Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
epp_b

Windows Longhorn

Recommended Posts

Guest ThunderRiver

nlinecomputers, exactly my point. Every one is saying Microsoft is bad, but it has the right business mind. Bill Gates is the No. 1 richest man in USA, but he wasn't just lucky. He got the right timing. If he was JUST ONLY lucky all the way, Microsoft would not be this big to this date. On top of that, I am also a dedicated external & internal beta tester for Microsoft, so I know which direction they are most likely heading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well he was partly lucky. Much of the reason Microsoft is so big is because IBM made several critical mistakes in their dealings with them. Gates was no idiot and he took total advantage of the mistakes made. Had IBM signed an exculsive contract with Microsoft for MS-DOS then Compaq and all the other clone makers wouldn't had an OS to run their computers on. As it is Microsoft was able to sell DOS to anyone and anyone could make a PC....One infinite market for one supplier = unlimted profits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually he was very lucky. Gates had no operating system when he was first approached by IBM and sent them to see Gary Kidall of Digital Research who had a sucessful OS selling over 600,000 copies of CP/M. IBM met with Mrs. Kidall [Gary was unavailable] and she refused to sign a non-disclosure statement. And IBM wouldn't tell her what they were planning without her signature - so they left.IBM returned to Gates and gave him the job of developing a OS. Gates then bought Q-DOS [Quick and Dirty Operating System] from Seattle Computer Works written by a Tim Paterson for $50,000 and Gates didn't disclose he already had a deal with IBM. The rest is history. Wonder what would of happened had Mrs. Kidall signed the non-disclosure statement? I guess we will never know. Do you think Gary may of been just a little perturbed at her? PS In 1984 MS did pay Tim Patterson $1M :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The rest is history. Wonder what would of happened had Mrs. Kidall signed the non-disclosure statement?
And what if Mrs. O'Leary's cow didn't kick over that latern? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Getting back to a point ThunderRiver made a while back, what if the Win XP license worked this way:
Each person who owns Windows Xp is entitled to have 2 licenses, which entitles the person to install the same copy on 2 machines max
Several folks in the press lobbied Microsoft very hard to do exactly this before XP launched. They really did give is strong consideration, but I think the bean counters took over and they decided not to. If you think this isn't all about money, you're missing the whole point. It's also about selling new PCs. They believe by doing this that people will buy new PCs. It's just too expensive to upgrade your OS now, and too complicated too.In my opinion, it's a very short-term mentality. I don't disagree with Microsoft's rights to do this. They have every right. But I do think it's both bad for them and for the marketplace long-term. It's things like this that are driving a lot of long-time Windows stalwarts toward Linux.And let me tell you, the way Linux is rising now? It bears more than a passing similarity to the way Microsoft rose in the early 1980s.Microsoft is the new IBM.-- Scot
This certainly would have been a more benevolent way for Microsoft to handle licensing. And at the price they charge would have been an intelligent move.They have not sold nearly as many copies of WinXP as they thought they would. Many people just said, no thanks.WinXP is a great OS, even with the constant security issues. I for one will be glad when they get WindowsUpdate working better. In it's current state, they could never require updates because too many updates break and/or slow systems or cause corruption of data. We have seen this repeatedly with WinXP and WindowsUpdates.As far as locking you out of the OS you purchase with expiration dates. I think this is where things are headed, but I also think this is a very suicidal approach. They WILL lock people out of THEIR data when they lock the OS. That is the same as taking ownership of someone else's data.I also believe that Microsoft is the next IBM and that they have worked hard to this end and are very proud of their status and level of control over users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ThunderRiver

