tirk
Apr 11, 11:44 AM
If it is going to be a 4g/LTE iPhone then this works for me. I have no complaints with my iPhone 4 so waiting another 4-6 months is fine with me.
80%* of potential purchasers won't have access to LTE for at least another year from then. Given that 3G was added only after it was widely available, why would Apple take such a risk with the huge numbers of June/July iPhone users coming to the end of their contracts for such a minority market?
[*made up statistic, but I bet it's not far wrong! :D ]
80%* of potential purchasers won't have access to LTE for at least another year from then. Given that 3G was added only after it was widely available, why would Apple take such a risk with the huge numbers of June/July iPhone users coming to the end of their contracts for such a minority market?
[*made up statistic, but I bet it's not far wrong! :D ]
BaldiMac
Mar 22, 02:52 PM
I wasn't thinking straight, big deal.
And Thankfully I'm more successful in life than you'll ever be. Thanks.
I guess that's as close to an apology as one can expect on this forum.
And Thankfully I'm more successful in life than you'll ever be. Thanks.
I guess that's as close to an apology as one can expect on this forum.
eawmp1
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
Now our long national nightmare is over! It's morning again in America. ;)
All is good with the world.
Left and right can unite behind the newly-legitimized president and join together to accomplish the work of the people.
:rolleyes:
All is good with the world.
Left and right can unite behind the newly-legitimized president and join together to accomplish the work of the people.
:rolleyes:
geerlingguy
Aug 16, 11:24 PM
When rendering in FCP, it's all about the CPU.
Fast hard drives contribute to real-time effects, but do NOT contribute to rendering.
Ram helps a little bit.
However, depending on what kind of rendering you're doing, the hard drive can be a limiting factor.
Say you're just rendering ten minutes worth of a blur effect on video�the CPU says 'gimme all you got' and goes to town on the frames, blurring each one quickly. But the hard drive may have a hard time keeping up with the CPU, because 10 minutes of footage needs to be read, then re-written to the drive. For HD-resolution video, that can be a couple gigs of data. And that data also has to pass through the RAM (which acts like a high-speed buffer).
However, in the case of these benchmarks, one would think the testers would choose some more CPU-intense rendering, which would allow the hard drive to take it's time while the CPU is overloaded with work.
But, to anyone configuring a graphics or video workstation: Everything�CPU, Hard Drives, RAM, and even the GPU for some tasks�should be as fast and ample as possible. "A chain is only as good as it's weakest link." If you pair up a Quad 3.0 GHz Xeon with a 5400 rpm USB 2.0 drive, you will be disappointed.
Fast hard drives contribute to real-time effects, but do NOT contribute to rendering.
Ram helps a little bit.
However, depending on what kind of rendering you're doing, the hard drive can be a limiting factor.
Say you're just rendering ten minutes worth of a blur effect on video�the CPU says 'gimme all you got' and goes to town on the frames, blurring each one quickly. But the hard drive may have a hard time keeping up with the CPU, because 10 minutes of footage needs to be read, then re-written to the drive. For HD-resolution video, that can be a couple gigs of data. And that data also has to pass through the RAM (which acts like a high-speed buffer).
However, in the case of these benchmarks, one would think the testers would choose some more CPU-intense rendering, which would allow the hard drive to take it's time while the CPU is overloaded with work.
But, to anyone configuring a graphics or video workstation: Everything�CPU, Hard Drives, RAM, and even the GPU for some tasks�should be as fast and ample as possible. "A chain is only as good as it's weakest link." If you pair up a Quad 3.0 GHz Xeon with a 5400 rpm USB 2.0 drive, you will be disappointed.
Shasterball
Apr 19, 01:58 PM
Parties do not understate potential damages in a lawsuit. No way. No how.
bassfingers
Apr 27, 04:55 PM
The right wing has once again demonstrated to what extent it's pathetic. Obama once again acts like the only grown up amongst a crowd of children. Nothing new.
