ColoJohnBoy
May 22, 11:28 AM
As I write this, I am sitting at my parent's old Compaq Presario 5000, with 750 MHz AMD Duron, 576 MB RAM, 30 GB Hard Drive, and 64 MB NVidia GeForce 2 card (Most of it I have upgraded myself) and running Windows XP Home. I have used PCs for about ten years now. I am familiar with them, I know exactly where to find everthing on them, how to fix everything on them.... I know how everything works, even in XP. Yet Last June, I switched to Mac. Why?
1) Design. PC computers are just hideous. Really, they're simply not attractive to look at. The only one that comes glose is Gateway's All-In-One computer. But even that is no iMac. Apple computers really are beautiful. They're simple, graceful, and durable.
2) Mac OS X. Like I said, I know every Windows OS inside and out, having used every iteration of it for ten years. Yet I prefer OS X. Just like the physical design of the computer, OS X is simple, graceful, and durable. What some might perceive as "dumbed down" I see as rid of the unneecessary aspects that all but a small fraction of the computer user population use. It's clear and straightforward, and never have I experienced any problems with it. I admit, it has crashed twice. But both times it was because I was trying to run a severly faulty program. That's two crashes in one year. I'm lucky if I can make it through one day without having Windows (Yes, even XP) crash twice.
3) iApps. I've been using my parents computer lately, and looking for a good MP3 program to use while I do. I've been spoilt by iTunes. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, for PCs that works as well as iTunes. I've been using MusicMatch, but after iTunes it seems clunky, redundant, and difficult to use. Dare I say, unintuitive.
4) Health. I have enough headaches in my life already. I don't need even the small stresses that crashes, program errors, and unintuitive programs cause. I don't stress out when I'm using my Macs. It's like electronic aspirin.
I admit to bashing Pcs. But I must defend myself by saying that I use them enough to be entitled to such bashing. For me, Macs are better, and I bash them with good reason.
That, and bashing PCs is just fun ;)
Visit http://bluepudding.1hwy.com
1) Design. PC computers are just hideous. Really, they're simply not attractive to look at. The only one that comes glose is Gateway's All-In-One computer. But even that is no iMac. Apple computers really are beautiful. They're simple, graceful, and durable.
2) Mac OS X. Like I said, I know every Windows OS inside and out, having used every iteration of it for ten years. Yet I prefer OS X. Just like the physical design of the computer, OS X is simple, graceful, and durable. What some might perceive as "dumbed down" I see as rid of the unneecessary aspects that all but a small fraction of the computer user population use. It's clear and straightforward, and never have I experienced any problems with it. I admit, it has crashed twice. But both times it was because I was trying to run a severly faulty program. That's two crashes in one year. I'm lucky if I can make it through one day without having Windows (Yes, even XP) crash twice.
3) iApps. I've been using my parents computer lately, and looking for a good MP3 program to use while I do. I've been spoilt by iTunes. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, for PCs that works as well as iTunes. I've been using MusicMatch, but after iTunes it seems clunky, redundant, and difficult to use. Dare I say, unintuitive.
4) Health. I have enough headaches in my life already. I don't need even the small stresses that crashes, program errors, and unintuitive programs cause. I don't stress out when I'm using my Macs. It's like electronic aspirin.
I admit to bashing Pcs. But I must defend myself by saying that I use them enough to be entitled to such bashing. For me, Macs are better, and I bash them with good reason.
That, and bashing PCs is just fun ;)
Visit http://bluepudding.1hwy.com
jose fuertes s.
Oct 19, 12:04 PM
ummm an iPhone, but what it will make this thing special, Design?, Os?, well one thing is for sure, Apple design things that are really kickin ass, iMacs, iPods, an such things. The OS, well it will be like the iPod OS (but definitely much better) on this iPhone, i dont think apple will put and minimal version of OS X on this iPhone... or could they?
iAppTime
Nov 27, 06:22 PM
Why ?
If it were genuine White iPhone 4 parts, Apple most likely wants to investigate where they got leaked.
If it were genuine White iPhone 4 parts, Apple most likely wants to investigate where they got leaked.
hazz4121
Sep 13, 06:34 PM
sorry 10.1.5
more...
HBOC
Mar 29, 01:16 PM
here are some good references to get a grasp of the differences. As others have stated, the lens is the same focal length, but on a smaller sensor body (APC), the image is essentially "cropped". Some websites..