Microsoft may be the next IBM, but there is a very very sharp difference between the Big Blue and the software giant.IBM takes months to make decisions, and once they make the decision, it is already too late. Other competitors already took over the market. IBM has many great elite people, but their marketing is poor. They don't know how to market their products well enough that OS/2 fell shortly after Windows 3.1 hit the market.Microsoft, on the other hand, does listen to its customers. They don't always do what customers desire, but they do listen. The interaction between develoopers and external beta testers have been excellent so far except Microsoft Office Team. I have dealt with Office team before, and their arrogant attituide is indeed sick. On the other hand, I have dealt with Windows team before. They are very cooperative to any problems or suggestions that I raise up to them. In some cases, big Windows program managers and in more certain cases, the vice president of Windows (Brian Valentine) would contact us directly though emails or MSN Messenger. That's the level of interaction I am talking about. They don't make decisions like IBM does. They make quick and sharp one. Bill Gates didn't make Microsoft go big. It is the people that work for Microsoft making it prosperous.ThunderRiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<<They have not sold nearly as many copies of WinXP as they thought they would. Many people just said, no thanks.WinXP is a great OS, even with the constant security issues. I for one will be glad when they get WindowsUpdate working better. In it's current state, they could never require updates because too many updates break and/or slow systems or cause corruption of data. We have seen this repeatedly with WinXP and WindowsUpdates.>>Oh really... In October of 2002, the total sales count of XP was up to 67 Million copies and counting. SourceI guess that means nobody likes it or wants it... Perhaps we are talking about the difference between perception and reality. You precieve that nobody likes nor wants XP. But the reality speaks differently. Those sales figures are nearly 10 months old. Are you saying that nobody cares nor is interested 10 months later? MS keeps making money quarter after quarter. We all know the the X-Box is an ongoing loss... so how does MS keep making billions? Smoke and mirrors?<<We have seen this... >> Please define "we." I only ask because I have never had a problem with WU in relation to XP, Win2K or the new Win2k3 Server. My friends have not had any issues either...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ThunderRiver

Not everyone hate Windows Xp. I am sure there are people that dislike Linux due to its lack of support. There is not really any centrical support from any distro. SuSE barely supports much, not to mention Mandrake. The support that Linux talks about comes from fellow Linux users..enough said.I am quite happy with Windows Xp though I have to say that Windows 2003 is a lot more stable and secure than Xp is. Even though I am 95% Windows user, it does't mean I don't know how to use Linux. I compile programs mostly in BSD/Solaris platform, so I know my drills with Linux commands. On top of that, I am also looking forward to YellowTab, the new BeOS. I enjoyed the version 5, but I want more if you know what I meant ;)There is still a huge momentum with Windows Xp even after 10 months of sale. If Windows Xp is not big enough, i am sure Windows 2000 would add to the weight. One thing I find in Linux is that it is hard to manage the data stored on the hard drive, and I tend to find Linux not uninstalling the sources after installation. They just add up the space over time. People complain about Windows partitions being as big as 2 gig, but Linux adds up weight....3 gig..5 gig...10 gig.. it is just staggering. Oh well, Linux is not yet good enough for desktop use yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First, let's please remember to keep responses squarely on the topic not aimed at a Forum Member as Scot has stated in the forums in the past and which is outlined in #4 of the Forums Rules as quoted below:4. Scot’s Newsletter Forums has zero tolerance for inconsiderate or mean people. Personal attacks and insults to others will not be tolerated. While it is acceptable to challenge others' points of view and opinions, please do so only respectfully and thoughtfully. Any member who belittles or threatens anyone on these forums (via forum post, PM, or email) will be warned or banned.Thanks.

WinXP is a great OS, even with the constant security issues. I for one will be glad when they get WindowsUpdate working better. In it's current state, they could never require updates because too many updates break and/or slow systems or cause corruption of data. We have seen this repeatedly with WinXP and WindowsUpdates.
