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 > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > macOS > Snow leopard: Release

Snow leopard: Release (Page 17)
Thread Tools
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 08:00 AM
 
OK. Apparently running browser plug-ins as separate processes is disabled in the 32-bit version of Snow Leopard. Which is a pity since Flash is crashing a lot now and taking down Safari with it.
     
Art Vandelay
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 11:10 AM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS View Post
But they're still morons for not making the helper task a unibin.
No one is disputing that! I particularly love how they deliberately install font conflicts with the way they install Office's fonts.
Vandelay Industries
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 11:16 AM
 
I still cannot sort search results by size? WTF?
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 11:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
OK. Apparently running browser plug-ins as separate processes is disabled in the 32-bit version of Snow Leopard. Which is a pity since Flash is crashing a lot now and taking down Safari with it.
The Flash plug-in runs in its own little process, here.

It's even called "Flash Player (Safari Internet plug-in)".

This is a 32-bit EFI MacBook.

I also haven't had Flash crash on me yet on 10.6.
     
gilp1n
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 12:24 PM
 
I went to install an old Apple Garageband Jam pack, and hundreds of Software Update windows opened simultaneously stating that I need to install Rosetta, causing my dock to go crazy.

Video can be found here: YouTube - Snow Leopard Dock

Sorry for the very poor quality, using a camera to take the video.

I hope this get's fixed soon, because I would like to install the software (or does anyone know a way around this problem?)
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 12:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
This is a 32-bit EFI MacBook.
This is a 32-bit EFI but still a 64-bit processor MacBook, right?

On my 32-bit MacBook browser plug-ins run within the Safari process.
     
moep
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 12:39 PM
 
Random SL question: How do I get the Text–replacement feature to work in Applications other than TextEdit? (c) (r) (p) TM and so on don’t work here in Safari.
"The road to success is dotted with the most tempting parking spaces."
     
kylef
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Northern Ireland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 12:42 PM
 
The good: everything except the bad.
The bad: can no longer control items, eg Adium status, from the dock.

That's my list so far.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 12:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
This is a 32-bit EFI but still a 64-bit processor MacBook, right?

On my 32-bit MacBook browser plug-ins run within the Safari process.
Yes, that's correct. Safari itself is running in a 64-bit process on this Core 2 Duo MacBook.
     
Jasoco
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Home in front of my computer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 02:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
I still cannot sort search results by size? WTF?
I don't know! It makes no sense! But at least we can do Date Modified and Created.

We can't do Version, Comment and Label either. But aside from Label, I don't care about the other two. But seriously. Size and Label.. why can't we use those? WTF?
     
gilp1n
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Mar 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 02:13 PM
 
I can still control my Adium status from the dock...
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 02:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by Jasoco View Post
I don't know! It makes no sense! But at least we can do Date Modified and Created.

We can't do Version, Comment and Label either. But aside from Label, I don't care about the other two. But seriously. Size and Label.. why can't we use those? WTF?
Come on, people, stop complaining, it could be worse.

My Lotus Notes version doesn't even let me sort by SUBJECT.
It's an email client, and I can't sort ANYTHING by subject?!?!?! WTF

[/favorite_rant]

-t
     
Eden Aurora
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 02:46 PM
 
Anyone care to write about speed increases they have noticed or not noticed using the iLife software.
I eat turtle soup for breakfast
     
xi_hyperon
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Behind the dryer, looking for a matching sock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 03:00 PM
 
If anyone has any experiences running Parallels 3.0 in SL, I'd like to know how it runs.
     
Jasoco
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Home in front of my computer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 03:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Come on, people, stop complaining, it could be worse.
It was worse. In Leopard. But it was also better in Tiger. So...

But hey, I'm just glad they returned the date sorting at least. Next let's get Size in there at least, Apple. Please? I'll be your bestest friend.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 03:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eden Aurora View Post
Anyone care to write about speed increases they have noticed or not noticed using the iLife software.
It's Snappier™ of course! Sorry people, I couldn't resist.
     
Jasoco
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Home in front of my computer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 03:30 PM
 
I'm leaving to get my copy in a few minutes. As long as they still have some left.
     