Oh, I thought his administration was the one that dropped the F-bomb on live TV.
Or that he was the one who fabricated a "healthcare crisis" so that he could ram through legislation that doesn't even kick in for years
I thought he was the one who is always on the news whining about why nothing ever goes his way.
He is the inexperienced child. And if he hadn't been born in the US, that would have been great news
Oh, I thought his administration was the one that dropped the F-bomb on live TV.
Or that he was the one who fabricated a "healthcare crisis" so that he could ram through legislation that doesn't even kick in for years
I thought he was the one who is always on the news whining about why nothing ever goes his way.
He is the inexperienced child. And if he hadn't been born in the US, that would have been great news
.gif "easter bunny coloring pages.")
Macnoviz
Jul 20, 08:07 AM
heavy
It looks like 2006 won't be like 1984
It looks like 2006 won't be like 1984
tjanuranus
Mar 27, 03:35 AM
I really want Lion, for the number one reason being TRIM support. I eagerly want to finally start using an SSD (specifically one from Crucial, since they make the fastest ones on the market), but have avoided doing so since the latest version Snow Leopard does not support TRIM.
It's a shame Apple is waiting so long to finally include TRIM support. Windows 7 already includes it.
I think I'll wait until 10.7.3 comes out before upgrading, though. If there are bugs in the TRIM implementation, I fear it may corrupt data.
this is not true. The Mercury elite pro SSD from OWC was just used in the fastest over clocking competition winner because it's the fastest and requires NO Trim support in OSX. I have one in my laptop right now, ZERO slow down.
http://blog.macsales.com/9530-owc-mercury-extreme-pro-re-solid-state-drive-used-to-set-overclocking-world-record
It's a shame Apple is waiting so long to finally include TRIM support. Windows 7 already includes it.
I think I'll wait until 10.7.3 comes out before upgrading, though. If there are bugs in the TRIM implementation, I fear it may corrupt data.
this is not true. The Mercury elite pro SSD from OWC was just used in the fastest over clocking competition winner because it's the fastest and requires NO Trim support in OSX. I have one in my laptop right now, ZERO slow down.
http://blog.macsales.com/9530-owc-mercury-extreme-pro-re-solid-state-drive-used-to-set-overclocking-world-record
chrono1081
Apr 10, 08:08 AM
Anyone else call BS on that whole article?
First, off: Its poorly written. As soon as I saw the "The Apple fan-boys out there will say that..."
Really? Speculation on what Apple "fanyboys" will say? Sounds like Engadget forums.
Second: Didn't ANYONE realize this is all rumor and speculation? Not fact?
I used to come to Macrumors to read about Mac news, but now its all anit-apple crap.
First, off: Its poorly written. As soon as I saw the "The Apple fan-boys out there will say that..."
Really? Speculation on what Apple "fanyboys" will say? Sounds like Engadget forums.
Second: Didn't ANYONE realize this is all rumor and speculation? Not fact?
I used to come to Macrumors to read about Mac news, but now its all anit-apple crap.
peharri
Aug 11, 01:10 PM
If Apple does decide they're going to compete with, rather than cooperate with, existing cellphone manufacturers, they will lose their dominance over online music.
They have to cooperate with cellphone manufacturers because MP3 playing cellphones will end up being the future of portable music. Apple cannot make its own phone and expect to have even 10% of the entire market. Without its dominant market share, the iTMS will end up looking less attractive to the music industry - an industry already, by all accounts, upset with and wanting to get away from, iTMS - and will be deserted faster than you can say "90% of phones support Windows Media".
I don't believe this story. It doesn't make sense. Jobs crowing over a new product which by rights ought to be veiled in secrecy strikes me as insane. Apple producing a cellphone strikes me as insane. If I were a shareholder, I'd be calling up Steve Jobs personally and demanding answers.
That said, if it's any good, it's quadband, and supports EDGE and Bluetooth (and maybe UMA if the carriers can get their fingers out), I might buy one.
