02:23 PM
This is something I absolutely don't need, BUT I WANT IT!!! Including the iCade cabinet.
Kieranic
Oct 16, 04:13 AM
Michael Jackson and Ola Ray during the filming of Thriller in 1983 :)
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/7973/screenshot20101016at101.jpg
http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/7973/screenshot20101016at101.jpg
more...
AppleFanatic10
Apr 7, 11:46 AM
I hope they release one for the Verizon iPhone...
wrxguy
Apr 19, 07:49 AM
This months wallpaper is from a photo I took in
Phuket Thailand282073
Phuket Thailand282073
more...
Lord Blackadder
Jan 13, 02:02 PM
VW has had some nasty problems, especially in the electronics dept. I believe they are getting better, though I haven't seen any recent news on it. Fiat seems to have been a blessing for Chrysler.
Two points:
1. I agree about the electrics, to an extent. Years ago, my old man bought an '88 Jetta, and it had two main problems - the electrical systems were horrible, and the body was not properly galvanized. It rusted before our eyes (hole in the floor after just 5 years) and most of the major electrical subsystems needed replacement within 5 years. However, it's worth noting that the Mexican-built VWs and the German-made VWs are quite different in quality. I may be wrong, but I believe that US-market GTIs are still made in Germany, and are the most reliable of the bunch. Several other VW-owning friends of mine have experienced a couple electrical gremlins here or there, but in terms of quality I'd still put VW's cars over the American Big Three for the most part. The interiors especially were superior.
2. Funny that you point out FIAT as a bringer of quality to Chryselr...Chrysler must be pretty bad if that's the case, as FIAT has a reputation for making sensationally unrealiable cars. I'll concede that they have improved dramatically in the last ten years, but you know what I mean. For me, the best thing about FIAT's new relationship with Chrysler will be the arrival of FIATs in the USA and access to FIAT's small car (particularly diesel - fingers crossed) technology.
Of course bland sells in the mid-size market. The Accord and Camry are the largest selling cars in the US.
I consider myself a bit of an automotive enthusaist, and I distinguish between autos that are intended to be appliances(Camry/Accord/Corolla/Minivans/basic Pickups etc etc) versus autos that are intended to be driven by enthusiasts.
The Jetta was always kind of borderline between the two categories, but the VR6 and turbo models were definitely budget enthusiast cars. The same could be said about the Passat as a luxury car. With the new versions, I think they are decidely more "appliance" and less "driver's car".
Think VW USA is missing the mark at what made VW a drivers car in the end.... this one looks cheap to me :(
VW's core customer base is yuppies and budget driving enthusiasts (with a smattering of tuners thrown in for good measure). Most of those people will probably not like the new version as much as the old. But, to be fair, VW's stated goal is to sell this new Passat to new people, to expand the customer base. So that necessarily involved some dumbing-down. We'll see if the gamble pays off.
Two points:
1. I agree about the electrics, to an extent. Years ago, my old man bought an '88 Jetta, and it had two main problems - the electrical systems were horrible, and the body was not properly galvanized. It rusted before our eyes (hole in the floor after just 5 years) and most of the major electrical subsystems needed replacement within 5 years. However, it's worth noting that the Mexican-built VWs and the German-made VWs are quite different in quality. I may be wrong, but I believe that US-market GTIs are still made in Germany, and are the most reliable of the bunch. Several other VW-owning friends of mine have experienced a couple electrical gremlins here or there, but in terms of quality I'd still put VW's cars over the American Big Three for the most part. The interiors especially were superior.
2. Funny that you point out FIAT as a bringer of quality to Chryselr...Chrysler must be pretty bad if that's the case, as FIAT has a reputation for making sensationally unrealiable cars. I'll concede that they have improved dramatically in the last ten years, but you know what I mean. For me, the best thing about FIAT's new relationship with Chrysler will be the arrival of FIATs in the USA and access to FIAT's small car (particularly diesel - fingers crossed) technology.
Of course bland sells in the mid-size market. The Accord and Camry are the largest selling cars in the US.
