Bubba Satori
Mar 25, 12:29 PM
Darn greedy company.
Don't talk about iApple that way.
Don't talk about iApple that way.
redeye be
Jun 13, 03:59 AM
My back is still killing me but at least i can sit for more than 30 minutes right now, expect the widget to change this week.
welcome back to folding dubbz!
As for the tracking of other folders and multiple instances.
It is indeed, as Flying Llama pointed out, an apple thing with the prefs. You should however be able to work around this by duplicating the widget in your library and giving it a different name. This will let you run different widgets in stead of different instances. No idea on the performance hit though, not at home/mac right now.
A 'target' option is in the make. It will let you track 3 folders or teams of your choice in one widget. Now how cool is that ;).
welcome back to folding dubbz!
As for the tracking of other folders and multiple instances.
It is indeed, as Flying Llama pointed out, an apple thing with the prefs. You should however be able to work around this by duplicating the widget in your library and giving it a different name. This will let you run different widgets in stead of different instances. No idea on the performance hit though, not at home/mac right now.
A 'target' option is in the make. It will let you track 3 folders or teams of your choice in one widget. Now how cool is that ;).
torbjoern
Apr 26, 01:20 AM
1680x1050 pixels in the 13" would be nice. Retina is preferable, but a bit too much to hope for... at least within the next 1.5 - 2 years
drumpat01
Mar 11, 07:47 AM
Hey all you Fort Worth people, thanks for coming out so early, all of us employees are very happy to see you guys care so much.
more...
MacNut
Apr 23, 05:30 PM
Trump is a great salesman. If he wanted to run for president he should be the best at selling himself. I bet he would even turn the campaign into an episode of The Apprentice. The last person to not get fired wins the White House.
Ommid
Apr 25, 06:01 AM
Now that is something to lol at :p
I bet it will come in the next 2 years ;)
I bet it will come in the next 2 years ;)
more...
SandynJosh
Apr 5, 06:51 PM
I wonder who the first manufacturer was to create a dock connector? I assume IBM? They should sue Apple and give them a piece of their own medicine. You know if the shoe was on the other foot. . .
Dock connectors for some equipment date back to WWII for sure, maybe earlier.
Dock connectors for some equipment date back to WWII for sure, maybe earlier.
bowens
Apr 12, 07:15 AM
I've found a couple places difficult so far, too. I just beat 2-1 last night so I'm not very far along. I would have played more but I wanted to get my wife playing it. She didn't want to. She said, "It doesn't interest me." Then I finally talked her into playing it and she sat in there for over half an hour going "Cool!"
more...
Stewie
Oct 27, 01:22 AM
Ummm, yes you can.
Thanks for playing, but no you can't.
Thanks for playing, but no you can't.
likemyorbs
May 2, 11:22 PM
Let's put it this way, if the conservative leader Stephen Harper, who has won a majority government tonight, was the prime minister back in Canada too would have entered the pointless mess that is the Iraq war. We had a liberal party in power then, and they rightly decided otherwise.
A conservative government is also more friendly to corporations (cutting corporate taxes), less concerned with the environment (supporting oil sands in Alberta), in favour of spending more on the military (buying new jets in the coming years) and more willing to spend huge amounts on security and the like (~$1 billion spent for security during the Toronto G20 summit).
Having said that though thankfully in Canada the conservative party is nothing like the hawkish corporate shills that you guys have in the US, at least not in that extreme.
Hm, that pretty much sounds the same as the difference between conservatives and liberals in the US for the most part. Hope they don't try to take away your universal health care!
A conservative government is also more friendly to corporations (cutting corporate taxes), less concerned with the environment (supporting oil sands in Alberta), in favour of spending more on the military (buying new jets in the coming years) and more willing to spend huge amounts on security and the like (~$1 billion spent for security during the Toronto G20 summit).
Having said that though thankfully in Canada the conservative party is nothing like the hawkish corporate shills that you guys have in the US, at least not in that extreme.
Hm, that pretty much sounds the same as the difference between conservatives and liberals in the US for the most part. Hope they don't try to take away your universal health care!
more...
Ja Di ksw
Nov 14, 01:55 PM
BTW - I cannot post in the new thread you created so.. I guess my contribution will end here :)
I'm sorry, my goal wasn't to keep people out of the topic, but to make it easier to talk about the two separate topics. Why can't you post over there?
I'm sorry, my goal wasn't to keep people out of the topic, but to make it easier to talk about the two separate topics. Why can't you post over there?
sarge
Mar 25, 11:15 AM
Yes well photos were just a fraction of the business they did w/drug stores, considering they bought a big pharma concern. From the NYTimes:
By BARNABY J. FEDER
Published: January 25, 1988
more...
Anime Wolf With Wings.
lack anime wolf with wings.
more...