Drakino
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 03:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by xi_hyperon View Post
If anyone has any experiences running Parallels 3.0 in SL, I'd like to know how it runs.
Snow Leopard will block Parallels 3 from running due to compatibility issues. http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3258 . Looks like you may need to pay for Parallels 4.
<This space under renovation>
     
PasteEater
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2009
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 04:01 PM
 
Out of curiosity, what's the final Snow Leopard build number? Some were saying 10a432, others were saying 10a435.

I'm not ready to upgrade yet, but I'm just wondering who was correct.
     
Brien
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southern California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 04:39 PM
 
It's 432. The 435 thing was a hoax.

As an aside, I arrived early to my store this morning (9AM) only to find that they were already open and selling SL.
     
jay3ld
Senior User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 06:02 PM
 
I got mine from FedEx finally. Poor guy didn't know what Apple was doing, he just knew he has had a lot of these today, and I am in the middle of Microsofts home state.

Oh well, that said. Trying to get time machine to force a complete backup (So I have a easy restore point) and will be soon installling Snow Leopard.
You shouldn't make fun of nerds... you'll be working for one some day.
     
fisherKing
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: brooklyn ny
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 06:14 PM
 
so far so good...all my apps seem to work..! and there are new versions of some (like mail unread menu).
took about 40 minutes (i think), not bad. now off to explore...


edit:oops! flash player just crashed, but...did NOT take down safari. woohoo!
( Last edited by fisherKing; Aug 28, 2009 at 06:41 PM. )
"At first, there was Nothing. Then Nothing inverted itself and became Something.
And that is what you all are: inverted Nothings...with potential" (Sun Ra)
     
Eriamjh
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: BFE
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 06:29 PM
 
I got 10GB of free space on my MBP CD. The wife gained about 13GB. I didn't know being universal was so FAT.

Haven't really noticed much difference. As long as it works.

Also, don't know if this was pointed out, QT7 Pro is moved to the Utilities folder.

I'm a bird. I am the 1% (of pets).
     
0157988944
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 06:30 PM
 
You might have also noticed that your hard drives themselves grew a bit
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 07:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post
I got 10GB of free space on my MBP CD. The wife gained about 13GB. I didn't know being universal was so FAT.

Haven't really noticed much difference. As long as it works.

Also, don't know if this was pointed out, QT7 Pro is moved to the Utilities folder.
How much of that savings was drivers though?
     
Jasoco
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Home in front of my computer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 07:33 PM
 
Got my copy installed after some trouble with overheating. My poor broken Mac has a broken fan controller and overheats. It shut down twice during the install. Fortunately OS X automatically recovers from a botched install when that happens. After three tries I finally got it installed. I guess I'm taking this thing to the shop on Monday.
     
Art Vandelay
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: New York, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 07:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
How much of that savings was drivers though?
Most of it. If you pay attention to the package sizes in the Installer, you'll notice that the core OS of SL is bigger than Leopard.

Also, remember that even though there is no PPC code, they now have 32bit and 64bit binaries for most everything. So, you're just swapping one fat binary for another fat binary.
Vandelay Industries
     
kylef
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Northern Ireland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 08:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by gilp1n View Post
I can still control my Adium status from the dock...
Whoops - I use an old wireless mighty mouse that doesn't have a right click and I'm used to click-and-hold, which Apple have taken over. Control-click does the trick.
     
Eriamjh
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: BFE
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 08:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by adamfishercox View Post
You might have also noticed that your hard drives themselves grew a bit
Yeah. The whole binary GBs versus decimal GBs... Apple kinda folded on this one. It would have been easy to give the user the option to select it.

I gained space no matter what.

I noticed that in the System Profiler under applications you can see which apps are Intel, Universal, PPC, 32 bit or 64 bit.

I'm a bird. I am the 1% (of pets).
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 28, 2009, 11:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
I still cannot sort search results by size? WTF?
Seriously? Jeez, that is ridiculous.
     
B Gallagher
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 29, 2009, 04:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by Art Vandelay View Post
Most of it. If you pay attention to the package sizes in the Installer, you'll notice that the core OS of SL is bigger than Leopard.
Excellent point. To compare, the "Essential System Software Only" sizes are 2.6 GB for 10.4.0, 5.9 GB for 10.5.0, and 8.01 GB for 10.6.0.

