New Windows Ad Incenses Apple Fans

Don't forget the HP comes with a dedicated GPU ;) The 'sexy' macbook uses onboard gfx...
 
There is a simple fact that most Mac fans seem to gleefully ignore. That in this economy, its simply too expensive to be a apple fanboy for 95% of us. The Apple Tax must be repealed if they are to survive this. MS is simply picking on Apple's weak spot, and the fanboys cant take take it.
 
I don't understand the ad. He wanted "portability, battery life, and power." He got one of those three (power). A 13.3" MacBook would have given him all three. Fail.
 
LOL. I saw this last night during the final four a couple of times. It's about time Microsoft grew a pair and struck back at the Mac-fans "I'm a Mac" commercials.
 
TheCAD said:
Their MP3 player(the touch) is just plain better than anything else available.
The design and software.

When it comes to computers...they are all drawing from basically the same hardware.

and apples is way more expensive. You are paying like $500+ just for an OS in reality.
Click to expand...

I vouch for the Touch part. Simply a sublime piece of hardware. :D

This one was good, the first one was substantially better though.
 
Trepidati0n said:
Actually....apple is in a LOT of trouble. While people might be able to justify the 100% price increase in their MP3 player for a slightly better SW package (aka iTunes) ....
Click to expand...

Sleeker design is subjective. I personally find the Sandisk Fuze to be a lot sleeker and better looking than an iPod.

iTunes is free. iTunes is also crapware. I'd rather just drag and drop my files without needing any drivers or bloated software.

Nothing justifies the 100-200% (and in some cases, 400%) price premium for an iPod.
 
Spidey329 said:
That was discussed up above. Please see there. :D
Click to expand...

It was? All I saw was people talking about how many more megahertz and gigahertz the HP had. Power was only 1/3 of the consideration. Portability and battery life are far more important factors in choosing a laptop, and the HP gets a solid F in both categories. ;)
 
Serpico said:
Not entirely. Battery life is a major issue with Vista. I suspected it for a few months and Anandtech finally confirmed it in several reviews.

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=3435&p=13

http://www.anandtech.com/mobile/showdoc.aspx?i=3540&p=10

Same thing with speed. I have Vista and OS X dual booting on a few machines and OS X smokes it on every single one of them. So longer battery life and faster performance on the same hardware, that's value. Speed doesn't seem much better on Windows 7 on that level of hardware, although that seems different on slower hardware. I tried it on a netbook and it seemed to give much better performance than Vista. No clue on Windows 7 battery life, I'm crossing fingers that it is a big improvement over Vista, it has to be.

Either way, I see nothing for Mac users to be "incensed" about. I mean, no shit that Mac notebooks are more expensive than most other brands (certain XPS models, Alienwares, and the Adamo being the notable exceptions). That said, you're paying for the things I mentioned above, as well as better keyboards (Lenovos are also great there) and better trackpads (IMO still the best).

If budget is an absolute concern, buy something else, no big deal. If you want to spend a few extra bucks and get something better for it, well, even if I was only using Windows I'd still be using a Macbook, let's put it that way. :)
Click to expand...
You do realize that they set Vista to BALANCED for the power saving tests, right? Honestly, Anandtech puts so much fail into their articles sometimes it's amazing. Even if they wrote a proper article comparing the two OS, it's still flawed. Vista is an OS written for billions of combinations of hardware. Macbooks have what, a couple of different models every cycle? It's a lot easier to get the best results when you don't have to deal with that kind of variability. I'd imagine if you tweaked the hell out of the Vista OS, you could get similar results.

Anyway, I haven't used a laptop in almost two years, but last time I did Macs were still overpriced crap. The Dell 9300 I had ran circles around any Mac I encountered, including performance, battery life, and looks. I have to buy a notebook for medical school, so I guess I'll find out this summer if that's changed. Still, there's still WAAAAYYYY too many idiots out there that believe Macs are the best thing, and I'm glad MS is doing something about it.
 
InorganicMatter said:
It was? All I saw was people talking about how many more megahertz and gigahertz the HP had. Power was only 1/3 of the consideration. Portability and battery life are far more important factors in choosing a laptop, and the HP gets a solid F in both categories. ;)
Click to expand...