I consider myself a bit of an automotive enthusaist, and I distinguish between autos that are intended to be appliances(Camry/Accord/Corolla/Minivans/basic Pickups etc etc) versus autos that are intended to be driven by enthusiasts.
The Jetta was always kind of borderline between the two categories, but the VR6 and turbo models were definitely budget enthusiast cars. The same could be said about the Passat as a luxury car. With the new versions, I think they are decidely more "appliance" and less "driver's car".
Think VW USA is missing the mark at what made VW a drivers car in the end.... this one looks cheap to me :(
VW's core customer base is yuppies and budget driving enthusiasts (with a smattering of tuners thrown in for good measure). Most of those people will probably not like the new version as much as the old. But, to be fair, VW's stated goal is to sell this new Passat to new people, to expand the customer base. So that necessarily involved some dumbing-down. We'll see if the gamble pays off.
Gelfin
Apr 5, 07:12 PM
Your blind comparison of an 11 year old "dressing like a prostitute" and a man in a business suit to prove some point didn't work.
The preconceptions that lead you to reject it are not the same as it "not working."
The preconceptions that lead you to reject it are not the same as it "not working."
more...
JGowan
Apr 13, 10:10 AM
I didn't get a 4 because I was holding out for a bigger screen. I really want to keep buying Apple products. But at this point, if the phone is delayed or the screen is staying the same size, I am going to have to start checking out some of the HTCs. My 3G is almost unusable since OS4.Enjoy! HTC looks a very capable phone. Cheers! It sounds like you need an upgrade, too. I'm on the original iPhone — but I know whatever I buy will have to do me for 2-3 years so I'm waiting on iPhone 5, no matter what.
Good, bad, right or wrong, Apple [...] it rolls out its "cloud." [...] flips the switch [...] No iPhone until late fall at earliest. Probably not until next year.Nice insight... your sources?
-------
I can understand frustration — feeling it too, just not venting — the tea leaves all pointed to new iPhones in June and then, Blammo. But we have to realize that Apple does not want to be predictable. We don't really know just exactly how the JAPAN devastation affected Apple and how it will deliver its products. That could be very well what has delayed things. If this is the case, patience is all we can give anybody at this point. They lost so much.
Good, bad, right or wrong, Apple [...] it rolls out its "cloud." [...] flips the switch [...] No iPhone until late fall at earliest. Probably not until next year.Nice insight... your sources?
-------
I can understand frustration — feeling it too, just not venting — the tea leaves all pointed to new iPhones in June and then, Blammo. But we have to realize that Apple does not want to be predictable. We don't really know just exactly how the JAPAN devastation affected Apple and how it will deliver its products. That could be very well what has delayed things. If this is the case, patience is all we can give anybody at this point. They lost so much.
nizmoz
Dec 28, 08:38 AM
Well said. I was going to start typing a similar post but glad you did. The person that replied to the OP above saying IT people are clueless is 100% wrong as you are the one that is clueless. I run a IT department and there is no way MACs would ever become the Computer of choice over any Windows machine that has way more software for the enterprise than a MAC will ever see. And using Bootcamp is a waste of funds as PCs are cheaper. It always takes someone who has no clue about how IT works to say something like that.
Yeah, sure. Because all of those business/enterprise applications written exclusively for Windows run ah-so smoothly on Macs...
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using Macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (There is a world beyond the Microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's OLD Java, and many Java apps require a very specific Oracle JVM to run. There's .NET. There's Sharepoint. There's an IBM mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no OS X drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with Windows.)
Enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a Mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, Time Machine is NOT an enterprise solution.
TCO? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (Apple)? HUGE fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out Fail. (Try getting support for OS X Leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for Tiger or Panther TODAY. Then compare it to Windows XP, an OS from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on Cupertino toys.)