Site #1 (http://www.extremeinstability.com/topic-full-frame.htm)
Site #2 (http://www.petapixel.com/2010/10/02/full-frame-vs-crop-sensor-comparison/)
Site #3 (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/canon-lenses/field-of-view-crop-factor.aspx)
The second site is a video that is nice. 3rd site has good info.
It is funny HOW NO ONE clicked on these links. It has all the info here, and you can see what the differences are... or people can just keep arguing.
Site #1 (http://www.extremeinstability.com/topic-full-frame.htm)
Site #2 (http://www.petapixel.com/2010/10/02/full-frame-vs-crop-sensor-comparison/)
Site #3 (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/canon-lenses/field-of-view-crop-factor.aspx)
The second site is a video that is nice. 3rd site has good info.
It is funny HOW NO ONE clicked on these links. It has all the info here, and you can see what the differences are... or people can just keep arguing.
rdowns
May 2, 01:22 PM
I wish this would begin our troop withdrawal from Afghanistan. Simply a money pit.
The fact is, little will likely change. We'll still keep buying cold war era weapons like the F-22.
Trillions of dollars on all those cold war fighter jets and all we have to show for it is ****ing Top Gun. :D
The fact is, little will likely change. We'll still keep buying cold war era weapons like the F-22.
Trillions of dollars on all those cold war fighter jets and all we have to show for it is ****ing Top Gun. :D
more...
marksandvig
Mar 21, 03:08 AM
Who cares??? its a $500 device that can replace all computer needs of any student. Period.
When was the last time you were in a university class? No offense, but before the iPad came out, I said I would purchase one if it did everything I needed it to do (word processing, FULL internet, music, and email). Unfortunately, it doesn't multi-task, and it does not do the full internet.
When was the last time you were in a university class? No offense, but before the iPad came out, I said I would purchase one if it did everything I needed it to do (word processing, FULL internet, music, and email). Unfortunately, it doesn't multi-task, and it does not do the full internet.
kbmb
Mar 26, 03:07 PM
Two questions:
1) Is that an iPad on the table?
2) Who paid for the coffee? :D
-Kevin
1) Is that an iPad on the table?
2) Who paid for the coffee? :D
-Kevin
more...
steadysignal
Apr 1, 08:51 AM
2011. People are still watching TV? Scary.
indeed. the day will come that it wont matter what you watch content on, just how it gets paid for...
wishing that advertising would just die is fun. pipe-dream, but fun nonetheless. everyone wants to be paid.
indeed. the day will come that it wont matter what you watch content on, just how it gets paid for...
wishing that advertising would just die is fun. pipe-dream, but fun nonetheless. everyone wants to be paid.
liavman
Apr 27, 10:02 AM
Thanks Palter. Based on all your input, I booked my ticket on a 7 P.M. flight. Hopefully I can leave Moscone by 5 P.M. and make it. I assume it will take a bit longer than usual at that time of the day to get to San Francisco International Airport -SFO ( Google says half an hour with traffic )
more...
Axl Rose
Mar 27, 01:24 PM
when was that?
TheMacBookPro
Apr 23, 11:28 AM
Just saw this thread, so I figured I'd share some knowledge (been gaming for 8 years).
So the reason why people are avoiding these things like the plague is because they STINK. The Intel chipsets ARE more powerful than the NVIDIA 320M, BUT, that doesn't always equal better performance.
Game developers usually design games on nvidia chipsets (Hence, "Nvidia: The way it's meant to be played) slogan.
Although the 3000HD shows better specs, it's been proven to perform worse in game. The reason being that the drivers are total rubbish. Until they can improve the drivers, it's a downgrade. But then again.............who in their right mind would try and game with a laptop!? ;)
:eek: You're joking right?
I have always gamed on laptops - M17x, M11x, MBP, VAIO Z... list goes on and on. Add the Air to that list now. The 320M is a very capable chip and it can play many modern games at medium settings smoothly.
The way you describe laptop chipsets makes you sound like you've only ever tried laptop gaming with a GMA500 :p
So the reason why people are avoiding these things like the plague is because they STINK. The Intel chipsets ARE more powerful than the NVIDIA 320M, BUT, that doesn't always equal better performance.