And a t400 gets A in both. ;)
 
computerpro3 said:
And a t400 gets A in both. ;)
Click to expand...

Very true. I'm by no means saying the MacBook would have always been a better choice. Just that choosing a cheap, bulky, overpowered, plasticky, laptop that gets terrible battery life and has an awful display, in order to demonstrate the PC's "strengths," probably wasn't the best idea. The Mac community has a perfectly valid complaint there. ;)

Just like their operating systems, MS stopped one step short of perfect and shot themselves in the foot. (Probably at the request of HP, which is exactly what happened with Vista too. :p) They could have avoided this altogether by choosing a solid Lenovo ThinkPad or Dell Latitude.
 
Lets spread the specs out for people.

HP HDX 16
2.4GHz Intel Core2 Duo Processor P8600, 3MB L2 cache, and 1066MHz front side bus
16:9 16" high-definition Ultra BrightView Infinity display (1366 x 768)
4096MB DDR2 SDRAM (2 DIMM)
500GB (5400 rpm) hard drive
NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT with up to 2302MB Total Available Graphics Memory with 512MB dedicated

1099.99
http://www.shopping.hp.com/product/...16t_series/rts/4/computer_store/NB129UA%23ABA

Apple Macbook
Processor 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Memory 2GB DDR3
Graphic NVIDIA GeForce 9400M (with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory)
Display 13.3" WXGA 16:10 1280 x 800
Hard Drive 160GB

1299.00

Lets tally it up. He COULD of gotten a MB, for 200$ more, but what would he gain? A swank aluminum case, and more RAM bandwidth. Anyone that knows anything about PC's knows that standard apps and games care very little about the extra bandwidth. It only amounts to a few % of REAL WORLD performance. The LACK of ram would HURT his performance GREATLY, since his video card will be taking up 256MB of the 2gb. Also, he still needs to fork over another $200 to run Windows Vista if he wants to use almost ANY programs or games. Putting him well over his $1500 budget (after tax).

What he would be LACKING is everything else. Like POWER, a bigger screen, RAM, and the ability to play 3D games at a decent FPS. He also wont need to fork over an extra 200$ for the OS.

I dont know how AppleInsider can call this a victory. They seem to dance all over the fact that the apple has more RAM bandwidth, and compleatly ignore that the MINOR gains in RAM bandwidth will be wiped out by the fact that its only got 1.792gb after the video card takes its 256mb chunk. Sorry, but thats not enough ram now a days. Apple is way behind the times.

Asking for $200 MORE for a LESSER notebook is just not wise in this economy.
 
The touch, with it's incredibly limited ability to play back only what, 4 primary audio formats, is most definitely not the best digital audio player out there. And with the lockdowns on the OS and options for serious customization thrown out the window, even if you Jailbreak it, where that concept of "best" comes from is simply beyond me.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going back to playing around with my Nokia N800 while I listen to some FLAC files on the 8GB SD card I have in it while I'm editing some images with GiMP in Debian while copying some Xvid movies to the second 8GB SD card while I'm downloading some emails off my desktop PC using Bluetooth to the N800... all at the same time... or I could just listen to the FM radio... or stream some tunes, of course.

Sorry, you can play music on a touch and... what else? One more thing at a time? Gotcha... best... hehe that's cute.
 
^Someone didn't read the thread. Let's try again:

Power was only 1/3 of the consideration. Portability and battery life are far more important factors in choosing a laptop, and the HP gets a solid F in both categories
 
Power may be 1/3 of his considerations, but apparently, its the most important since he felt the little netbook wasn't what he wanted.
 
Gibbage said:
Lets spread the specs out for people.