Edit: Despite my custom install for 10.5 being around 3 GB less than that for 10.6, I still gained about 8 GB of HDD space. I'm oh so confused, but by no means about to complain.
( Last edited by B Gallagher; Aug 29, 2009 at 06:42 AM. )
MBP 15" C2D 2.2GHz 4.0GB [email protected]
iPhone 4 32GB Black
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 29, 2009, 09:19 AM
 
Supposedly, 13" Mac laptops are not supported for 64-bit mode in Snow Leopard, whether or not they have a 64-bit EFI. Nonetheless, this is my 13" MacBook Pro:

     
davidflas
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Boynton Beach, Florida, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 29, 2009, 09:48 AM
 
I have been happy with my update, no issues so far!

2.7Ghz 15" Mid 2012 MBP 16GB RAM 7.2k 750GB HD anti-glare display|64GB iPad4 ATT LTE|
     
frdmfghtr
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 29, 2009, 10:31 AM
 
Mostly error-free here as well. My first install was over-the-air on a MacBook Air sharing the DVD with my iMac. The install took over an hour, but when both units are talking to the Airport Express N wirelessly, that's to be expected. The iMac took about 30-40 minutes (I wasn't watching too closely).

The only two issues I have found so far:

(1) GPGMail was disabled in Mail 4.0 No big deal, because nobody else I know uses signed/encrypted email

(2) The Safari Adblock plugin doesn't work. It seems to install OK, but it's nowhere to be found in the Safari preferences.

I also ran XBench on each under Leopard before making the upgrade, and got lower scores after upgrading. I waited a while for Spotlight to finish up and for the hard drive activity to settle down, but was somewhat puzzled. I've also heard that XBench isn't that good of a benchmarking tool. I'll have to poke around the web for benchmarks.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 29, 2009, 11:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by B Gallagher View Post
Excellent point. To compare, the "Essential System Software Only" sizes are 2.6 GB for 10.4.0, 5.9 GB for 10.5.0, and 8.01 GB for 10.6.0.

Edit: Despite my custom install for 10.5 being around 3 GB less than that for 10.6, I still gained about 8 GB of HDD space. I'm oh so confused, but by no means about to complain.
10.6 essential system software is only about 5 GB.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 29, 2009, 11:35 AM
 
The essential software was claimed to be 8 GB for me according to the installer (after I erased my hard drive), unless I misread the dialogue box. I realize that 8 GB is using decimal numbers, but that's still a fair bit larger than 5 GB.
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 29, 2009, 01:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by frdmfghtr View Post
(2) The Safari Adblock plugin doesn't work. It seems to install OK, but it's nowhere to be found in the Safari preferences.
You may have to launch Safari in 32-bit mode for it to work with this. I used SafariBlock for a long time, and it's a great ad blocker, but I don't want to use Safari 32. x64 Safari is much quicker, so I shifting my ad blocking to GlimmerBlocker, which is working great so far and its preferences pane even loads natively (system prefs doesn't need to open in 32-bit mode).

I tried CSS-based ad blocking but didn't like it.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 29, 2009, 02:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cold Warrior View Post
You may have to launch Safari in 32-bit mode for it to work with this. I used SafariBlock for a long time, and it's a great ad blocker, but I don't want to use Safari 32. x64 Safari is much quicker, so I shifting my ad blocking to GlimmerBlocker, which is working great so far and its preferences pane even loads natively (system prefs doesn't need to open in 32-bit mode).
I need to give it another try.

A while back, I tested it, but often the connection times out.

-t
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2009, 08:53 AM
 
1) What uses OpenCL?
2) Yes Snow Leopard is faster, but how much of that is perception due to changed timings? eg. Have they changed the timing of some drop down sheets?
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2009, 10:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
My Lotus Notes version doesn't even let me sort by SUBJECT.
It's an email client, and I can't sort ANYTHING by subject?!?!?! WTF
Glad to see that I'm not the only one who has to deal with Lotus Notes... It's amazingly powerful in some weird ways (such as labeling stuff based on whether you are on To, CC or BCC - awesome feature, couldn't survive without it) but it does fail at the simplest things.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2009, 10:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
. It's amazingly powerful in some weird ways (such as labeling stuff based on whether you are on To, CC or BCC .
Huh ? I can do this with Apple Mail.