It's MUCH easier to integrate Linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put Mac OS X boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like Oracle and IBM actually use, sell and support Linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the Mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large IT department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a CTO to bet the company's IT future on Nintendo Wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the World Health Organization of the United Nations, and it turned out to be IMPOSSIBLE to integrate Macs into their IT environment. I had the only Mac (a 20" Core Duo) in a world wide network because I was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then I quickly had to give up on OS X and instead run Windows on it in order to get my job as an IT admin done and be able to use the IT resources of the other WHO centers. OS X Tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but Windows Vista and XP got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a Mac that only runs Windows. That's what you get for being an Apple fanboy, which I admittedly was at that time.
Where I work now, two other people bought Macs, and one of them has ordered Windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out OS X from his hard disk and replace it with Windows. He's an engineer and not productive with OS X, rather the opposite: OS X slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in Apple land, I will now also move away from OS X. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the Apple hardware and their iTunes store. If the web browser and iTunes and maybe Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio or the Adobe Creative Suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then OS X probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When Apple brag about how cool it is to run Windows in "Boot Camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the Mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run Windows in VirtualBox on Linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support TWO operating systems to get ONE job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the Mac still is not a full computing platform without Microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case AGAINST migrating to Mac OS X.
Yeah, sure. Because all of those business/enterprise applications written exclusively for Windows run ah-so smoothly on Macs...
Just accept it, folks: There is no business case for using Macs in an enterprise environment.
Compatibility? Fail. (There is a world beyond the Microsoft .doc format where enterprise applications live. There's OLD Java, and many Java apps require a very specific Oracle JVM to run. There's .NET. There's Sharepoint. There's an IBM mainframe you need to talk to. There are department printers that have no OS X drivers. There's a long list of office equipment that only plays well with Windows.)
Enterprise-ready? Fail. See compatibility, see support, see backup.
Central administration? Fail. Try applying group policies to a Mac.
Central backup? Fail. No, Time Machine is NOT an enterprise solution.
TCO? Fail. Expensive hardware, short-lived platform support.
Enterprise-support from the manufacturer (Apple)? HUGE fail.
Roadmaps? Fail. Apple doesn't even know what the word means. You just cannot plan with this company and their products.
Product longevity? Knock-out Fail. (Try getting support for OS X Leopard in two years from now. Try getting support for Tiger or Panther TODAY. Then compare it to Windows XP, an OS from the year that will be officially supported until 2014. Then make your strategic choice and tell me with a straight face that you want to bet your money on Cupertino toys.)
It's MUCH easier to integrate Linux desktops into an enterprise environment than it is to put Mac OS X boxes in there. Why? Because some "blue chip" companies like Oracle and IBM actually use, sell and support Linux and make sure that it can be used in an enterprise environment.
Trying to push a home user/consumer platform like the Mac into a corporate environment is a very bad idea. Especially if the company behind the product recently even announced that they dropped their entire server hardware because nobody wanted them. Why should the head of a large IT department trust a company that just dropped their only product that was even remotely targeted at the enterprise market? It's like asking a CTO to bet the company's IT future on Nintendo Wiis.
And just for your info: I've had those discussions at the World Health Organization of the United Nations, and it turned out to be IMPOSSIBLE to integrate Macs into their IT environment. I had the only Mac (a 20" Core Duo) in a world wide network because I was able to talk someone higher up the ladder into approving the purchase order for it, but then I quickly had to give up on OS X and instead run Windows on it in order to get my job as an IT admin done and be able to use the IT resources of the other WHO centers. OS X Tiger totally sucked in our network for almost all of the above reasons, but Windows Vista and XP got the job done perfectly. It wasn't very persuasive to show off a Mac that only runs Windows. That's what you get for being an Apple fanboy, which I admittedly was at that time.
Where I work now, two other people bought Macs, and one of them has ordered Windows 7 yesterday and wants me to wipe out OS X from his hard disk and replace it with Windows. He's an engineer and not productive with OS X, rather the opposite: OS X slows him down and doesn't provide any value to him.