HP HDX 16
2.4GHz Intel Core2 Duo Processor P8600, 3MB L2 cache, and 1066MHz front side bus
16:9 16" high-definition Ultra BrightView Infinity display (1366 x 768)
4096MB DDR2 SDRAM (2 DIMM)
500GB (5400 rpm) hard drive
NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT with up to 2302MB Total Available Graphics Memory with 512MB dedicated

1099.99
http://www.shopping.hp.com/product/...16t_series/rts/4/computer_store/NB129UA%23ABA

Apple Macbook
Processor 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Memory 2GB DDR3
Graphic NVIDIA GeForce 9400M (with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory)
Display 13.3" WXGA 16:10 1280 x 800
Hard Drive 160GB

1299.00

Lets tally it up. He COULD of gotten a MB, for 200$ more, but what would he gain? A swank aluminum case, and more RAM bandwidth. Anyone that knows anything about PC's knows that standard apps and games care very little about the extra bandwidth. It only amounts to a few % of REAL WORLD performance. The LACK of ram would HURT his performance GREATLY, since his video card will be taking up 256MB of the 2gb. Also, he still needs to fork over another $200 to run Windows Vista if he wants to use almost ANY programs or games. Putting him well over his $1500 budget (after tax).

What he would be LACKING is everything else. Like POWER, a bigger screen, RAM, and the ability to play 3D games at a decent FPS. He also wont need to fork over an extra 200$ for the OS.

I dont know how AppleInsider can call this a victory. They seem to dance all over the fact that the apple has more RAM bandwidth, and compleatly ignore that the MINOR gains in RAM bandwidth will be wiped out by the fact that its only got 1.792gb after the video card takes its 256mb chunk. Sorry, but thats not enough ram now a days. Apple is way behind the times.

Asking for $200 MORE for a LESSER notebook is just not wise in this economy.
Click to expand...

+1.

Very true.
 
Gibbage said:
If anyone cares.

Scenes were shot in Costa Mesa. Scene outside was South Coast Plaza. Scene inside was Fry's off the 405 in Fountain Valley, about 2-3 miles for South Coast Plaza.

I only know this because it was my old kicking grounds before I moved to Seattle.
Click to expand...

LOL, the sad thing is that area is a breeding ground for Mac lovers. Snobby middle or upper class kids galore!
 
The ad certainly touched IM's nerve. :D

The HP has superior specs overall and is a better bargain on top of it, unless you're a blind, rabid fanboy. If you want the larger capacity battery, and/or other configurations (including BluRay), you can CTO it on HP's site for not much more. For example, this config is only $1,323.99 after instant discount:

• Genuine Windows Vista Home Premium with Service Pack 1 (64-bit)
• Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo Processor P7450 (2.13GHz) <-- faster CPU
• FREE Upgrade to 4GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm) from 2GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm) <-- 2x more memory
• FREE Upgrade to 320GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive with HP ProtectSmart Hard Drive Protection <-- 2x more HD space
• 512MB NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT <-- much, much faster video
• 16.0" diagonal High Definition HP Ultra BrightView Infinity Display (1920x1080p) <-- high resolution HD display
• FREE Upgrade to Blu-Ray ROM with SuperMulti DVD+/-R/RW Double Layer <-- BD isn't even an option on Macs
• Webcam + Fingerprint Reader with HP Imprint Finish (Fluid)
• Intel Next-Gen Wireless-N Mini-card
• HP Color Matching Keyboard
• 12 Cell Lithium Ion Battery <-- 4+ hour battery *under Vista*

:p
 
I think it's fun to watch Apple and Microsoft go toe-to-toe. As for the debate of whether a Mac > PC or PC > Mac is a little off base.
I'd bet that many people will get along just fine with a Windows PC for a few reasons. It's the most common reatil OS, support is readily available, & program compatability. Others will prefer Mac for it's interface and lack of maintenance required.
I use Windows, OS X, and Linux on multiple PC's.
Ubuntu - Runs on my netbook, performs well, no need for anti-virus or protection, it's fun to play with the cube.
OS X - I prefer using OS X for my digital photography
Windows - My HTPC operating system. Nothing else works as well for me and setup is quick and simple.

The Mac I use at work first came to my desk with 512MB of ram. I ran OS X 10.5.6 on it for almost a month without realizing it only had 512MB of ram. I upgraded it to 1GB simply because I'm not use to using a machine with less than 1GB. The machine ran well and smooth. I'd have multiple applications open and never felt the hold-up that I would definitely get with Windows running with that much Ram.
People who buys Macs tend to keep them longer than PC users I know, and typically a Mac user doesn't game. I know one person who plays World of Warcraft and that's about it.
This isn't to say that PC users can't keep a computer for a long time, but they seem to deal with more frustration.
In the end, I try to keep up with as much as I can. I see +/-'s in each but enjoy using them all.
Will I purchase an Apple anytime soon? Probably not, my current rig has some life in it. Who knows what I'll purchase later down the road.
 