Dark Wolf - lack, dark, wings
White Anime Wolf With Wings.
more...
anime wolf girl with wings.
anime wolf head
anime wolf girl with wings.
By BARNABY J. FEDER
Published: January 25, 1988
more...
Doylem
Mar 18, 05:25 AM
Get lost in the world of gear. Spend your time reading about the specs of forthcoming cameras and lenses, instead of actually taking pics. Denigrate the gear you have; fantasise about a fancier camera. That would make you a better photographer, surely? ;)
iApples
Apr 4, 11:46 AM
Why don't we just give our full paycheck to the government each week. With all these stupid taxes, we're pretty much already doing this.
more...
Andronicus
Aug 19, 11:13 AM
because it's turned on by default. it should be off by default (IMO) and then turned on as an option. many people aren't aware that Facebook's new "features" are almost always on when rolled out.
Can anyone confirm this? It's so annoying when new features are turned on by default. I guess I just need to delete my account. I have a fb, but never check it, but I keep it around just because I get an email if somebody sends me a message on there and then I contact them back. Facebook is just awful, worst mistake signing up for it. If you don't have one DON'T GET ONE!!
Can anyone confirm this? It's so annoying when new features are turned on by default. I guess I just need to delete my account. I have a fb, but never check it, but I keep it around just because I get an email if somebody sends me a message on there and then I contact them back. Facebook is just awful, worst mistake signing up for it. If you don't have one DON'T GET ONE!!
Jonasgold
Apr 21, 02:27 PM
1. Apple is an American company. Their products get released in the US first. The US market is and should remain their primary concern. If the US is going to LTE, that's where Apple needs to go.
No offence, but I think Apple goes where most of their customers are, and if most of them are non-Americans, than that is where their priority lies.
No offence, but I think Apple goes where most of their customers are, and if most of them are non-Americans, than that is where their priority lies.
more...
bunger
Apr 5, 05:14 PM
I thought about the Bose/app combo, but some of the stations I like to listen to don't stream online... which means the app route won't work. <sigh>
TheKrillr
Sep 1, 01:44 AM
Who wants to take bets on when the update will be released on torrent sites and FTP servers just like the dev beta? :D
It won't need to be, those who have 10.5 installed already simply need to run the builtin update software... just like every other system update for every other OS X version.
It won't need to be, those who have 10.5 installed already simply need to run the builtin update software... just like every other system update for every other OS X version.
syrianos
Sep 19, 05:17 PM
CONFIRMED
if u use raid, u'll need to have a single disk with osx to boot from to be able to install the EFI firmware update!!
the progression bar just appeared and i get the ok symbol after reboot, next is the smc update and then switching back to my fast raid :D
shame though u need to go through all this hastle, really...
if u use raid, u'll need to have a single disk with osx to boot from to be able to install the EFI firmware update!!
the progression bar just appeared and i get the ok symbol after reboot, next is the smc update and then switching back to my fast raid :D
shame though u need to go through all this hastle, really...
Aldaris
Apr 30, 12:45 PM
So, how long does GameStop take to send the beta code? I just preordered... wish I could start the download while I'm waiting for the code...
Supposedly, according to Gamestop, within 1 business day, although some other posts I have come across seem less optimistic (maybe they're just trolls...)
Either way, I put in a pre-order, if I don't get my beta key before too long I might cancel, I might not... I'm more of a digital download fella anyway...
Supposedly, according to Gamestop, within 1 business day, although some other posts I have come across seem less optimistic (maybe they're just trolls...)
Either way, I put in a pre-order, if I don't get my beta key before too long I might cancel, I might not... I'm more of a digital download fella anyway...
MikeTheC
Nov 3, 01:19 AM
I'd like to tackle a few points in the discussion here.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
peacenfunk
Apr 5, 10:55 AM
Even though this is most likely faked no one can be 100% sure, do you think they would drop the 8gb and go with 32gb, 64gb and 128gb as the models?
DoFoT9
Mar 1, 01:58 PM
Just looking at the ''Server Admin' screenshots posted, i noticed that in the list of Services, both AFP and NFS are missing. Is File Sharing managed somewhere else in Lion?
youre right! uh oh. will have to investigate when i get to work.
youre right! uh oh. will have to investigate when i get to work.
surf2snow1
Mar 24, 04:40 PM
Just picked one up in Norwalk CT - they had plenty in stock and the sales person didn't realize the markdown until I mentioned it. Great deal. They tried to sell me a ton of services, but you don't have to... $317 out the door.:)
I think I was asked 3 times if I wanted MiFi, oh well, $329 OTD here in AZ.
I think I was asked 3 times if I wanted MiFi, oh well, $329 OTD here in AZ.
No comments:
Post a Comment