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 > Resell value of PPC-based Macs

Resell value of PPC-based Macs
Thread Tools
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:22 PM
 
Ok, so what's that switch to Intel-based hardware gonna do to the PPC-based hardware resell value, especially the highend PowerMacs and PowerBooks ?

In my opinion, anyone who just bought something recently should be worried, and everyone who would by a Pro machine in the next year is plain suicidal, from a money-perspective...

What you guys think ?

-t
     
wdlove
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:27 PM
 
You have proposed a very interesting question. At this point the answer is anyones guess.

The problem with waiting is what if a current Mac dies. Money wise would a person be smart to have it repaired. Also most recommend not purchasing a Rev. A. That would prolong the purchase even longer.

"Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never - in nothing, great or small, large or petty - never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense." Winston Churchill
     
Randman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:29 PM
 
PPC will be supported for some time.
Likely, the minis and laptops will be the first to jump. That should ease the way for iMacs and PowerMacs. I wouldn't buy a PM right now, but if needed, I'd still get a laptop.

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by Randman
PPC will be supported for some time...
True, the hardware will probably be supported for awhile. However, I seriously doubt PPC owners will see much in the way of upgrading done to any software they may be running. Anyone honestly think we'll see an Adobe CS3 for PPC Macs?
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad
True, the hardware will probably be supported for awhile. However, I seriously doubt PPC owners will see much in the way of upgrading done to any software they may be running. Anyone honestly think we'll see an Adobe CS3 for PPC Macs?
Why WOULDN'T Adobe offer a PPC/Intel version of CS3? If they are going to go through all the trouble to make the switch (which shouldn't be a MAJOR undertaking), why would they drop support for a majority of systems. Remember, even in 3 years, PPC based systems will still be the norm... not the exception.

In 5-6 years, that's when you are going to see x86 rule over PPC.
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 04:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by wdlove
You have proposed a very interesting question. At this point the answer is anyones guess.

The problem with waiting is what if a current Mac dies. Money wise would a person be smart to have it repaired. Also most recommend not purchasing a Rev. A. That would prolong the purchase even longer.
As long as you purchase inteligently, you can purchase around this issue. The people I feel bad for are those that buy a new computer every 6-12 months.

I bet the PPC/x86 transition will follow standard upgrade paths.
     
Since EBCDIC
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Francisco
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:11 PM
 
I really don't get what the problem is. If your machine is useful for what you need, keep it for 12-24 months. If not, buy something used or something new. When you're ready for your next purchase, Leopard on Mactel will be ready for you. (Just remember to skip rev. 1; those always suck.)
Since EBCDIC
Using Macs since they were Lisas.
     
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by mitchell_pgh
Why WOULDN'T Adobe offer a PPC/Intel version of CS3?
Extra testing, extra packaging costs, extra support costs... there are plenty of reasons.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:22 PM
 
Personally, I'm keeping my G5 forever. Last of a long line.
     
rambo47
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Denville, NJ.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:24 PM
 
Man, lots of folks at the Apple Store at Short Hills yesterday walking out with new PowerBooks, Mac Minis, etc. are gonna be PISSED! What's the current resale value of a PowerPC 604e Mac?
     
Randman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by Millennium
Extra testing, extra packaging costs, extra support costs... there are plenty of reasons.
Extra cash. If there's a market, Adobe will support it.

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
     
trip
Forum Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Calgary Canada
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:31 PM
 
I just bought a new iMac 2 weeks ago. Not too big a deal in my mind. I buy with the idea that a computer should last 4 years, then buy a new one. I figure most apps will support powerpc for a few years after the change so I see no problem. From there I can always use it as an apache server or a HDTV recorder or both - there's a ton of things you can do with them.
"The direct use of force is such a poor solution to any problem, it is generally employed only by small children and large nations". --David Friedman
     
Person Man
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northwest Ohio
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Millennium
Extra testing, extra packaging costs, extra support costs... there are plenty of reasons.
They did it with the 68K/PPC switch. What makes you think they won't with this one?
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Millennium
Extra testing, extra packaging costs, extra support costs... there are plenty of reasons.
Extra testing... Come on... granted, they would need to test it on PPC/Intel, but there is NO WAY they would abandon the profits gained from G5/G4 sales over the past 2-3 years. Especially considering the nature of graphic designers.