And personally, after more than five years in Apple land, I will now also move away from OS X. It's a consumer platform that's only there to lock people into the Apple hardware and their iTunes store. If the web browser and iTunes and maybe Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio or the Adobe Creative Suites are the only pieces of software that you need to be happy, then OS X probably is okay for you. For everything else, it quickly becomes a very expensive trap or just a disappointment. When Apple brag about how cool it is to run Windows in "Boot Camp" or a virtualization software, then this rather demonstrates the shortcomings of the Mac platform instead of its strengths. I can also run Windows in VirtualBox on Linux. But why is this an advantage? Where's the sense in dividing my hardware resources to support TWO operating systems to get ONE job done? What's the rationalization for that? There is none. It just shows that the Mac still is not a full computing platform without Microsoft products. And that is the ultimate case AGAINST migrating to Mac OS X.
more...
iqwertyi
Dec 28, 10:13 AM
Did you get the lights at IKEA too? Looks good!
Yes, the lights were Ikea as well. They come in sets of four. So one package will light up four cubes. Had to purchase 4 sets for this shelf.
Also, the lights can be one of about seven colors. Or you cam make it transition. :)
Yes, the lights were Ikea as well. They come in sets of four. So one package will light up four cubes. Had to purchase 4 sets for this shelf.
Also, the lights can be one of about seven colors. Or you cam make it transition. :)
Abyssgh0st
Dec 26, 11:38 AM
I got..
$750 cash
$175 in gift cards
2 Polos
2 OU Hoodies
4 OU Shirts
3 OU Blankets
An OU Ornament
A 2lb Rice Krispie Treat..
Harry Potter Hogwarts Scarf
Harry Potter Replica Snitch
Some cool stuff from the Container Store
TV-B-Gone
And random stuff from 5 different stockings
$750 cash
$175 in gift cards
2 Polos
2 OU Hoodies
4 OU Shirts
3 OU Blankets
An OU Ornament
A 2lb Rice Krispie Treat..
Harry Potter Hogwarts Scarf
Harry Potter Replica Snitch
Some cool stuff from the Container Store
TV-B-Gone
And random stuff from 5 different stockings
Peel
Jul 27, 01:44 AM
I guess I'm not as much of a purist as some here. I make DVDs off EyeTV digital HD broadcast recordings with Toast 7 and they look and sound very close to the original HD broadcasts on my 24" Dell 1920 x 1200 display. I cannot see much nor hear any difference.
Call me old fashioned but I just don't see why I would want Blu-ray or HD-DVD until they are cost competitive with good old fashioned single layer 4.38 GB DVDs. :rolleyes:
Well maybe on the 24" screen, but go to play it on a 42" or larger plasma monitor, and the difference will become apparent. On the 24" screen you've got a pitch of about 92 ppi, the plasma screens run from 53 ppi for the 42" down to 37 ppi on a 60" screen (remember the resolution doesn't change, just the screen size). On these less dense screens, the full resolution of the HD image, along with the greater color depth that HD provides over NTSC is significant.
Call me old fashioned but I just don't see why I would want Blu-ray or HD-DVD until they are cost competitive with good old fashioned single layer 4.38 GB DVDs. :rolleyes:
Well maybe on the 24" screen, but go to play it on a 42" or larger plasma monitor, and the difference will become apparent. On the 24" screen you've got a pitch of about 92 ppi, the plasma screens run from 53 ppi for the 42" down to 37 ppi on a 60" screen (remember the resolution doesn't change, just the screen size). On these less dense screens, the full resolution of the HD image, along with the greater color depth that HD provides over NTSC is significant.
dazzer21
Apr 27, 04:53 PM
Steve just does not look well in that photo - I even had to look closely to see if he'd been Photoshopped in or not as the colour of his skin is so different to the others'...
Bern
Sep 24, 06:38 PM
In that case then, tell him you trust him and let him get his own place. I wonder how responsible, trust worthy and adult he will be when he gets her pregnant??
Mac7
Sep 1, 02:03 PM
249509
bigrobb
Dec 6, 05:52 PM
Mind posting the source to that black 'n blue Apple-logo one?
Looks shweet :cool:
I can't remember where got it but I will post mine
Looks shweet :cool:
I can't remember where got it but I will post mine
swindmill
Mar 27, 01:04 PM
Is there a way o still get the standard Wiretap program. All I can find is WireTap Pro, which costs $20
No comments:
Post a Comment