Game developers usually design games on nvidia chipsets (Hence, "Nvidia: The way it's meant to be played) slogan.
Although the 3000HD shows better specs, it's been proven to perform worse in game. The reason being that the drivers are total rubbish. Until they can improve the drivers, it's a downgrade. But then again.............who in their right mind would try and game with a laptop!? ;)
:eek: You're joking right?
I have always gamed on laptops - M17x, M11x, MBP, VAIO Z... list goes on and on. Add the Air to that list now. The 320M is a very capable chip and it can play many modern games at medium settings smoothly.
The way you describe laptop chipsets makes you sound like you've only ever tried laptop gaming with a GMA500 :p
more...
kpangilinan
Nov 14, 03:13 PM
I believe this will be the coolest thing ever. As long as it charges it at the same time, I'll fly more.
thatisme
Mar 29, 07:24 AM
robbieduncan is right-on with his explanation, you're making incorrect claims: focal lengths are independent of the size of the sensor, a 50 mm lens will be a 50 mm lens on a medium format body, a full frame analog body or an APS-C-sized dslr. What changes is the field of view, which is an angle. It is this angle which is different on the above-mentioned cameras. The reason why people write something to the effect `a 50 mm lens on a crop body is equivalent to 75~80 mm lens on a full frame body' is that we've gotten used to associating focal lengths on 35 mm bodies to FOVs. Sort of like Americans got used to measuring distances in miles rather than kilometers.
which is why I have not made the claim that 200mm on one lens is not equal to 200mm on the other (by actual measurements). What I have claimed is that the EFFECTIVE (perceived) focal length is different, when angle is taken into effect (the size of the sensor in relation to the size of the rear element).
YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF. on the EF lens, the 200mm assumes you are using the ENTIRE image circle of the lens, which you are not. You ARE using the ENTIRE image circle on the EF-S lens, which is a True 200mm for that camera. You have to use the ENTIRE image circle to get a true measure of the focal length. when you use only a portion of that image circle, you have to apply the FOVCF to get the EFFECTIVE focal length.
Your last 2 sentences actually prove my point for me. Everything in today's photography arsenal (at least in DSLR) is based on the old film standard of 35mm image recording space (or sensor size). It is you standard of measure. It has not changed with Digital. This is why we have conversion factors and have to talk of EFFECTIVE focal lengths.
which is why I have not made the claim that 200mm on one lens is not equal to 200mm on the other (by actual measurements). What I have claimed is that the EFFECTIVE (perceived) focal length is different, when angle is taken into effect (the size of the sensor in relation to the size of the rear element).
YOU WILL GET DIFFERENT IMAGES IF YOU USE A 200mm EF Lens on a 7D (APS-C) and a 200mm EF-S lens on that same camera due to the FOVCF. on the EF lens, the 200mm assumes you are using the ENTIRE image circle of the lens, which you are not. You ARE using the ENTIRE image circle on the EF-S lens, which is a True 200mm for that camera. You have to use the ENTIRE image circle to get a true measure of the focal length. when you use only a portion of that image circle, you have to apply the FOVCF to get the EFFECTIVE focal length.
Your last 2 sentences actually prove my point for me. Everything in today's photography arsenal (at least in DSLR) is based on the old film standard of 35mm image recording space (or sensor size). It is you standard of measure. It has not changed with Digital. This is why we have conversion factors and have to talk of EFFECTIVE focal lengths.
more...
AdamBOh3
Mar 24, 01:04 PM
Are you people seriously applauding this? What a waste of our tax dollars!! I do contracts with the Navy every single day and I know that the technology that they have will not be benefited by the use of iPad/iPod/iPhone. The military does not offer wi-fi to their staff on base. Everything is hard wired and the conduit is sealed with a tamper proof silicon. The Government is very very particular about their SIPRnet (as they call it). Without wi-fi, what use is the iPad for the military other than to give them a little treat and waste our tax dollars? They already have mobile equipment in the vehicles that is far superior to Apple's products.
