mrholder
Apr 6, 04:37 PM
Was considering a Xoom, but purchased a brand new 1st gen iPad a couple of days ago through the Verizon sale. Couldn't resist the price. Plus, can't see spending money on new content for the Xoom when I have tons of content that I've purchased through itunes.
wpotere
Apr 27, 01:49 PM
Oh you're right, that is completely applicable and single-handedly discredits the foundation of the American government. Instead of government, let's all gather around and talk about our feelings.
Sarcasm ^
Nah, instead we can all stand around and look at a birth certificate! :rolleyes:
Sarcasm ^
Nah, instead we can all stand around and look at a birth certificate! :rolleyes:
jmsait19
Aug 26, 05:39 PM
This is interesting, BUT, from what I know, Intel announced the desktop (Conroe) Core 2 Duo proccessor on July 27, and as far as I know, no Conroe systems are shipping right now, almost a month later.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
that's because conroe wouldn't have been an upgrade compared to what apple already had out (maybe the imac, but merom waiting for merom would keep it cooler inside). The only thing left to change at that point was the PowerMac and they put Woodcrest in it and that one IS shipping.
Dell has announced some Conroe systems that you can order, but as far as I know they aren't readily shipping yet.
that's because conroe wouldn't have been an upgrade compared to what apple already had out (maybe the imac, but merom waiting for merom would keep it cooler inside). The only thing left to change at that point was the PowerMac and they put Woodcrest in it and that one IS shipping.
Georgie
Aug 26, 02:55 PM
Dude. You bought Rev. A machines. I've bought -- EIGHTEEN Macs over the past two years and -- nope NO problems. Granted, they are all PowerPc Macs. Just bought the final Rev. PowerPC 12" Powerbook G4 last week. I'm pleased as punch.
Sorry about your luck but you bought Rev. A machines. The only Rev A machine I ever bought from Apple was the Titanium (tibook) 400mhz G4 Powerbook in August of 2001. Three years later, almost to the day the warranty ended, Apple replaced almost the whole machine under Applecare. That was about my only trouble with Apple, and the problem with the machine was that I was really scared and all thumbs when it came to putting in a stick of memory -- broke the holders and they sent a whole new logic board. That machine is still going strong, with a DayStar CPU upgrade, in a friend's office, and it's got years left in her.
Three of my friends still are on 1998 and 1999 iMacs, going strong with new harddrives only. Two of my other friends are on 2001 and 2000 year iMacs -- one with the same hard drive. Two friends are on 2001/2000 iBooks, going strong. My sister and two other friends are on year 2002 iMacs. All kicking butt. Personally, I prefer my year 2002 667mhz VGA Titanium Powerbook (on it right now) to my other machines and will be upgrading the CPU to 1.2ghz in a few months at Daystar. All to say that Apple makes kickbutt machines. Sorry about your luck. Oh, and again, forgot to mention that since i've been on Apple since 1989, I never had a virus. I bought NOrton Anti Virus out of ignorance once inthe 90's and once in but promptly took it off the puters, unnecessary.
If I were you, I'd have started off with the top of the line G5 2.1ghz 20" iMac (with iSight) and a 14" 1.42ghz iBook. You understand, these are the top of the line of the great PowerPC line of Apple products. It's like buying a 1989 560SL Mercedes (last year) or a 1968 Mustang convertible. I'd ask Apple for a trade 'em in for your rev a machines at least until Rev C Mactels.
Ohhh, Rev A!
I guess I wasn't watching carefully or listening intently when they explained that part in the commercials. Did anyone else hear Mac-dude explain that I would be buying a "Rev A" product and should expect it to fail within three months? Maybe that's what he was saying in Japanese with Camera-chick.
This "Rev A" excuse doesn't hold water. See, had I known that I might not have bought a Mac at all. And if it's true I should expect my $2000 to buy a broken toaster then I also expect Apple to replace it, not make up excuses. As far as that goes, they should pay me to QC their products.
Sorry about your luck but you bought Rev. A machines. The only Rev A machine I ever bought from Apple was the Titanium (tibook) 400mhz G4 Powerbook in August of 2001. Three years later, almost to the day the warranty ended, Apple replaced almost the whole machine under Applecare. That was about my only trouble with Apple, and the problem with the machine was that I was really scared and all thumbs when it came to putting in a stick of memory -- broke the holders and they sent a whole new logic board. That machine is still going strong, with a DayStar CPU upgrade, in a friend's office, and it's got years left in her.