There have been postings from our forums members who have experienced the very types of items mentioned in the quote above and can be found easily enough through the search function on the forums.In addition clients have called at their wits end for help because of many of the same issues experienced by our forum members.I definitely do not hate WinXP at all. As I mentioned in the quote from my previous posting, WinXP is a great OS. It is certainly Microsoft's most stable OS to date.Glad to hear that WinXP sales have gotten better in the last year.With all the speculation going on .. it will be interesting to see the new Longhorn when it is completed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me but I fail to see where I have been inconsiderate or mean. I quoted your post precisely. I challenged your assertion with published facts quoting the source. I did not personally attack you.All I did was challenge your assertions.As to the issue of users with Windows Update problems... I read posts on many forums dealing with MS products. You used the collective we as if we all had suffered from WU issues. I challenged that as well. I personally have had zero issues with WU.Some folks do have issues but the majority doesn't. I think if it were the other way around we would be reading an endless stream of negative stories from every rag on the planet. That does not seem to be the case. The rags that are out there are always looking for faults.I read others on other forums advise users seeking help not to use, Windows Update because they read somewhere where WU caused horrible problems and should be avoided at all costs. They advise folks with little to zero experience who were seeking sound advice, to not use a very useful tool. Last week we suffer the MSBlast worm. Home users and many businesses were caught with their pants down. The patch was there long before the flaw became an issue. Were many of these home users following the advice found on many forums? Hard to say but it is clear that users need to use WU or their machines may be under someone elses control.I believe these forums do a great service to the computing community. I don't believe everything I read nor should anyone else for that matter. Challenge the assertions to get to the truth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I read others on other forums advise users seeking help not to use, Windows Update because they read somewhere where WU caused horrible problems and should be avoided at all costs. They advise folks with little to zero experience who were seeking sound advice, to not use a very useful tool. Last week we suffer the MSBlast worm. Home users and many businesses were caught with their pants down. The patch was there long before the flaw became an issue. Were many of these home users following the advice found on many forums? Hard to say but it is clear that users need to use WU or their machines may be under someone elses control.I believe these forums do a great service to the computing community. I don't believe everything I read nor should anyone else for that matter. Challenge the assertions to get to the truth.
That's the problem with the net. Anyone can post anything, verified true or not. I think that half of what you read on many forums is rumor or pure BS. The problem, of course, is knowing which half is which. Most users don't use forums and in fact don't even know that this resource exists.As to MSBlast - Windows is a complicated beast. Yet the average user thinks (or wants to think ) that it works like a TV. You turn it on or off and there is no maintenance involved other than wiping the screen occasionally. Your average user knows nothing about firewall's, little about viruses (except what they might stumble across in a newspaper headline story) and nothing about computer security issues in general. MS should enable their firewall and should make updates automatic (unless you go turn it off) out of the box to protect these people from themselves. OTOH, the system admin and/or the technical management of any business that gets hit by a virus because they don't have a patch in place should be fired. They aren't doing their job and should know better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree on that point. patch patch and more patch. in win2k, i had trouble with games freezing randomly. its a conflict with VIA's AGP. fixed in win2K SP4. then i had a problem with add/remove programs crashing with MSHTA.EXE error. microsoft themselves dont even know the REAL solution. :) they're so-called knowledge base says "do sfc /purgecache, then sfc /scannow". what a drivel of an answer. the technical equivalent of "did you turn the computer ON?" shame on those that call Microsoft support great. its mediocore, at best. for real technical issues, i google it. i read some post that updating to IE6 SP1 in Win2K will fix the MSHTA.EXE error, and sure enough, after doing that upgrade, it fixed the problem. MS seems to have a decent record with patches that fix many problems, so patch everything you can, but to call their support excellent is a bit of a stretch in imagination.

Oh well, Linux is not yet good enough for desktop use yet.
and Thunderriver, though i respect your opinion as i feel you are one of our most knowledgeable members here, ya gotta use Linux more than 5% of the time to give a valid answer to "is linux ready for destkop use". it IS ready for some, it isnt for others. i personally found driver installation / detection, DSL modem hook up, and parition / boot managing to be FAR superior to anything Microsoft has put out. then again, other spend months trying to get an ISA sound card working. luck of the draw, but works both ways. i had issue after issue getting an old WinTV card working in Windows, while SuSE Linux detected it on boot and worked flawlessly. for people that only use documents, internet, email, etc.., Linux is certainly ready. for graphic/web designers, gamers, designers, Linux isnt for them. how does Windows 2003 server look like? does it have Luna theme like XP, or is it more stripped down like win2000? also, would if fare well as a stand-alone desktop computer with an Athlon 800, 512 RAM and good video card?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Let me point you to the MS Action Pack. $25K to $30K of MS software for a $300 first year "subscription." Each year after that is just $200 bucks. I'm in my 3rd year and the 3rd quarter updates are on the way. I have 20 licenses for Office XP Professional. Before my 3rd year subscription expires, I will receive 20 licenses for Office System 2003 Professional. These are not upgrades but full product installs. So you ask what did this Office refresh cost me? This year, $200 bucks for the subscription which has already shipped a copy of Windows 2003 Advanced Server and a piece of paper informing all MS Subscription holders that their 5 licenses per Action Packs have been increased to 10 licenses per desktop product. Did I also mention that the July update is also shipping MS CRM (Customer Resource Management) with 5 user licenses and 1 CRM Server license. That little tool is worth $5K retail.