NONSENSE! As a recent active duty infantry Marine and now employed by the USMC I completely disagree! Do you work for SPAWAR or NMCI? You do contracts with the Navy everyday, eh? My father-in-law is a retired Naval Flight Officer, an electrical engineer, and works for SPAWAR in San Diego. He does not like Apple, he likes to do things the hardway and is stuck with windows, even though he concedes things like the iPhone have better technology than his Blackberry (The Blackberry's touch screen pushes down and triggers a touch vs. on an iPhone you just touch it, similar to putting a folder over your keyboard and calling it a touchkeyboard - keys are still being stroked).
And gov't tax dollars!!! Get out of town. My father-in-law has also submitted proposals to deliver millions in savings to the gov't by utilizing off-the-shelf components for USN,USCG, and USMC systems. He has been consistently squashed by higher-ups, some of them who are younger and maybe even Apple users, and they have virtually shut him up in favor of proprietary systems that utilize government contracts to make new systems that are COSTING THE TAXPAYERS MILLIONS. The simplified version is called waste, fraud, and abuse.
The Army is smart for working with Apple and I'm sure that DARPA does already (if not they should be). It sounds like you would rather sit back and see the good 'ol boy government system drown us in stagnation. It seems that BIG ARMY is maybe waking up. Then again, the equipment or chips will most likely be built in China where electronic spyware and backdoors could be put into play. And, do you think the Chinese military and foreign militaries around the world aren't reverse engingeering Apple products and modeling themselves after Apple's management and innovation processes? Welcome to the 21st century of warfare and espionage. You apparently abhor competetion, modernization, and warfighting superiority and would rather return to pre 1984.
Today, I work for the Marine Corps in remote CA. Wi-Fi is coming, as in it's not just a thought but a reality in the works. We have mobile equipment in Iraq/Afghanistan and all over the world and guess what... it's up to military standards but not particularly great and DEFINITELY NOT SUPERIOR TO APPLE PRODUCTS. I can go to amazon or a bix box store and by a better GPS unit than the military will provide and the same thing can be said about off-the-shelf Apple products and HOPEFULLY the Army believes this can be translated into military specific applications. Privates to Generals use Macs during war and they can be used on SIPRnet/NIPRnet. I know, I have done it. Tamper Proof silicon... you must be joking.
Still not sure if you are a Mac fan or a Mac hater. I do know that you don't know it all and I know that I too do not know it all. Yet, I do speak from operational experience.
NONSENSE! As a recent active duty infantry Marine and now employed by the USMC I completely disagree! Do you work for SPAWAR or NMCI? You do contracts with the Navy everyday, eh? My father-in-law is a retired Naval Flight Officer, an electrical engineer, and works for SPAWAR in San Diego. He does not like Apple, he likes to do things the hardway and is stuck with windows, even though he concedes things like the iPhone have better technology than his Blackberry (The Blackberry's touch screen pushes down and triggers a touch vs. on an iPhone you just touch it, similar to putting a folder over your keyboard and calling it a touchkeyboard - keys are still being stroked).
And gov't tax dollars!!! Get out of town. My father-in-law has also submitted proposals to deliver millions in savings to the gov't by utilizing off-the-shelf components for USN,USCG, and USMC systems. He has been consistently squashed by higher-ups, some of them who are younger and maybe even Apple users, and they have virtually shut him up in favor of proprietary systems that utilize government contracts to make new systems that are COSTING THE TAXPAYERS MILLIONS. The simplified version is called waste, fraud, and abuse.
The Army is smart for working with Apple and I'm sure that DARPA does already (if not they should be). It sounds like you would rather sit back and see the good 'ol boy government system drown us in stagnation. It seems that BIG ARMY is maybe waking up. Then again, the equipment or chips will most likely be built in China where electronic spyware and backdoors could be put into play. And, do you think the Chinese military and foreign militaries around the world aren't reverse engingeering Apple products and modeling themselves after Apple's management and innovation processes? Welcome to the 21st century of warfare and espionage. You apparently abhor competetion, modernization, and warfighting superiority and would rather return to pre 1984.
Today, I work for the Marine Corps in remote CA. Wi-Fi is coming, as in it's not just a thought but a reality in the works. We have mobile equipment in Iraq/Afghanistan and all over the world and guess what... it's up to military standards but not particularly great and DEFINITELY NOT SUPERIOR TO APPLE PRODUCTS. I can go to amazon or a bix box store and by a better GPS unit than the military will provide and the same thing can be said about off-the-shelf Apple products and HOPEFULLY the Army believes this can be translated into military specific applications. Privates to Generals use Macs during war and they can be used on SIPRnet/NIPRnet. I know, I have done it. Tamper Proof silicon... you must be joking.