They have to cooperate with cellphone manufacturers because MP3 playing cellphones will end up being the future of portable music. Apple cannot make its own phone and expect to have even 10% of the entire market. Without its dominant market share, the iTMS will end up looking less attractive to the music industry - an industry already, by all accounts, upset with and wanting to get away from, iTMS - and will be deserted faster than you can say "90% of phones support Windows Media".
I don't believe this story. It doesn't make sense. Jobs crowing over a new product which by rights ought to be veiled in secrecy strikes me as insane. Apple producing a cellphone strikes me as insane. If I were a shareholder, I'd be calling up Steve Jobs personally and demanding answers.
That said, if it's any good, it's quadband, and supports EDGE and Bluetooth (and maybe UMA if the carriers can get their fingers out), I might buy one.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 05:34 PM
It's worth noting that Intel has shipped P4-series chips at 3.4GHz. But the new chips (Woodcrest and Conroe) aren't being sold at speeds above 3GHz.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
Pay attention. The answer is "sooner than you think".
Quarter 4 this year will see the X6900 conroe extreme at 3.2GHz.
So when will we start seeing 8 chips in a computer? Perhaps this will become the new measurement...not processor speeds, but the number of processors (or cores).
There have already been technology briefings from Intel that talk about 4-core chips in early and 32-core chips by 2010. Similar offerings are expected from AMD.
And the Xeon-MP series processors (which will, of course, eventually get all this tech) are designed with 8-way SMP in mind. A theoretical Xeon-MP based on this 32-core tech would produce a system with 256 cores. Of course, it is doubtful that anything other than a large server would be able to take proper advantage of this, so I wouldn't ever expect to find one on a desktop.
8 core should be out sometime between end of 2006 and beginning of 2007 with the quad core Clovertown processors (based on woodcrest) available in dual chip configurations. And it'll only get better from there.
Which reminds me, though slightly OT... this is a good reason why iMac may well get Conroe now or perhaps get Merom now but transition to a desktop chip by the time Santa Rosa comes out. The new chipset/socket means new logic board, and by the time that comes out the Kenstfield quad core chips on the consumer desktop end will start arriving. I don't yet know how far kentsfield will be scaling either up or down as far as clock speed/heat, but if quad core starts moving into the consumer dekstop market, they will need a very powerful processor: either Conroe or Kentsfield.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
tortoise
Aug 22, 05:19 PM
The next Xeon is Clovertown, which is just Woodcrest scaled to 4 cores with a few changes in clock and FSB etc. Tigerton comes next, also 4 cores but MP capable (3+ chips possible) and with a possibility of increased FSB speed, bigger L2 cache and so on.
This will likely suck, because the interconnect Intel is using is just too damn slow. Putting four cores in the same package will just make the situation worse, because a lot of applications are significantly limited by memory performance.
The Woodcrest processors have been put through their paces pretty well on the supercomputing lists, and their Achille's heal is the memory subsystem. Current generation AMD Opterons still clearly outscale Woodcrest in real-world memory bandwidth with only two cores. Unless Intel pulls a rabbit out of their hat with their memory architecture issues when the quad core is released, AMDs quad core is going to embarrass them because of the memory bottleneck. And AMD is already starting to work on upgrading their already markedly superior memory architecture.
This will likely suck, because the interconnect Intel is using is just too damn slow. Putting four cores in the same package will just make the situation worse, because a lot of applications are significantly limited by memory performance.
The Woodcrest processors have been put through their paces pretty well on the supercomputing lists, and their Achille's heal is the memory subsystem. Current generation AMD Opterons still clearly outscale Woodcrest in real-world memory bandwidth with only two cores. Unless Intel pulls a rabbit out of their hat with their memory architecture issues when the quad core is released, AMDs quad core is going to embarrass them because of the memory bottleneck. And AMD is already starting to work on upgrading their already markedly superior memory architecture.