Also, the packaging would be exactly the same (Universal Binary).
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by rambo47
Man, lots of folks at the Apple Store at Short Hills yesterday walking out with new PowerBooks, Mac Minis, etc. are gonna be PISSED! What's the current resale value of a PowerPC 604e Mac?
Most I see go for a few hundred dollars at the most.
     
ambush
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: -
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 05:50 PM
 
ahah.... way less demand and same offer. price drops.

ebay time
     
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 07:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Person Man
They did it with the 68K/PPC switch. What makes you think they won't with this one?
I remember the switch. Most major apps ditched 68K within two versions. Fat binaries ("Universal Binaries", Apple now calls them) were almost unheard of; most developers preferred to ship two versions, one for each processor.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
Person Man
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Northwest Ohio
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 07:31 PM
 
Originally Posted by Millennium
I remember the switch. Most major apps ditched 68K within two versions. Fat binaries ("Universal Binaries", Apple now calls them) were almost unheard of; most developers preferred to ship two versions, one for each processor.
Some did. Some still will, but Apple made it through the transition once.

But oh well, why don't you wait to see how this plays itself out before totally jumping ship?
     
JoshuaZ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Yamanashi, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 07:35 PM
 
Resale will be high. I mean, as long as the hardware is supported the people on eBay will pay outrageous prices for it.
     
storer
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 07:42 PM
 
I'm hoping that the iBooks and Mini will jump first. I was planning on buying an iBook yesterday if that keynote had brought that news
     
yukon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Amboy Navada, Canadia.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 07:47 PM
 
Well, back in the 68k->PPC switch, many programs simply didn't support it anymore because they didn't care to (these would be the shareware type programs), and programs like what Adobe sold, they often stopped supporting since the previous generation was too slow to run the new software pleasantly and they didn't feel like optimizing the code for a dead platform.

I'd argue that the price will drop substantially, 68k machines became almost worthless overnight in my recollection, people with 68040 processors were told to get with the times (the times being a skin-burning hot 601 that ran everything slower in emulation).
[img]broken link[/img]
This insanity brought to you by:
The French CBC, driving antenna users mad since 1937.
     
turtle777  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 09:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by JoshuaZ
Resale will be high. I mean, as long as the hardware is supported the people on eBay will pay outrageous prices for it.
No, they won't. Not if you get an Intel-based machine for cheaper with more horsepower.
Yes, there are always fanboys out there that have more money than brains, but these are the minority, and they are already stocked up...

-t
     
tooki
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 10:07 PM
 
1. This will be an easier transition than 68K -> PPC was. There is less to do.

2. I predict that by the time they stop making PPC software, all the PPC hardware will be far too outdated and obsolete for anyone to care. For the most part, that's what happened with 68K.

tooki
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 10:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by tooki
1. This will be an easier transition than 68K -> PPC was. There is less to do.
How do you figure?

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
tooki
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 6, 2005, 10:20 PM
 
Well, as I understood it, a lot of 68K apps were written with appreciable amounts of 68K-dependent code (e.g. assembly). No, not the whole app, but there would be chunks in many of them. Many of those apps ended up being scrapped and rewritten. (Poster child: MS Word 5. It had so much assembly in it that the PPC transition was impossible.)

Stuff written for OS X should all already pretty much be in platform-independent source, shouldn't it?

tooki
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 03:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by tooki
Well, as I understood it, a lot of 68K apps were written with appreciable amounts of 68K-dependent code (e.g. assembly). No, not the whole app, but there would be chunks in many of them. Many of those apps ended up being scrapped and rewritten. (Poster child: MS Word 5. It had so much assembly in it that the PPC transition was impossible.)

Stuff written for OS X should all already pretty much be in platform-independent source, shouldn't it?

tooki
Ah, I see what you mean. Yeah, from a development point of view, it'll be easier. From a user point of view, though, it's definitely going to be a whole different ball game, unless that Rosetta stuff works really well.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
tooki
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 03:39 AM
 
If Rosetta works as well as the 68K emulator on PPC Macs works, it should be smooth sailing ahead.

tooki
     
tooki
Admin Emeritus
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 03:45 AM
 
Just as an aside: I hope Mac OS X retains one little gem of elegance from NeXT: on NeXTstep, if an application package didn't have the necessary binary for the hardware you were running, it would gray out the app icon. (Rosetta may allow most apps to run, but some will not, and it'd be great if the Finder could make it very obvious.)

tooki
     
Eriamjh
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: BFE
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 07:47 AM
 
The resale will be high until the new machines with proven better performance at a lower price come out. Then prices will drop accordingly.

