Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Minimum recommended computer for Longhorn... 4 to 6GHz ?!!

Minimum recommended computer for Longhorn... 4 to 6GHz ?!!
Thread Tools
olePigeon
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 07:19 PM
 
http://www.microsoft-watch.com/artic...1581842,00.asp

Microsoft is expected to recommend that the "average" Longhorn PC feature a dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs three times faster than those on the market today.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
djohnson
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 07:40 PM
 
nice... now were are these mythical computers? By placing the specs so high, I guess they are going to announce it in 3-4 years now?
     
soul searching
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Stuck in 19*53
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 07:41 PM
 
...4 to 6GHz...
Jiminy Christmas! Granted, it's one or two years from now, 6GHz? A tiny bit too much.

"I think of lotteries as a tax on the mathematically challenged." -- Roger Jones
     
rozwado1
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Miami Beach
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 07:45 PM
 
Isn't the point of an OS to make it available to EVERYONE? I can understand these requirements for video editing or 3D rendering in 2006, but come on...
     
olePigeon  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 07:47 PM
 
Originally posted by soul searching:
Jiminy Christmas! Granted, it's one or two years from now, 6GHz? A tiny bit too much.
4GHz isn't totally far out there. Next year Intel is expected to release 4GHz CPUs. The problem I see is that EVERYONE (home, business, everyone) is going to have to buy brand new PCs just to run Longhorn.

Some people were complaining about having to shell out $129 for 10.3, how about having to shell out $289 for the upgrade to Longhorn, and then having to shell out another $1000 for a PC even capable of running it?
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 07:49 PM
 
I wonder what all those pats they been applying for are about.
     
itai195
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 07:57 PM
 
Lots of PC users do buy new PCs when they upgrade their OS. That's why those will be the average specs for Longhorn users -- they'll be the typical specs during the 2 year window following Longhorn's release.
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 07:58 PM
 
System Requirements

Holographic projection monitor
Quad P5 9GHz
Dual 23" LCD displays
     
olePigeon  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 08:00 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
I wonder what all those pats they been applying for are about.
The idea isn't to ensure that Microsoft makes a fair profit from its patents; it's to make sure that no one else can write fully compatible software.' An older article mentions some other patents.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
olePigeon  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 08:01 PM
 
Originally posted by itai195:
Lots of PC users do buy new PCs when they upgrade their OS. That's why those will be the average specs for Longhorn users -- they'll be the typical specs during the 2 year window following Longhorn's release.
So what was the argument about Macs being more expensive again? I have a feeling that whatever Mac OS X is out by the time Longhorn hits, it'll still run on graphite G4.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Ratm
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 08:04 PM
 

ROTFL
     
itai195
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cupertino, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 08:11 PM
 
Originally posted by olePigeon:
So what was the argument about Macs being more expensive again? I have a feeling that whatever Mac OS X is out by the time Longhorn hits, it'll still run on graphite G4.
Unlikely, by then G5s will already have been on the market for 2 years. Three year old macs (like my original PB G4) were already not fully supported by OS 10.2 (Quartz Extreme). Partly Apple is also constrained by their own, relatively slow-paced performance improvements. Apple has to prepare an OS that supports slow computers it sold just a year or two prior.

If someone upgraded their PC in 2001 for XP, they will be able to run the service packs, and by 2005 they will be ready to upgrade, as people generally follow a 3-4 year hardware upgrade cycle. I agree that on a Mac you can follow a 4-5 year upgrade cycle, but I'm not sure how much money that really saves considering that PC hardware is considerably cheaper anyway.
( Last edited by itai195; May 4, 2004 at 08:17 PM. )
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 08:15 PM
 
All these things being said, it's like saying "what are going to be the minimum requirements for 10.6 considering that's the timeframe for Longhorn.
     
olePigeon  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 08:22 PM
 
Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
All these things being said, it's like saying "what are going to be the minimum requirements for 10.6 considering that's the timeframe for Longhorn.
Any Macintosh that shipped with a G4 processor. That's my prediction.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 08:26 PM
 
Originally posted by olePigeon:
Any Macintosh that shipped with a G4 processor. That's my prediction.
Three years from now... yah, that's fair... I'm guessing GHz system or above (but it will permit lower MHz...)
     