SiliconAddict
Aug 5, 08:01 PM
*shrugs* I have no money so it not that big of a deal for me. It will be nice to know more about 10.5.
samcraig
Apr 25, 04:06 PM
1. the lawsuit may have merit HOWEVER - the restitution being sought is silly because I am sure that the two people suing could have or still could return their devices for a refund or store credit.
2. If this was a suit brought up against Google for the same thing - those defending Apple would be ripping Google (or anyone else) a new one. But clearly because it's Apple being targeted it's a witch hunt?
3.the iPhone 4 had an antenna issue. Steve flat out said so. He said that ALL phones have an issue. That doesn't negate the iPhone having one. Oh - but this was LONG after his email to me (and others) that there was NO issue. Backpeddled on that one only after Consumer Reports refused to give the iPhone a good review. Suddenly there was a press conference and finger pointing (poorly) at every other phone manufacturer
I suspect the same will happen here. Apple will be in the cross hairs. Justifiably or not. And when push comes to shove - they will throw anyone and everyone under the bus (ATT, Google, etc) for doing the same thing.
2. If this was a suit brought up against Google for the same thing - those defending Apple would be ripping Google (or anyone else) a new one. But clearly because it's Apple being targeted it's a witch hunt?
3.the iPhone 4 had an antenna issue. Steve flat out said so. He said that ALL phones have an issue. That doesn't negate the iPhone having one. Oh - but this was LONG after his email to me (and others) that there was NO issue. Backpeddled on that one only after Consumer Reports refused to give the iPhone a good review. Suddenly there was a press conference and finger pointing (poorly) at every other phone manufacturer
I suspect the same will happen here. Apple will be in the cross hairs. Justifiably or not. And when push comes to shove - they will throw anyone and everyone under the bus (ATT, Google, etc) for doing the same thing.
bibbz
Jun 9, 07:34 PM
Bibbz,
I have a couple questions.. I want to preorder with radioshack. I am NOT the primary account holder, but I am an authorized user. I also know the last 4 digits of the account holders social. Will this be a problem when picking up the phone?
I also have a FAN account. Will these be a problem?
FAN account isnt an issue.
At the shack we can only do an upgrade or add a line if the account holder is in the store. Some stores will do it, bc physically the computer will let us, but we are not supposed to.
I have a couple questions.. I want to preorder with radioshack. I am NOT the primary account holder, but I am an authorized user. I also know the last 4 digits of the account holders social. Will this be a problem when picking up the phone?
I also have a FAN account. Will these be a problem?
FAN account isnt an issue.
At the shack we can only do an upgrade or add a line if the account holder is in the store. Some stores will do it, bc physically the computer will let us, but we are not supposed to.
mwswami
Jul 21, 10:20 AM
If you get away from the desktop and look to the server market, however, the picture changes. A web server may only be running one copy of Apache, but it may create a thread for every simultaneous connection. If you have 8 cores, then you can handle 8 times as many connections as a 1-core system can (assuming sufficient memory and I/O bandwidth, of course.) Ditto for database, transaction, and all kinds of other servers. More cores means more simultaneous connections without performance degradation.
I agree with all you said except for the above. Most servers don't use a thread per connection model. Using non-blocking, asynchronous, or event based IO you can get a lot higher scalability with far fewer threads. But its true - you get more work done with more cores.
Multi-core systems on the server are also great for supporting virtual environments. The higher the number of cores, memory etc, the better it is for supporting larger number of virtual servers.
I agree with all you said except for the above. Most servers don't use a thread per connection model. Using non-blocking, asynchronous, or event based IO you can get a lot higher scalability with far fewer threads. But its true - you get more work done with more cores.
Multi-core systems on the server are also great for supporting virtual environments. The higher the number of cores, memory etc, the better it is for supporting larger number of virtual servers.
littleman23408
Dec 6, 10:25 PM
IC-10 license test is killing me. I can only manage 2nd. I can get into 3rd pretty quick (at the hairpin before the long straight) and then I can't get 2nd until the same turn, and then there is just not enough race left to get past 1st. I can get kind of close to him, but nowhere near close enough to cut him off at the last turn.
zacman
Apr 19, 02:34 PM
Sigh. The iPhone is still gaining market share. Not losing market share.