Marsden11, you fail to mention that "The Microsoft Action Pack Subscription is restricted to resellers, consultants, value-added resellers, value-added providers, system integrators, developers, system builders, hosts, service providers, and IT professionals who sell Microsoft products or provide solutions based on Microsoft products and technologies to third-party customers."
.That's well and good for you, but what about those of us who don't qualify? Yes, there are academic versions, but they are restricted to academics and full-time students. MS also has a good program for charities and not-for-profit organisations, but they are not available to the rest of us either.The $300 you mention (I assume you're talking about the $299 cost of the Standard subscription) is for some of us a large sum of money! I guess those who qualify to subscribe would be able to afford that, but I certainly wouldn't.Another point is that the subscription cost varies from country to country (as does the software content, according to the website). In my country, Australia, the standard subscription is $AUD699, or $USD447 -- almost $USD150 more than the US version. The Plus subscription is not available here. I have to grin when I read some of the posts in this topic. Some of you in the US either assume that prices of software and hardware elsewhere in the world are as cheap as they are for you, or you're forgetting that you have readers in other parts of the world. MS products are not cheap in Australia; we pay considerably more than you for the same products. WinXP Pro here, for example, costs around $AUD599 or $AUD415 for the upgrade version. Those figures translate to $USD383 or $USD265, which is considerably more than prices I've seen mentioned in the US. I have the feeling that hardware prices here are more comparable to those in the US, but I don't have time to check that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ThunderRiver

I suppose I can easily fall into the category of developer. I am not developing anything at this moment, but that's I do in spare time. Or I could also be an IT that administer a network of 100+ machines. On the other hand, I don't use Action Pack. We have volume licensing program with Microsoft, so no activation required.Ziba, we never forget that there are people from Europe and parts of Asian countries. Obviously the price would be higher in other countries because of the piracy. The more piracy takes places in Europe, the higher cost is going to be for MS products.On the other hand, the current model of WPA is suitable enough if you only own one or two machines. You should not be worrying about such thing unless you have 5 to 20 computers inside your house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest ThunderRiver
I read others on other forums advise users seeking help not to use, Windows Update because they read somewhere where WU caused horrible problems and should be avoided at all costs. They advise folks with little to zero experience who were seeking sound advice, to not use a very useful tool. Last week we suffer the MSBlast worm. Home users and many businesses were caught with their pants down. The patch was there long before the flaw became an issue. Were many of these home users following the advice found on many forums? Hard to say but it is clear that users need to use WU or their machines may be under someone elses control.I believe these forums do a great service to the computing community. I don't believe everything I read nor should anyone else for that matter. Challenge the assertions to get to the truth.
That's the problem with the net. Anyone can post anything, verified true or not. I think that half of what you read on many forums is rumor or pure BS. The problem, of course, is knowing which half is which. Most users don't use forums and in fact don't even know that this resource exists.As to MSBlast - Windows is a complicated beast. Yet the average user thinks (or wants to think ) that it works like a TV. You turn it on or off and there is no maintenance involved other than wiping the screen occasionally. Your average user knows nothing about firewall's, little about viruses (except what they might stumble across in a newspaper headline story) and nothing about computer security issues in general. MS should enable their firewall and should make updates automatic (unless you go turn it off) out of the box to protect these people from themselves. OTOH, the system admin and/or the technical management of any business that gets hit by a virus because they don't have a patch in place should be fired. They aren't doing their job and should know better.