Both this latest AD and the Lauren AD are airing on TV.

I saw both during the NCAA BB final four.

The first was better because of the very specific needs.
The second was a little vauge, but the point is still valid......find what you want for under X dollars and it's yours............
I think HP has thrown some money into this campaign though. If you look closely, HP gets a ton of camera time, and in both ADs the people end up buying an HP product.

MS goes a long was to point out the variety of selection available in a windows based laptop.........versus generally one or two models of Macs.

I like these ADs...........they bitch slap that emo "I'm a Mac" guy.
 
pxc said:
The ad certainly touched IM's nerve. :D
• Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo Processor P7450 (2.13GHz) <-- faster CPU
Click to expand...
Only slightly, not enough to matter.
• FREE Upgrade to 4GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm) from 2GB DDR2 System Memory (2 Dimm) <-- 2x more memory
Click to expand...
Not an Apples-to-Apples comparison. OS X and Vista are very different Operating Systems
• FREE Upgrade to 320GB 5400RPM SATA Hard Drive with HP ProtectSmart Hard Drive Protection <-- 2x more HD space
Click to expand...
More HDD space is nice, I'll give you this point.
• 512MB NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT <-- much, much faster video
Click to expand...
Gaming is not priority for people who want a Mac, so stick with a PC if this is what you want.
• 16.0" diagonal High Definition HP Ultra BrightView Infinity Display (1920x1080p) <-- high resolution HD display
Click to expand...
Depends on what you want in a portable device.
• FREE Upgrade to Blu-Ray ROM with SuperMulti DVD+/-R/RW Double Layer <-- BD isn't even an option on Macs
Click to expand...
I'm not big on carrying Blu-Ray movies around with me, or watching HD on a portable device. Most movies come with a digital copy, works for me if I need it to go,
• 12 Cell Lithium Ion Battery <-- 4+ hour battery *under Vista*:p
Click to expand...
Not sure how accurate your claim is on this one, but I don't like carrying around 12 Cell batteries. I've done it before, but then again I prefer my little netbook for a portable device. I know it's needed for some people so it's definitely a strong point.
 
magoo said:
Both this latest AD and the Lauren AD are airing on TV.

I saw both during the NCAA BB final four.

The first was better because of the very specific needs.
The second was a little vauge, but the point is still valid......find what you want for under X dollars and it's yours............
I think HP has thrown some money into this campaign though. If you look closely, HP gets a ton of camera time, and in both ADs the people end up buying an HP product.

MS goes a long was to point out the variety of selection available in a windows based laptop.........versus generally one or two models of Macs.

I like these ADs...........they bitch slap that emo "I'm a Mac" guy.
Click to expand...
I agree, the Lauren ad was less specific. Typically isn't that how people envision women shopping for a PC? I know this isn't always true, but I can tell you that my wife would choose one PC over another based on color alone. She loves orange lol.
 
For all of those people that are saying well i dont need a mac for gaming or watching blu ray movies. You are out of your mind. I travel a lot for business. It's really nice to have something powerful and portable that can play blu-ray or game while im on the road, because Im not able to go back home and do it over the course of a week.

PC's are better. The day of Mac superiority is gone.

As far as IPOD touches go. That is the first, the only apple product I have bought and it is simply a piece of engineering genius. I did not want to buy an ipod until the touch came out. It's a device that simply "works" even if it is locked into itunes etc. You can play movies, surf the internet, download applications, etc etc

Most people are in the hardocp.com forums because of the "PC" we want to tweak, discover, add, etc control our devices.
 
michaelkahl said:
Only slightly, not enough to matter.

Not an Apples-to-Apples comparison. OS X and Vista are very different Operating Systems
More HDD space is nice, I'll give you this point.