The PPC platform is not dead yet. It won't be a year until the first Intel-based machines come out. Notice Steve didn't timeline any specifics about hardware? I think the consumer macs will come first, as they don't depend on optimized power-software for video or 3D. Powerbooks will also come fast.

I'm a bird. I am the 1% (of pets).
     
d.fine
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2004
Location: on 650 cc's
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 07:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett
Personally, I'm keeping my G5 forever. Last of a long line.
Not planning on getting rid of my current G5, and not planning to switch untill the Intel based machines are well established, and I absolutely need a new machine. Which I hope will be a long time from now.

stuffing feathers up your b*tt doesn't make you a chicken.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 07:55 AM
 
I think the PowerBooks will be the first thing they update. They need an update. A real update.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Randman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 07:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by tooki
If Rosetta works as well as the 68K emulator on PPC Macs works, it should be smooth sailing ahead.
I timed it and during the keynote, it took Steve almost 5 seconds less to launch the latest version of PhotoShop via Rosetta on his Pentium 3.5Ghz Mac over my PowerBook17 (1.5Ghz, 1.5GB of ram). That's pretty dang good.

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
     
Scooterboy
Senior User
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Minneapolis for now
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 08:01 AM
 
Which sucks for anyone who bought a PowerBook recently.
Scooters are more fun than computers and only slightly more frustrating
     
d.fine
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2004
Location: on 650 cc's
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 08:06 AM
 
There's a 5 second difference between a 1.5GHz G4 and a 3.5GHz Intel, I'd say hooray to the G4 ! PowerBook still stands strong in my eyes.

stuffing feathers up your b*tt doesn't make you a chicken.
     
Randman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: MacNN database error. Please refresh your browser.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 08:11 AM
 
Unless you follow the plan never to buy a rev a.

This is a computer-generated message and needs no signature.
     
Mastrap
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 08:11 AM
 
Anyone wanting to panic sell me a dual G5 just drop me a PM
     
d.fine
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2004
Location: on 650 cc's
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 08:14 AM
 
Originally Posted by Mastrap
Anyone wanting to panic sell me a dual G5 just drop me a PM
Haha, yea, same here ! I'll take the 2nd unit to go...

stuffing feathers up your b*tt doesn't make you a chicken.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 7, 2005, 08:17 AM
 
Hmmm, used 1+ GHz PowerBook or new PowerBook later, hard decisions are about to come
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
wintermute
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jul 2005
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 05:03 AM
 
Ummm... most of you don't seem to understand how this transition to Intel works. Of course Adobe CS3 will be available for PPC macs. In order to create Mac-Intel versions of CS3, Adobe needs to re-code all their apps in Apple's Xcode environment. After doing this, they then select "create dual-binaries" to create versions of their apps that run on both types of processors. It would be stupid for Adobe to port their code to Xcode and then not crank out dual-binary or PPC apps... all the work would already have been done. So, OF COURSE Adobe CS3 will be available for PPC macs. All future mac apps will be PPC enabled for several years to come since all code development will be through Apple's Xcode environment. It's very similar to "fat-binaries" that were created during the transition from 68040 to PPC chips. It will be several generations before PPC code is dropped. By that time, most people will have upgraded to new Macs three or four times and all current day machines would be quaint relics, like a Mac SE is considered today. No worries. Buy now, buy later... makes no difference; except if you wait, you won't have the benefit of using an up-to-date machine, but you will get more "bang for your buck" since prices keep dropping as speed increases.
     
Mastrap
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 05:57 AM
 
You're kind of late to the party, no?
     
Hawkeye_a
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 06:08 AM
 
I dont remember hearing 'x86' during the keynote. (i could be wrong). But i think it COULD be possible that intel is manufacturing a processor without all the legacy stuff thats been hacked onto the x86 over 20 years. Apple probably wont be needing or using it, so why have all that spaghetti tacked onto it ? I wonder....... could it also have some connection to Longhorn ? seeing as how longhorn(big transition for Microsoft) and macintels are expected to debut at roughly(at best) the same time.