Still not sure if you are a Mac fan or a Mac hater. I do know that you don't know it all and I know that I too do not know it all. Yet, I do speak from operational experience.
Designer Dale
Mar 18, 11:54 AM
These days much of the craftsmanship that used to take place in the darkroom coaxing a master print from a negative now takes place digitally. A technically well exposed frame can still produce a crappy print at the end of a less skilled artist. Conversely, technical perfection (second curtain sync, hyperfocal distancing gobbledygook) has very little to do with art, or even creativity. Great "art" these days is even being shot on a cellphone.
Both camps (the technical-crats & the ones who are blissfully unaware of the minutiae) can produce "great" work.
Many beginners suffer from the same bad pshop skills (hey, look... I can make grass grow on his head, no make that two heads) and mistakes that beginning designers can (hey look, I can make EACH letter a different color, and a different font).
All that being said, if I was teaching beginning photographers I would remove almost everything to start (camera, lens, etc.) and go primitive and start with building pinhole cameras. Then I would progress to the end point which would be post-processing. Post-processing is huge though...
cheers,
michael
When I learned film photography in the '70s, we were not allowed to use our SLR cameras. The college provided 4x5 view cameras. That put all of us on the same level for the first year. By the time I was finishing up my senior work using my Nikon the school had beginning students building pin hole cameras. This helped a lot. When I showed up for my first classes, some of the other students had Hasselbad cameras. Forgetting about gear forced us to think about the frame and what was going on in there.
Dale
Both camps (the technical-crats & the ones who are blissfully unaware of the minutiae) can produce "great" work.
Many beginners suffer from the same bad pshop skills (hey, look... I can make grass grow on his head, no make that two heads) and mistakes that beginning designers can (hey look, I can make EACH letter a different color, and a different font).
All that being said, if I was teaching beginning photographers I would remove almost everything to start (camera, lens, etc.) and go primitive and start with building pinhole cameras. Then I would progress to the end point which would be post-processing. Post-processing is huge though...
cheers,
michael
When I learned film photography in the '70s, we were not allowed to use our SLR cameras. The college provided 4x5 view cameras. That put all of us on the same level for the first year. By the time I was finishing up my senior work using my Nikon the school had beginning students building pin hole cameras. This helped a lot. When I showed up for my first classes, some of the other students had Hasselbad cameras. Forgetting about gear forced us to think about the frame and what was going on in there.
Dale
more...
Eraserhead
Jun 12, 04:10 PM
http://guides.macrumors.com/Vista_Beta_2_on_Macbook_Pro should be deleted, Vista full is now out.
EDIT:
http://guides.macrumors.com/Category:Macs can now be deleted, the articles have now been moved as suggested above. Guides has also been emptied.
EDIT:
http://guides.macrumors.com/Category:Macs can now be deleted, the articles have now been moved as suggested above. Guides has also been emptied.
ConnYoungy
Apr 26, 10:14 AM
"how" doesnt really bother me, only "when"
InuNacho
May 5, 10:38 AM
Aww the Mini, Pro, and i7 27" aren't on there.
rjflyn
Apr 12, 06:19 PM
And how many Ipad-1 owners have yet to upgrade, those stats aren't given. If you are happy with what you have are you going to switch when you do upgrade, for the Average Joe probably not. I personally know just as many people who refer to Verizon as Whorizon as other who refer to ATT as the Death Star.
EGT
Nov 14, 08:39 AM
"Mummy, why is that man watching those naked people doing things to each other." :p
It will happen.
It will happen.
iMikeT
Sep 1, 04:09 AM
I think this is page 1 worthy only if Apple released some new feature in Leopard.:rolleyes:
Mactagonist
Mar 26, 04:37 PM
He's very into simplicity and minimalism, just look at the way apple products are designed. I think its a conscious choice to wear a simple black turtleneck and jeans, even though he could easily afford any clothes he wanted.
I wear a black shirt and jeans almost every day too!
But...
1: I wear good shoes. Come on steve!
2: Mine fit.
3: Turtlenecks dont look good on anyone.
I wear a black shirt and jeans almost every day too!
But...
1: I wear good shoes. Come on steve!