Three of my friends still are on 1998 and 1999 iMacs, going strong with new harddrives only. Two of my other friends are on 2001 and 2000 year iMacs -- one with the same hard drive. Two friends are on 2001/2000 iBooks, going strong. My sister and two other friends are on year 2002 iMacs. All kicking butt. Personally, I prefer my year 2002 667mhz VGA Titanium Powerbook (on it right now) to my other machines and will be upgrading the CPU to 1.2ghz in a few months at Daystar. All to say that Apple makes kickbutt machines. Sorry about your luck. Oh, and again, forgot to mention that since i've been on Apple since 1989, I never had a virus. I bought NOrton Anti Virus out of ignorance once inthe 90's and once in but promptly took it off the puters, unnecessary.
If I were you, I'd have started off with the top of the line G5 2.1ghz 20" iMac (with iSight) and a 14" 1.42ghz iBook. You understand, these are the top of the line of the great PowerPC line of Apple products. It's like buying a 1989 560SL Mercedes (last year) or a 1968 Mustang convertible. I'd ask Apple for a trade 'em in for your rev a machines at least until Rev C Mactels.
Ohhh, Rev A!
I guess I wasn't watching carefully or listening intently when they explained that part in the commercials. Did anyone else hear Mac-dude explain that I would be buying a "Rev A" product and should expect it to fail within three months? Maybe that's what he was saying in Japanese with Camera-chick.
This "Rev A" excuse doesn't hold water. See, had I known that I might not have bought a Mac at all. And if it's true I should expect my $2000 to buy a broken toaster then I also expect Apple to replace it, not make up excuses. As far as that goes, they should pay me to QC their products.
MattSepeta
Apr 27, 02:35 PM
Are you calling me a liar? I literally went to WhiteHouse.gov, opened the file in Illustrator, and moved the text around myself. :rolleyes:
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
Anyway, like I said, I'm sure there's an explanation... are there any graphic designers here who can help?
I already explained it to you.
When you scan things in, depending on the software, you are often given an option to "auto-inscribe" or something, I cant recall the term. The software then attempts to read the document and embed real type into the PDF, rarely succeeding. I'm assuming that the pieces that came through just happened to be the clearest to read.
EDIT: They probably DO want the controversy to continue! If I was in his shoes I would be eating it up. Every story on a right-wing birther makes the centerists even more alienated from the right.
Some things never change. Laughably bias.
Anyway, like I said, I'm sure there's an explanation... are there any graphic designers here who can help?
I already explained it to you.
When you scan things in, depending on the software, you are often given an option to "auto-inscribe" or something, I cant recall the term. The software then attempts to read the document and embed real type into the PDF, rarely succeeding. I'm assuming that the pieces that came through just happened to be the clearest to read.
EDIT: They probably DO want the controversy to continue! If I was in his shoes I would be eating it up. Every story on a right-wing birther makes the centerists even more alienated from the right.
georgee2face
Mar 23, 08:57 AM
Well, let's hear it for the Angles and the Saxons who came down frrom the North Sea ( Dennmark, Germany, france and the Netherlands) to start the language we can argue over so fluently and ardently today!!!!!
G
You know, this silly attitude really becomes tiring. Modern English really began in the 1600s, as did English colonization of what is now North America. The British English and American English languages formed concurrently, American is NOT a late offshoot. Rather, they both stem from the same Middle and Old English, but separately.
Get over yourselves.
G
You know, this silly attitude really becomes tiring. Modern English really began in the 1600s, as did English colonization of what is now North America. The British English and American English languages formed concurrently, American is NOT a late offshoot. Rather, they both stem from the same Middle and Old English, but separately.
Get over yourselves.
iAlan
Nov 28, 08:16 PM
I haven't read all the post as yet, got to around post #50 but my sentiments pretty much reflect those of most posters.
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
However, if there is evidence that a bulk of the royalty (and I mean more than 50%) will go to artists then I can see justification in the process (but it should not be a flat $1 per device as the cost/profit of devices varies). But at the same time, Apple should get a higher share of the 99c per track as I believe the money they get per song pretty much only covers there management of the stored data and hosting on iTunes with very little profit per song - and this is understandable as Apple can leverage the iTunes store to drive iPod sales.
If the record companies want a profitable piece of Apple�s pie (no pun intended) then Apple should be entitled to a profitable piece of the 99c download.
Same logic me thinks�
Val-kyrie
Jul 30, 05:09 PM
I don't think this is correct. The Merom chips were introduced last Thursday, but have been shipping for a while now, a month ahead of schedule.
Intel said that you could expect to see this chip in a laptop by the end of August. Does that mean custom built or in Best Buy (or wherever)?