Anything that Apple Mail can do can (by definition) NOT be amazingly powerful

-t
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2009, 08:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Huh ? I can do this with Apple Mail.

Anything that Apple Mail can do can (by definition) NOT be amazingly powerful

-t
Yes, it was more impressive in 1999 or whatever it was when I first saw it, but it's still fairly neat to have icons for that feature, colors for the sender and folders for the subject.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2009, 09:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
Yes, it was more impressive in 1999 or whatever it was when I first saw it, but it's still fairly neat to have icons for that feature, colors for the sender and folders for the subject.
Icons ?

I don't have icons for this feature in my Notes. Maybe that's a custom install for your company.

And don't get me started on folders and archiving. What a clusterf*ck in Notes.

-t
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2009, 09:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post
Yeah. The whole binary GBs versus decimal GBs... Apple kinda folded on this one. It would have been easy to give the user the option to select it.
Uhhh... no

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
0157988944
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2009, 09:52 PM
 
Apple is doing it "right" by using the correct definition of Gigabytes. The base 2 definition they were using before is really a Gibibyte. Plus, all hard drive manufacturers use base 10 so it only makes sense that you would want your 500 GB drive to be 500 GB, no?
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2009, 10:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by adamfishercox View Post
Apple is doing it "right" by using the correct definition of Gigabytes. The base 2 definition they were using before is really a Gibibyte. Plus, all hard drive manufacturers use base 10 so it only makes sense that you would want your 500 GB drive to be 500 GB, no?
No, it doesn't. It was a way for hard drive manufacturers to artificially inflate the size of their product. That was the only logic that was ever involved in the base 10 numbers.

What makes sense is that when I send a file to my Windows and Linux and Unix and Mac OS X (pre SL)-using friends, I don't see a completely different file size from everybody else.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
- - e r i k - -
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 1, 2009, 10:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chuckit View Post
No, it doesn't. It was a way for hard drive manufacturers to artificially inflate the size of their product. That was the only logic that was ever involved in the base 10 numbers.
Load of crap and you know it. Didn't we already have this discussion already? Yeah, I bought into that conspiracy theory once too…

[ fb ] [ flickr ] [] [scl] [ last ] [ plaxo ]
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 2, 2009, 01:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by - - e r i k - - View Post
Load of crap and you know it. Didn't we already have this discussion already? Yeah, I bought into that conspiracy theory once too…
The conspiracy where hard drive manufacturers were the only ones who said 1 KB = 1000 bytes and every operating system on earth besides Snow Leopard says 1 KB = 1024 bytes? I'm pretty sure that's a historical fact, and no, I don't recall anybody disputing it. (Some people were saying it shouldn't be so, but I think it's pretty indisputable that it is so.)
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 2, 2009, 02:16 AM
 
Yeah, I'm not sure that this was a smart move on Apple's part, I agree with Chuckit. I agree that the current standard is not ideal and that what Apple is trying to do is for a noble cause, but I'm not sure I see the wisdom in how they are going about doing this.

I can foresee this causing a tremendous amount of confusion and support headaches, for starters, but more importantly not every standard is great but we kind of have to roll with them sometimes. There were/are problems and/or tradeoffs with VHS, DVD, SATA, Bluray over HD-DVD, USB over Firewire, UTF-8, ISO, etc. The solution to this is to establish a new standard, get some buy-in, approval, documentation, agreement - something that paves a new way to transitioning from old to new. You don't just ignore the standard and create your own that you think is better.

Of course, there is nothing stopping you from doing so, but unless Apple expects this to result in many other players following suit, I don't see the benefits of what people see matching the marketing vs. the confusions of sharing files with other operating systems or older versions of OS X.

Apple is clearly interested in standards and openness so far as it suits them, and that's fine, but it seems a little arrogant for them if they expect everybody to follow their lead just because they are Apple. It's also a little bizarre when Apple has given in to certain Microsoft conventions in the past, and I've seen no indication that Microsoft is willing to follow this lead. How many Mac users can operate in a vacuum of exchanging files between only other Mac users using a certain version of OS X?
     
Brien
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southern California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 2, 2009, 02:17 AM
 
Do SSDs measure in 10's or 2's? If they measure in 2's this might end up being a PITA.
     
 
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 11:03 PM.
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.,