Gaming is not priority for people who want a Mac, so stick with a PC if this is what you want.
Depends on what you want in a portable device.
I'm not big on carrying Blu-Ray movies around with me, or watching HD on a portable device. Most movies come with a digital copy, works for me if I need it to go,
Not sure how accurate your claim is on this one, but I don't like carrying around 12 Cell batteries. I've done it before, but then again I prefer my little netbook for a portable device. I know it's needed for some people so it's definitely a strong point.
Click to expand...
I really agreed with you on your post before this one, but this one not so much. While I do agree with you that most people that are deciding between a Mac and PC in the first place most likely don't even need the extra power or features of the PC, but for $100 less and a much better overall computer, you would be stupid to pay more for the lesser Mac. Unfortunately people are stupid, well mostly uninformed, and they will pay more for less because it looks pretty.
 
TeamStrykerCore said:
For all of those people that are saying well i dont need a mac for gaming or watching blu ray movies. You are out of your mind. I travel a lot for business. It's really nice to have something powerful and portable that can play blu-ray or game while im on the road, because Im not able to go back home and do it over the course of a week.
Click to expand...

I don't need a Mac for gaming or watching blu-ray movies. Your needs dictate that, and it's fine. My needs don't and digital copies work well for me. Gaming, I rarely play any, and if I do it's WoW which doesn't require a lot of horsepower. I'm not out of my mind for saying I don't need it, and you aren't for saying you need it. It's personal preference.
I'm happy with a netbook, thats me. No blu-ray, no gaming beyond WoW and that's a stretch. If I traveled more I may desire a larger screen but that's questionable for MY USE and PREFERENCE.
If I was connecting my my laptop up to an HDTV for HD playback then I might appreciate a blu-ray drive. Your needs and my needs are very different, and that's OK.
 
Gibbage said:
Lets spread the specs out for people.

HP HDX 16
2.4GHz Intel Core2 Duo Processor P8600, 3MB L2 cache, and 1066MHz front side bus
16:9 16" high-definition Ultra BrightView Infinity display (1366 x 768)
4096MB DDR2 SDRAM (2 DIMM)
500GB (5400 rpm) hard drive
NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT with up to 2302MB Total Available Graphics Memory with 512MB dedicated

1099.99
http://www.shopping.hp.com/product/...16t_series/rts/4/computer_store/NB129UA%23ABA

Apple Macbook
Processor 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
Memory 2GB DDR3
Graphic NVIDIA GeForce 9400M (with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory)
Display 13.3" WXGA 16:10 1280 x 800
Hard Drive 160GB

1299.00

Lets tally it up. He COULD of gotten a MB, for 200$ more, but what would he gain? A swank aluminum case, and more RAM bandwidth. Anyone that knows anything about PC's knows that standard apps and games care very little about the extra bandwidth. It only amounts to a few % of REAL WORLD performance. The LACK of ram would HURT his performance GREATLY, since his video card will be taking up 256MB of the 2gb. Also, he still needs to fork over another $200 to run Windows Vista if he wants to use almost ANY programs or games. Putting him well over his $1500 budget (after tax).

What he would be LACKING is everything else. Like POWER, a bigger screen, RAM, and the ability to play 3D games at a decent FPS. He also wont need to fork over an extra 200$ for the OS.

I dont know how AppleInsider can call this a victory. They seem to dance all over the fact that the apple has more RAM bandwidth, and compleatly ignore that the MINOR gains in RAM bandwidth will be wiped out by the fact that its only got 1.792gb after the video card takes its 256mb chunk. Sorry, but thats not enough ram now a days. Apple is way behind the times.

Asking for $200 MORE for a LESSER notebook is just not wise in this economy.
Click to expand...



Thx for the research!
 
silent hero said:
I really agreed with you on your post before this one, but this one not so much. While I do agree with you that most people that are deciding between a Mac and PC in the first place most likely don't even need the extra power or features of the PC, but for $100 less and a much better overall computer, you would be stupid to pay more for the lesser Mac. Unfortunately people are stupid, well mostly uninformed, and they will pay more for less because it looks pretty.
Click to expand...
Some of those people will tell you they want a Mac because they don't want the headache of dealing with viruses and other malicious software that Windows users deal with.
I do believe infections are easy to avoid, but honestly I see infected PC's everyday working IT and not everyone knows how or takes proper precautions to protect themselves.
Our Mac users have the least problems, and they aren't the most tech savy. As Apple gains more ground this threat will increase, but currently it isn't as strong.
 
silent hero said:
I really agreed with you on your post before this one, but this one not so much. While I do agree with you that most people that are deciding between a Mac and PC in the first place most likely don't even need the extra power or features of the PC, but for $100 less and a much better overall computer, you would be stupid to pay more for the lesser Mac. Unfortunately people are stupid, well mostly uninformed, and they will pay more for less because it looks pretty.
Click to expand...