G4ME
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Maine
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 09:16 PM
 
i will be getting many more years out of my dual 500 hell why update again? some new eye candy? hell the only reason that i did panther was that it gave me a speed boost. But eventually an update won't hurt me.

I GOT WASTED WITH PHIL SHERRY!!!
     
olePigeon  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 11:14 PM
 
Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
Three years from now... yah, that's fair... I'm guessing GHz system or above (but it will permit lower MHz...)
Probably Gigabit G4 (Dual 533) or QuickSilver or higher.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
Spliffdaddy
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: South of the Mason-Dixon line
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 11:18 PM
 
Originally posted by olePigeon:
4GHz isn't totally far out there. Next year Intel is expected to release 4GHz CPUs...(snip)


next year is now - at Hillbilly Technologies.
     
Lateralus
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 11:19 PM
 
I agree that lower end G4 owners, especially Dual GigE people, are in luck. The G4 will be supported for many years to come, and I doubt that Apple will require a minimum clock speed, since they never have before. They'll just require any G4.

And I have a feeling that these 'requirements' for Longcowhorn will be trimmed a little before the OS actually ships.
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 11:24 PM
 
Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:


next year is now - at Hillbilly Technologies.
As long as you are cool with a system that weighs 200 lbs.
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 11:25 PM
 
an 802.11g wireless link
Uh huh. Why would this be required?

I call BS on these supposed requirements.
     
BasketofPuppies
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Chicago
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 11:29 PM
 
Originally posted by CharlesS:
Uh huh. Why would this be required?

I call BS on these supposed requirements.
An anti-Microsoft propaganda post from olePigeon? Never!
inscrutable impenetrable impregnable inconceivable
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 11:36 PM
 
Originally posted by BasketofPuppies:
An anti-Microsoft propaganda post from olePigeon? Never!
Considering there isn't a nailed down delivery date, it could be two years away... I would guess 2GHz would be realistic...
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 11:38 PM
 
Originally posted by Zimphire:
I wonder what all those pats they been applying for are about.
Yeah... what do trees have to do with Longhorn?



"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 4, 2004, 11:54 PM
 
Well, we'll see what specs we need to run OS X decently. Although I run Panther on a fairly new machine (iBook G3 800, Dec 2002), it feels kinda slow sometimes. With the G5, Apple has caught up in terms of raw CPU power a little bit and voila, OS X on a G5 is cool and finally feels really usable.

So, with dual core CPUs on the door (I assume that the minimum Apple will do is to use the same CPUs used in the XBox 2), this would bring Apple in the position to build hell of a system. So they can implement even more useful technology that would be too much for the average Mac now (like mine).

I also expect a gradual transition to 64 bit that'll probably be completed in about four to six years time or so (four years after an all 64 bit CPU line-up, I'd say). So, right now, comparing OS X to XP (which is IMHO only in a few areas a real improvement over 2000), MS will catch up with Longhorn to what OS X is now (except for maybe WinFS, but it remains to be seen, how much of that actually makes it into the shipping release).
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
todrain
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Dallas, TX 75287
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 12:42 AM
 
Umm... whoever wrote that article doesn't know what they are talking about. Maybe at the time Longhorn is released that will be the average PC, but I doubt that that would be the min. requirements. Way too much of the market to shut out.
     
cszar2001
Photo Architect
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bamberg, Germany
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 01:21 AM
 
They missed the part where it says you have to sell your soul to the devil.
"Microsoft is a cross between the Borg and the Ferengi. Unfortunately, they use Borg to do their marketing and Ferengi to do their programming." Simon Slavin

Me on Flickr.
     
Kenneth
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Bellevue, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 02:45 AM
 
so we will see all the <4Ghz PCs in the junk yard near you soon?

How sad..
     
AppleCello
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 05:23 AM
 
Just becaues Apple releases new software doesnt mean that you have to upgrade. At least in our case (non microsoft), the software isnt swiss-cheese and it will continue to run and function, and security updates will continue to be released. The new software will have cool new features, but its not like the availability of new features should kill your current productivity.

upgrade when the features are truely compelling enough to make you want to outlay the 130$ and/or the "investment" in a new system. No one is forcing an upgrade (except microsoft, by virtue of their half-assed software).