Yes, I understand that a large number of posts on forums may not be truthful most of the time, but forums have its own reason to stay or else we would not be here today.You mentioend about auto-automatic update. Well, what about dial up users? Are they willing to sacrifice their bandwidth just to have the program downloading patches in the background? I do feel that if MS can provide more GUI for the firewall configuration, it will help the public as a whole to understand security better.I am not really for installing patches in the background becaues I watch patch update like a hawk. I get security bulletins all the time, and I only install most critial patches most of the time, and wait for the major service pack to cover everything.If today have we automatic update installing patches in the background, we would be running into infiinite loop by installing this patch KB823718. Boy I have been installing that patch since last week.. and every time I reboot or not, Windows Update always says that patch is not installed even though it was installed successfully. Heh. so if you want to do background installation, automatic update would probably keep installing and degrade system performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I challenge anyone to show me an Intel P4 3+GHz or an AMD XP 3000+ running XP Pro with a GB of RAM acting slow... I have never personally seen it!
Marsden11 you're making assumptions again. This may be a "standard" machine for you, but some of us are still struggling along with old machines with MUCH slower CPUs and MUCH less RAM. And we can't afford to update every 18 months.I think you're missing the point that some people have been making here. If we have an old machine that does what we want it to, and does it well enough for our needs, and the old OS we're running is sufficient for us, why would we want to upgrade to the bloat of WinXP or Longhorn -- not to mention the cost of upgrading the hardware to run it? I think you've accidentally shot yourself in the foot here. An Intel P4 3+GHz with 1GB or RAM running XP Pro might not run slowly... but the point is that we shouldn't NEED a 3+GHz computer with 1GB of RAM. My Pentium running at 400MHz with 128Mb of RAM was quite adequate for my needs. Give me one good reason I should upgrade to WinXP, assuming I could afford to buy both the OS and the hardware I'd need to run it.A lot of people want a lean OS that they can configure at will that will run on less hardware. Windows has been progressing (?) in the other direction. It's anything but lean, has become more than an OS (as someone mentioned), and needs ever higher-specification hardware to run it. Why should anyone upgrade if they don't need to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ziba... You make a very valid argument, but this isn't the way technology works... Technology is designed to make people desire newer and better things... If everyone was content with their PentiumII 400s, we'd never have 3+ Ghz machines... Why should MS make an OS for an old system when they can add features that make use of the new capabilities? This is all about progression, and that's the way it's always going to be... I personally think we're lucky that XP will run on anything less than 1.5Ghz! You can run XP very nicely on a 1Ghz machine (bought/built for around $200). Shoot, it ran quite well on my PIII 600Mhz. Computers ARE NOT a one-time purchase... They're designed to be replaced every few years... Why provide support for old machines (no $$$) when you can develop for the new ones (lots of $$$)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Technology improvements also bring lower prices. I remember in 1993 adding a stick of 4MB of RAM that cost $200. Hard drives were $1 per 1MB. A 1MB video display adapter was top of the line and a 14.4 modem at $150 was a deal! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<<Marsden11, you fail to mention that "The Microsoft Action Pack Subscription is restricted to resellers, consultants, value-added resellers, value-added providers, system integrators, developers, system builders, hosts, service providers,...>>"Consultant" is a very broad term. I tell my associates that if you help others with their computers they are doing exactly what a consultant does. For the most part, all a consultant does is look at your watch and tell you what time it is...I'm sorry that you can't afford it where you live. It is a terrific program.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<<Marsden11 you're making assumptions again. This may be a "standard" machine for you, but some of us are still struggling along with old machines with MUCH slower CPUs and MUCH less RAM. And we can't afford to update every 18 months. >>I'm not assuming anything here. I know that many have and use older hardware. I know that many have only dial-up connections. I like to encourage everyone to keep pace as best they can. Why? So the cost of transition is not so steep. Products like the Asus A7A266 motherboard are a great example of bridging the technology gap. A simple board that supports both PC 100/133 RAM or the newer DDR RAM. When it first was released, it covered just the early AMD Athlons and XP line of CPUs. A few BIOS tweaks later and this older board can now handle up to an AMD XP 2400. Asus extended it's useful life. I might not be able to afford that newer DDR RAM but I can still use my older PC100 memory just fine. It allows me to use older hardware with some newer hardware. The pain of transition is much less.You quoted me on my challenge on that I have never personally seen a "slow" P4 3GHz+ machine. To date I have not seen a slow one. But you are right that many don't need that kind of speed. I use them for video editing and they exceed at that task very well. For me it is more about having the right tool for the job. Someone could ask me to go into the forest and cut down a tree. They could hand me a simple hand saw and I could and would eventually cut down that tree. Or I could use a chainsaw and cut down many trees in the same period of time.