2: Mine fit.
3: Turtlenecks dont look good on anyone.
snberk103
Mar 18, 03:06 PM
I do still suck.
My problem is leaving my camera on Auto. I just don't know which setting to use. The more I read and the more opinions I see, the more confused I get. Plus when I see a good subject I don't want to mess it up with my ill informed selections...
I did just buy the Bryan Peterson Understanding Exposure book, so hopefully that will help set me off in the right direction!
I think sometimes people can be intimidated by all the choices. The trick, when learning, is simplify things, imo. So... read up on controlling Depth of Field using the aperture (f/stop). Ignore everything else. Set your camera on Aperture priority (usually Av) and let the camera do the work maintaining exposure. Then play with that for a while, just concentrating on the DoF. Find scenes where there is a series of objects from close to far, and focus on one of those objects, and then take 3 photos at the biggest/smallest f/stop # and then the middle. Don't move. Focus on an object at a different distance, and do the same thing.
Do this over and over again, with different subjects, until you get a feel for DoF. Don't sweat the other stuff, and don't even worry about perfect exposures at this point. Just get "good enough" exposures.
Now do the same thing for Shutter Priority. Except in this case, you find things that are moving. Fast, slow, close, far. Shoot the same type of motion with different shutter speeds - as different as possible, and then something in the middle. Don't worry about the other settings.
Copy and paste this post somewhere, and don't read anymore until you have done parts one and two above.
Now that you are comfortable with Apertures and Shutters ... concentrate on exposure control. The challenge is to get really good exposures, while at the same time getting the DoF and shutter speeds into an acceptable range. Read up on ISOs. One of the huge advantages of digital cameras is being able to change the ISO as you shoot. Use it. Also know that photography is often about compromises. In order to get the DoF you want, you may need to use a shutter speed that is not quite right, and/or an ISO that leaves noise, etc etc But that is just part of the game, and as you gain more experience you will find ways to mitigate these issues.
Also, there are two more ways to control DoF (lense focal length, and camera to subject distance.) But if you are reading this only after you did your homework, it won't be intimidating. It will be fun to figure it out. And if you read right through you are thinking " Aaaccckkk!!!" (I warned you, though... :) )
imho, of course
My problem is leaving my camera on Auto. I just don't know which setting to use. The more I read and the more opinions I see, the more confused I get. Plus when I see a good subject I don't want to mess it up with my ill informed selections...
I did just buy the Bryan Peterson Understanding Exposure book, so hopefully that will help set me off in the right direction!
I think sometimes people can be intimidated by all the choices. The trick, when learning, is simplify things, imo. So... read up on controlling Depth of Field using the aperture (f/stop). Ignore everything else. Set your camera on Aperture priority (usually Av) and let the camera do the work maintaining exposure. Then play with that for a while, just concentrating on the DoF. Find scenes where there is a series of objects from close to far, and focus on one of those objects, and then take 3 photos at the biggest/smallest f/stop # and then the middle. Don't move. Focus on an object at a different distance, and do the same thing.
Do this over and over again, with different subjects, until you get a feel for DoF. Don't sweat the other stuff, and don't even worry about perfect exposures at this point. Just get "good enough" exposures.
Now do the same thing for Shutter Priority. Except in this case, you find things that are moving. Fast, slow, close, far. Shoot the same type of motion with different shutter speeds - as different as possible, and then something in the middle. Don't worry about the other settings.
Copy and paste this post somewhere, and don't read anymore until you have done parts one and two above.
Now that you are comfortable with Apertures and Shutters ... concentrate on exposure control. The challenge is to get really good exposures, while at the same time getting the DoF and shutter speeds into an acceptable range. Read up on ISOs. One of the huge advantages of digital cameras is being able to change the ISO as you shoot. Use it. Also know that photography is often about compromises. In order to get the DoF you want, you may need to use a shutter speed that is not quite right, and/or an ISO that leaves noise, etc etc But that is just part of the game, and as you gain more experience you will find ways to mitigate these issues.
Also, there are two more ways to control DoF (lense focal length, and camera to subject distance.) But if you are reading this only after you did your homework, it won't be intimidating. It will be fun to figure it out. And if you read right through you are thinking " Aaaccckkk!!!" (I warned you, though... :) )
imho, of course
No comments:
Post a Comment