-PD
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 07:16 AM
 
Originally posted by AppleCello:
Just becaues Apple releases new software doesnt mean that you have to upgrade. At least in our case (non microsoft), the software isnt swiss-cheese and it will continue to run and function, and security updates will continue to be released. The new software will have cool new features, but its not like the availability of new features should kill your current productivity.

upgrade when the features are truely compelling enough to make you want to outlay the 130$ and/or the "investment" in a new system. No one is forcing an upgrade (except microsoft, by virtue of their half-assed software).

-PD
I agree with the above statement, but at the same time, 1/2 of the time I'm guilty of the "Well, 10.X fixed that bug" diagnosis to many users.

While I respect people for holding out on 10.2, I couldn't help but upgrade. I don't bitch, but at the same time, realize that if it's going to be a $129 every 16-18 months, I may try to skip one eventually as a majority of my crap is working well enough...
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 08:59 AM
 
Minimum recommended computer for Longhorn... 4 to 6GHz ?!!
That spec sounds like a lame attempt by a website to generate hits. A current Dell with current generation video card will most likely work very well with Longhorn, even with all the eye candy turned on.
     
sniffer
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Norway (I eat whales)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 09:20 AM
 
Originally posted by Eug Wanker:
That spec sounds like a lame attempt by a website to generate hits.
They might not be so far from the truth. MS have done similar thing before with w95. Only the newest machines, like Pentiums was really usable with windows, thought you could install it on 386es if you wanted. Not to far from the situation with OS X 10.0 either. It ran, but not especially fast, on new machines. Extra ram helped lot ofcourse.

Sniffer gone old-school sig
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 10:26 AM
 
Originally posted by sniffer:
They might not be so far from the truth. MS have done similar thing before with w95. Only the newest machines, like Pentiums was really usable with windows, thought you could install it on 386es if you wanted. Not to far from the situation with OS X 10.0 either. It ran, but not especially fast, on new machines. Extra ram helped lot ofcourse.
Win 95 ran fine with mid-end machines from years prior to Win 95's release.
     
ghost_flash
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 10:29 AM
 
Anyone hear anything about Virtual PC since Micro-buy-and-shelf-technology-monopolistic-scumbags bought them from Connectix?

Glad my University has allowed me to log into their VPN without having to have MS crap...

Maybe he should be fined again, just for putting out a virus and calling it an OS.
...
     
Wiskedjak
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Calgary
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 10:37 AM
 
By the time Longhorn makes it to market we'll be using 4ghz machines as paper weights.
     
sniffer
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Norway (I eat whales)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 11:09 AM
 
Originally posted by Eug:
Win 95 ran fine with mid-end machines from years prior to Win 95's release.
They still sold 486 DXes out there at the time w95 shipped. W95 was recommended to run on Pentium and Pentium Pro.

Sniffer gone old-school sig
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 11:23 AM
 
Originally posted by sniffer:
They still sold 486 DXes out there at the time w95 shipped. W95 was recommended to run on Pentium and Pentium Pro.
Yeah, but 486s were very low end machines by then. The Pentium came out in 1993.

BTW Windows 2000 runs fine on even a Pentium II 350.
     
sniffer
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Norway (I eat whales)
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 11:41 AM
 
Originally posted by Eug:
BTW Windows 2000 runs fine on even a Pentium II 350.
I am typing this on a -99 PII 333 MHz running XP. Pentiums was really expensive in 95 you know, and 486 DXs sold pretty well for a good period after the initial release of Windows 95. However the original Pentium chip is really old. I think you could get one already in -92 IIRC, but it didn't go averge Joe for about the year after W95.

edit: ups, perhaps it was -93.

Sniffer gone old-school sig
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 5, 2004, 09:22 PM
 
So it has already been confirmed that the specs for the video are complete bull.
     
olePigeon  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2004, 08:01 PM
 
http://news.com.com/2100-1016_3-5207...l?tag=nefd.top

Interesting article on how it's going to run. It'll look exactly like Windows 2000 on current computers. And while the video requirements aren't as high as the other article listed, the CPU requirements looks like to be on target. Microsoft says that by the time Longhorn ships that almost all the computers being manufactured during that time will be capable of running Longhorn.

So if by 2006 you think they'll hav dual core 6GHz machines, then that's what seems to be the requirement.
"…I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than
you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods,
you will understand why I dismiss yours." - Stephen F. Roberts
     
ghost_flash
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2004, 08:07 PM
 
Time to get .Net certified?
...
     