Not that it matters too much, but having an effecient processor like the G4 would be nice.... and i dont see why it isnt possible to come from intel. To me personally, performance of intel chips arent bad compared to the PPCs...i just dont like the way its all been tacked on for 20 odd years.... kinda beastly imo. oh well....
     
Gamoe
Mac Elite
Join Date: Sep 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 06:09 AM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777
In my opinion, anyone who just bought something recently should be worried, and everyone who would by a Pro machine in the next year is plain suicidal, from a money-perspective...
I don't know. I'm seriously considering getting a G5 before PowerMacs transition to Intel. I've been wanting another Power Mac for a long time. And it doesn't matter if you're not planning to sell it later.

Frankly, I always buy my Macs with the idea of keeping it for a long time to come, or assigning it another task or giving it away when it no longer suits my needs. I have a great Power Mac 8600 running Mac OS X, still being used for SETI@home, e-Mail, web browsing, etc.
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 06:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by Thorzdad
True, the hardware will probably be supported for awhile. However, I seriously doubt PPC owners will see much in the way of upgrading done to any software they may be running. Anyone honestly think we'll see an Adobe CS3 for PPC Macs?
Yes because all they have to do is click a button, a option for the software to work on both.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 06:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by Millennium
Extra testing, extra packaging costs, extra support costs... there are plenty of reasons.

Extra Packaging costs um lets see, how much more will it cost them to put a sticker on the box that says PPC/X86 and under requirements listing PPC or X86 Macintosh. There is no extra support costs and maybe a little bit of extra testing.
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
Athens
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Great White North
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 06:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by Millennium
I remember the switch. Most major apps ditched 68K within two versions. Fat binaries ("Universal Binaries", Apple now calls them) were almost unheard of; most developers preferred to ship two versions, one for each processor.
Most shareware developers who made software in the time when most downloads where done over dialup internet. All major apps where FAT
Blandine Bureau 1940 - 2011
Missed 2012 by 3 days, RIP Grandma :-(
     
CharlesS
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 12:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Athens
Yes because all they have to do is click a button, a option for the software to work on both.
Not exactly. For a complex application suite like Adobe CS3, I expect that they'll have to do quite a bit of work to port it.

Ticking sound coming from a .pkg package? Don't let the .bom go off! Inspect it first with Pacifist. Macworld - five mice!
     
The Godfather
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 01:30 PM
 
The only reason why Macs had a high resale value was that G4s were not obeying Moore's law. Expect your G5 to decrease its value by 40% from Jan06 to Dec 06.

Unless the x86 chips come first to the consumer machines (they might be considered slower, since they don't support Altivec). In that case, I win because I will be able to get a Windows bootable iBook.
     
Superchicken
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Winnipeg
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 04:40 PM
 
I'm gona be getting a dual 2Ghz G5 in the next few months. Why? We've got at least another two years of PPC Pro level Macs. Hence where the big boys make their money. This means that All pro apps have at least a 4-6 live span being shipped for these Macs. I mean does Adobe really even wanna abandon the dual 1Ghz PMs? My PowerBook runs newer Apps pretty darned good. By the time my G5 is out of date for the newer software, I'm not gona be wanting to run it on it anyway

And resale value... my Macs are like my children, I never sell em. I use em as file servers
     
goMac
Posting Junkie
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 05:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by CharlesS
Not exactly. For a complex application suite like Adobe CS3, I expect that they'll have to do quite a bit of work to port it.
It also depends whether or not they hand wrote their AltiVec code. If they used the Accelerate framework to abstract it they'll be fine. But, in since Accelerator didn't exist under OS 9, and CS3 is still based on a Mac OS 9 port, I would bet they did hand write their AltiVecc.
8 Core 2.8 ghz Mac Pro/GF8800/2 23" Cinema Displays, 3.06 ghz Macbook Pro
Once you wanted revolution, now you're the institution, how's it feel to be the man?
     
mitchell_pgh
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jul 2, 2005, 05:40 PM
 
I think Adobe is happy to see Apple port to x86. They will be able to use many common pieces of software and optimize for a common CPU.
     
 
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 06:41 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.,