<<why would we want to upgrade to the bloat of WinXP or Longhorn... >>Excellent question! Perhaps for the enhanced computing experience. Perhaps for a stable machine that does not require reboots to deal with system hangs every day. I have many friends who prefer to use Win98 and don't seem to mind the daily reboots.One of the things I like about the bloat of XP is the advance of technology that gives me, the user, more control... XP gives me an experience way beyond what has come before from MS. Take for instance Help. Everyone has always complained about how useless Help has been through the years. I clicked on Help and Support in XP yesterday and I noticed something for the first time. Help and Support had last been updated August 30th, 2003!help-support.jpgI never saw that in any of the 9X products. My XP Help files are not static at a month old or 6 months old, or ever a year old. They are current and only a day old at this point in time. I have the latest in Help at my finger tips. We all need help from time to time so I think that is a pretty good reason for the bloat.<<Give me one good reason I should upgrade to WinXP, assuming I could afford to buy both the OS and the hardware I'd need to run it. >>I just did...Another might well be Remote Assistance... best thing ever for helping family members that live out of state...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If one can afford a computer and the components to make it compatible, XP is very stable and a lot of fun.If not, it would be nice if Microsoft would have considered keeping up with at least any new Security issues (instead of just the current as of the given date Security issues) of the extremely popular Win9x.I think they are the ones who shot themselves in the foot ;)Many folks will not be able to make the hardware upgrades necessary to upgrade, especially when Win9x works for their needs and they can't justify the cost when life itself is expensive enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No disrespect, but often it is not whether someone can "afford" something or not but rather do they choose to afford it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XP gives me an experience way beyond what has come before from MS. Take for instance Help. Everyone has always complained about how useless Help has been through the years. I clicked on Help and Support in XP yesterday and I noticed something for the first time. Help and Support had last been updated August 30th, 2003!I never saw that in any of the 9X products. My XP Help files are not static at a month old or 6 months old, or ever a year old. They are current and only a day old at this point in time. I have the latest in Help at my finger tips. We all need help from time to time so I think that is a pretty good reason for the bloat.
MY WinXP SP1 Help system doesn't seem to get updated. I do have auto updates turned on. I can't find that updated date you show in your image (but I am using classic mode also).I went to the: Set search optionsIn this section I looked at the settings for the Microsoft Knowledge BaseIn the drop down for Select a product or topic: I only see Win2000. There is no mention of WinXP anywhere.My system has always been like this. Do you have any ideas on how I can update the help system? I have all the current critical and recommeded fixes from Windows Update. I even looked through the Windows Catalog and did not see anything relaated to an update for Help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was growing up as a teenager, my folks told me if I wanted my own car, I needed to get a job and support that car. Buy it myself, pay for all the gas and insurance myself. I was 16 at the time and in school. I really wanted my own car! So I found a job after school with the city where I lived. I did not have much free time with working and school but I did get my car... It was a choice I had to make.I know there are exceptions to this, but for the most part we all choose what we spend our money on. If I did not have health insurance and my daughter needed an operation which I could not afford, I would work 2, 3, 4 jobs or whatever it took to get the money. Again, it is all choice...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fire up Help and Support and search for the MSBlaster worm info or any other topic for that matter. Help and Support will update itself right before your eyes...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fire up Help and Support and search for the MSBlaster worm info or any other topic for that matter. Help and Support will update itself right before your eyes...
I tried your suggestion. Got "0 results found for msblaster" and no auto update occurred. There doesn't seem to be any way for me to update this beast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...