Kenneth
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Bellevue, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2004, 09:10 PM
 
so what's about running Longhorn within VPC?
     
chabig
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2004, 09:25 PM
 
The problem I see is that EVERYONE (home, business, everyone) is going to have to buy brand new PCs just to run Longhorn.
That's Microsoft's plan. Windows users don't always buy the latest and greatest OS from Microsoft. They stay with the OS that shipped with their machine. Heck, getting Windows users to move to XP has been a real chore. Lots of people still run Windows 95 and 98. The only way MS can get the big bucks is by getting people to buy new machines.

Chris
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2004, 09:42 PM
 
Originally posted by chabig:
That's Microsoft's plan. Windows users don't always buy the latest and greatest OS from Microsoft. They stay with the OS that shipped with their machine. Heck, getting Windows users to move to XP has been a real chore. Lots of people still run Windows 95 and 98. The only way MS can get the big bucks is by getting people to buy new machines.

Chris
??? That doesn't make much sense. If they don't want to upgrade, they're not going to buy a new machine.
     
Kenneth
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Bellevue, WA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2004, 10:17 PM
 
I agree with Chris.

None of the people I know of went out to buy Windows upgrade. My parents are still using a Win98 box. My dad told me.. the OS which comes with the machine is the best. He asked me whether buying a new system or not? I told him the new hardware is fine, but WindowsXP is not.

My friend has a NEC notebook with WinME on it. WinME is a horrible OS ever, but she still sticks with WinME.

BTW.. few days ago on MacMinute.com, M$ sold 210 M copies of WindowsXP.
     
Cipher13
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2004, 10:46 PM
 
Originally posted by olePigeon:
Any Macintosh that shipped with a G4 processor. That's my prediction.
No. This makes zero sense.

I have a G4 400 and an iBook 900, and the iBook 900 is significantly faster.

My prediction: any machine with FW800 or AP Extreme, for 10.6. That, or anything with QE.

It's not so much about the requirements, it's more about having a feature which can be used to draw a line.
     
Link
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hyrule
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2004, 11:09 PM
 
It'll be funny if computers released after OS X 10.1 can't run OS X 10.6.....
Aloha
     
Lateralus
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2004, 11:10 PM
 
Originally posted by Link:
It'll be funny if computers released after OS X 10.1 can't run OS X 10.6.....
...huh?
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
Link
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Hyrule
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2004, 11:14 PM
 
Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
...huh?
Sorry, let me reiterate because I made a fatal little flaw that I knew you peeps would exploit....

It'll be sad if macs released around the time of Mac OS X 10.1 (late 2001-early 2002) can't run Mac OS X 10.6

Granted that, since longhorn is coming out at around the same time as OS 10.6, and longhorn plans to support as low as a ~600mhz P3 which came out QUITE A WHILE before 2001, I'd say that's a BAD minimum line to have...

You're thinking ~1ghz or more g4. Apple better pull some amazing tricks out under their sleeve if it's going to REQUIRE a 1ghz g4 or faster.
Aloha
     
Lateralus
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 6, 2004, 11:20 PM
 
Originally posted by Link:
Sorry, let me reiterate because I made a fatal little flaw that I knew you peeps would exploit....

It'll be sad if macs released around the time of Mac OS X 10.1 (late 2001-early 2002) can't run Mac OS X 10.6

Granted that, since longhorn is coming out at around the same time as OS 10.6, and longhorn plans to support as low as a ~600mhz P3 which came out QUITE A WHILE before 2001, I'd say that's a BAD minimum line to have...

You're thinking ~1ghz or more g4. Apple better pull some amazing tricks out under their sleeve if it's going to REQUIRE a 1ghz g4 or faster.
One step at a time young one.

Apple will drop support for Macs without AGP slots first. More specifically, I expect Apple to make a Quartz Extreme video card a requirement. Meaning PowerBook G3s, first PowerBook G4 Tis, Rage 128 iBooks, and all of the G3 iMacs will lose support.

I don't expect Apple to start being discriminatory with the G4 Power Macs (Provided they have QE video) for many years to come.
I like chicken
I like liver
Meow Mix, Meow Mix
Please de-liv-er
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:38 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,