You're wrong. Apple is losing marketshare for over 2 years now. Just because they are selling MORE iPhones doesn't mean they are gaining marketshare. The market grows much faster than the iPhone sales. Have a look at Nokia: In Q4/10 Nokia sold almost 7 million more smartphones but they lost about 10% marketshare. In Q1/11 Apple lost about 2% marketshare despite the fact that they sold about 2.5 million more iPhones. Just read the latest GfK numbers (needs registered account), it's all in there. NDP numbers for Q1/11 will be released next week if you trust them more.
You're wrong. Apple is losing marketshare for over 2 years now. Just because they are selling MORE iPhones doesn't mean they are gaining marketshare. The market grows much faster than the iPhone sales. Have a look at Nokia: In Q4/10 Nokia sold almost 7 million more smartphones but they lost about 10% marketshare. In Q1/11 Apple lost about 2% marketshare despite the fact that they sold about 2.5 million more iPhones. Just read the latest GfK numbers (needs registered account), it's all in there. NDP numbers for Q1/11 will be released next week if you trust them more.
Macaroony
Mar 4, 03:53 AM
CaoCao, could you please elaborate as to how gays could cause the collapse of society? I keep hearing that but I don't understand the sentiment behind it. And please, do not skirt around the answer, I always try to be as clear as day with mine.
The only explanation I can come up with as to why you would see being gay and giving gays the same civil rights as the collapse of society is that it differs so much from your worldview, it causes your world to collapse to the point where you feel nothing but uncomfortable to live in such a society. In other words; if gays are treated equal under every law under the sun, your society would collapse.
I often hear that same-sex marriage devalues marriage and threatens those that are already married. I wonder why and how. I doubt that your straight neighbor's happy marriage affects you at all unless you're so jealous, you want their marriage to be annulled - a happy same-sex couple must be killing you inside. I have said it here and in another thread before, marriage is nothing but a contract between two members of two families and the state to secure their fortune and legacy. Every attorney will tell you the same.
I have to say, it's very exhausting coming up with a defense convincing enough for those that don't seem to follow the world by logic. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer because if law is like that all the time, I'd rather give up on it and live in exile.
The only explanation I can come up with as to why you would see being gay and giving gays the same civil rights as the collapse of society is that it differs so much from your worldview, it causes your world to collapse to the point where you feel nothing but uncomfortable to live in such a society. In other words; if gays are treated equal under every law under the sun, your society would collapse.
I often hear that same-sex marriage devalues marriage and threatens those that are already married. I wonder why and how. I doubt that your straight neighbor's happy marriage affects you at all unless you're so jealous, you want their marriage to be annulled - a happy same-sex couple must be killing you inside. I have said it here and in another thread before, marriage is nothing but a contract between two members of two families and the state to secure their fortune and legacy. Every attorney will tell you the same.
I have to say, it's very exhausting coming up with a defense convincing enough for those that don't seem to follow the world by logic. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer because if law is like that all the time, I'd rather give up on it and live in exile.
Funkymonk
Apr 19, 03:03 PM
Lol if apple was a religion it would have more extremists than Islam, Judaism, and Christianity combined! :eek:
monster620ie
Apr 5, 08:34 PM
Looking forward to the new FCP :D
If you are trying to learn FCP, check out Larry Jordan tutorials. I learned a lot.
If you are trying to learn FCP, check out Larry Jordan tutorials. I learned a lot.
Unspeaked
Aug 11, 11:14 AM
G5 iPhones next Tuesday.
Mr. Gates
Jun 8, 11:20 PM
You mean "The Shack"
They are pretty much ONLY a phone store now
They lost the Mojo
Boycott them
They are pretty much ONLY a phone store now
They lost the Mojo
Boycott them
No comments:
Post a Comment