BTW I wanted to add, I do agree that it's better hardware overall. I'm not trying to argue and say Windows > Mac or Mac > Windows.
Overall, I am trying to convey the message that different users have different needs. For the majority of users Windows is the answer because of it's popularity and support for hardware. Support will always be easily accessible compared to Linux or OS X, and there is little headache wondering whether this piece of software was ported over to OS X or Linux.
 
I rarely see a Windows user with infection problems who are installing system patches(which can be done automatically).
 
I think the only ammo Mac users have now is the fact that they don't need anti virus. Well, that applies to one of my schoolmates at least.
 
Apple charges a lot for their computers I'll give em that. But the software that they give out is very high quality and makes the computer worth buying.

I like the way that this author writes about Apple:
http://ffwtech.com/2009/04/the-new-windows-campaign-is-heartless/
http://ffwtech.com/2009/03/why-apple-is-suffering-and-how-to-fix-it/

It makes sense that Apple charges a lot for their products, but this new ad is kind of a cheapshot against apple. Why waste advertisement time talking down about the competition instead of boosting up your products like how Windows computers come in so many varieties.... I dunno I just lost respect for Microsoft.
 
Everyday I see it. Working for a College, we don't get control over all computers on Campus. Faculty may bring their personal laptop into the classroom for presentations, students come to campus and get on our network everyday with infected machines. If it's causing an issue and causing abnormal or heavy traffic we'll ban their MAC. They'll come to us and we'll let them know whats going on and grant them access when the threat is removed.
Lets assume then that fully patched Windows machines aren't vulnerable. Most typical users are terrible about keep their systems updated. (Note: typical users go beyond readers of this forum)
If a user is good about keeping Windows updated, then they are probably keeping Anti-virus and any other scanning software updated as well.
 
michaelkahl said:
Only slightly, not enough to matter.<blah, blah, blah>
Click to expand...
Let's play the Mac fanboy game, with a twist: how much would that "$1300" MB cost to upgrade to the specs of the HP? It's only fair, right? :D

memory upgrade to 4GB +$100
320GB hard drive upgrade +$150
LCD upgrade: not available on MB
optical drive upgrade: not available on MB
cpu upgrade: not available on MB
video upgrade: not available on MB
Looks like it's not a match, even at an extra $200+

So lets start with a closer MBP:
$2000 base 15" MBP w/ 9600M GT 256MB and 2.4GHz CPU (a plus)
memory upgrade to 4GB +$100
HD upgrade to 320GB +$75
1440 x 900 LCD, no 1920 option
no BD option
------
$2175, and still not really a match. The HP above would cost an extra $150 to upgrade to the 2.53GHz P8300, making the difference ~$700.

Next up is the MBP 17"
$2800 base 17" MBP w/9600M GT 256MB and 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo
Now we're getting somewhere. :D This laptop has a 1920x1200 LCD, 4GB memory, 320GB hard drive and 9600M GT 512MB. Sounds great, except that it's almost $1200 more than the similar spec HP I listed above when upgraded to the 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo.
 
michaelkahl said:
Some of those people will tell you they want a Mac because they don't want the headache of dealing with viruses and other malicious software that Windows users deal with.
I do believe infections are easy to avoid, but honestly I see infected PC's everyday working IT and not everyone knows how or takes proper precautions to protect themselves.
Our Mac users have the least problems, and they aren't the most tech savy. As Apple gains more ground this threat will increase, but currently it isn't as strong.
Click to expand...

Funny. My company mainly uses macs and I have to go fix their broken shit everyday. Our few PC users rarely have any issues other then hardware upgrades.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top