It seems to me that if one was going to introduce a so called "Mac Pro" with the newest 64-bit processor, one would also choose introduce its mobile "Pro" counterpart.
Perhaps I have overstated my case. Intel is shipping Merom chips, but laptops with Merom inside are not expected in retail channels until the end of August--perhaps because of limited supply?
Intel said that you could expect to see this chip in a laptop by the end of August. Does that mean custom built or in Best Buy (or wherever)?
It seems to me that if one was going to introduce a so called "Mac Pro" with the newest 64-bit processor, one would also choose introduce its mobile "Pro" counterpart.
Perhaps I have overstated my case. Intel is shipping Merom chips, but laptops with Merom inside are not expected in retail channels until the end of August--perhaps because of limited supply?
torbjoern
Mar 1, 04:22 AM
Isn't it all hormonal mishaps in the womb? Does your God control that? If so, he is predisposing people to sin, and isn't that unfair that not all are exposed to that disposition?
AFAIK, Christians have this idea of "inherited sin". The predisposal to sin doesn't come from God, but from Adam.
AFAIK, Christians have this idea of "inherited sin". The predisposal to sin doesn't come from God, but from Adam.
manu chao
Apr 25, 02:10 PM
Clearly you don't understand the issue. Apple is not tracking you since they do not collect this data. Rather your phone is generating a local cache of nearby cell towers and wifi hotspots. This benefits you by making your phones GPS function faster, more accurately and with less battery.
The issue is that the cache is not properly protected and could be used to infer some generalized information about roughly where your phone has been. This data is only accessible by somebody with direct access to your phone, or you phones backup files.
Why do people like that the data on their phones is encrypted and can be remotely wiped? Because it all too likely that something on your phone should not fall into somebody else's hand.
Enabling encryption of the phone by default is just taking reasonable precautions. Creating this data log (by which I mean not deleting any but the most recent entries) is not taking what would be a very reasonable precaution.
I always wondered why the option to encrypt the iPhone backup was there. What data would be on my iPhone but not on my computer (e-mails, browsing history, all sorts of passwords are generally both on my iPhone and my computer). Now I know of one reason, that Apple (or a third-party app) might without my knowledge create databases relating to my phone usage that are more critical than the rest of the data on my computer.
The point is that I would have assumed that any app or part of the OS creating a database would be open and transparent about it.
The issue is that the cache is not properly protected and could be used to infer some generalized information about roughly where your phone has been. This data is only accessible by somebody with direct access to your phone, or you phones backup files.
Why do people like that the data on their phones is encrypted and can be remotely wiped? Because it all too likely that something on your phone should not fall into somebody else's hand.
Enabling encryption of the phone by default is just taking reasonable precautions. Creating this data log (by which I mean not deleting any but the most recent entries) is not taking what would be a very reasonable precaution.
I always wondered why the option to encrypt the iPhone backup was there. What data would be on my iPhone but not on my computer (e-mails, browsing history, all sorts of passwords are generally both on my iPhone and my computer). Now I know of one reason, that Apple (or a third-party app) might without my knowledge create databases relating to my phone usage that are more critical than the rest of the data on my computer.
The point is that I would have assumed that any app or part of the OS creating a database would be open and transparent about it.
hobi316
Jun 9, 02:15 PM
I just called a local store here in SC and this was pretty much all confirmed. His computer system was down, so he didn't have the info in front of him, but he said it would run pretty much like the EVO did, with a $50 downpayment for the pre-orders. Unfortunately he wasn't yet sure if all stores would be doing pre-orders or just the "in-stock" stores. I'll call back Monday to see if that store can get me a phone on the 24th, since it's close to my work. We'll see, I guess.
jackc
Aug 8, 05:16 AM
I hope there's been a significant overhaul in Spotlight, beyond what Steve hinted at already. There was no video demo on the website, so hopefully that's the case. It was a really underdeveloped feature in Tiger.
tobio
Aug 7, 06:46 PM
The time machine features are just like salvage files on our old netware servers (before we "upgraded" to win2k3 with the quite embarressingly bad volume shadow copies). Obviously time machine is prettier, but the way it worked on netware was that all files whenever they are overwritten or deleted sit inbetween space. You can go into filer or use the right click menu to go back to previous versions of files unless you have purged them. This feature would turn off when you get down to 10% free space remaining.
If time machine lets you preview the contents of documents before you restore them, instead of going restore... is it that one? nope, try this one? nope... ah here we go found it. then hot damm thats a slick new feature
If time machine lets you preview the contents of documents before you restore them, instead of going restore... is it that one? nope, try this one? nope... ah here we go found it. then hot damm thats a slick new feature
satty
Jul 20, 08:48 AM
At some point your going to have deminished returns. Sure multimedia apps can take advantage of a few more cores, but I dont see Mail running faster on 4 cores, nevermind 2! The nice thing about intel is that they seem to realise that, and have invested in improved IO as well, look at Pci express and SATA, you can have the fastest processor in the world, but if your running it with 512megs of memory your going to slow down fast!
selena gomez who says video
selena gomez who says video
Selena Gomez Releases Who Says
selena gomez who says video.
selena gomez who says video
notabadname
Mar 22, 03:42 PM
To store data temporally. That is what RAM does.
I believe the question was about what App on the iPad 2 is hindered by the amount of RAM. What are you trying to do, with what App, that needs 1GB? If the RAM isn't enhancing the experience, than what is the point other than to increase cost? You could put 4GB in an iPad too, but you will likely notn use it (with the current 1/3 million Apps). So what is the magic number that works seamlessly for 99% of what people use the device for?
I believe the question was about what App on the iPad 2 is hindered by the amount of RAM. What are you trying to do, with what App, that needs 1GB? If the RAM isn't enhancing the experience, than what is the point other than to increase cost? You could put 4GB in an iPad too, but you will likely notn use it (with the current 1/3 million Apps). So what is the magic number that works seamlessly for 99% of what people use the device for?
8CoreWhore
Apr 25, 04:09 PM
GOOD!!
If Apple is not doing it, then they'll have to explain what is going on.
How rude and arrogant for them to not come clean and just address the questions head-on.
They owe us an explanation. We have a right to know what the device do and do not do.
If Apple is not doing it, then they'll have to explain what is going on.
How rude and arrogant for them to not come clean and just address the questions head-on.
They owe us an explanation. We have a right to know what the device do and do not do.
snouter
Apr 6, 11:07 AM
My 17" has backlit keys and I like them. Is that so wrong?
epitaphic
Aug 18, 11:46 PM
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
johnj84
Mar 26, 02:24 AM
Been on Lion for the past month and I can't see myself going back to Snow Leopard.
mmmcheese
Jul 14, 03:37 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.
dornoforpyros
Aug 27, 11:48 AM
I'm thinking 17" MBP or MacBook depending on if MBP has the MB removable easy access HD feature.
Reading through this thread you've mentioned that the MBP should have a removable HD on pretty much every page. We get it, you really want a user replaceable HD in a MBP. Mentioning it 100 times won't make it happen, however clicking your shoes together and saying 'there's no place like home' just might :rolleyes:
Reading through this thread you've mentioned that the MBP should have a removable HD on pretty much every page. We get it, you really want a user replaceable HD in a MBP. Mentioning it 100 times won't make it happen, however clicking your shoes together and saying 'there's no place like home' just might :rolleyes:
Surreal
Aug 27, 02:11 PM
jeez, i thought the thread might cool off in a day or so, but there is no sign of that happening, is there?
well, i have wondered for some time, how many people have had problems with the 17" mavbook pros?
i have one...it's fine. i heard a few small scale problems about it, but nothing on the scale of the 15"
well, i have wondered for some time, how many people have had problems with the 17" mavbook pros?
i have one...it's fine. i heard a few small scale problems about it, but nothing on the scale of the 15"
LagunaSol
Apr 20, 01:48 AM
But it's ok for Apple to sue and Australian grocery store because they think the letter W looks like their logo? LMAO. Please.
Why do you keep countering an argument that no one is actually making?
Straw man fail.
Why do you keep countering an argument that no one is actually making?
Straw man fail.
Glen Quagmire
Aug 23, 03:32 PM
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.
In two years' time, Intel will release Nehalem its next micro-architecture - to replace Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest. It is supposed to ditch the FSB in favour of Intel's own interconnect, named CSI. Two years after Nehalem will come another micro-architecture.
In some respects, I'm quite happy to have ordered a Woodcrest Mac Pro, especially if the slow FSB does slow things down when Woodcrest's successor is released. If the Mac Pro can last me three or four years, I'll be in time for the post-Nehalem generation, which should be fairly spectacular.
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.
In two years' time, Intel will release Nehalem its next micro-architecture - to replace Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest. It is supposed to ditch the FSB in favour of Intel's own interconnect, named CSI. Two years after Nehalem will come another micro-architecture.
In some respects, I'm quite happy to have ordered a Woodcrest Mac Pro, especially if the slow FSB does slow things down when Woodcrest's successor is released. If the Mac Pro can last me three or four years, I'll be in time for the post-Nehalem generation, which should be fairly spectacular.
No comments:
Post a Comment