Ninety-six percent of Finns have broadband internet

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Mathew Good, Feb 13, 2007.

  1. Mathew Good

    Mathew Good Guest

    1. Advertising

  2. Mathew Good

    Earl Grey Guest

    Earl Grey, Feb 13, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Mathew Good

    Zipper Guest

    Zipper, Feb 13, 2007
    #3
  4. Mathew Good

    impossible Guest

    impossible, Feb 14, 2007
    #4
  5. Mathew Good

    Allistar Guest

    Zipper wrote:

    > Earl Grey wrote:
    >> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>
    >> But only 75% use it.

    >
    > 100% for those under 40.
    >
    > They are outstanding figures.


    Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs of taxpayers,
    then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who charge those
    who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do not always
    justify the means.

    Allistar.
     
    Allistar, Feb 14, 2007
    #5
  6. Mathew Good

    Zipper Guest

    Allistar wrote:
    > Zipper wrote:
    >
    >> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>

    > http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>> But only 75% use it.

    >> 100% for those under 40.
    >>
    >> They are outstanding figures.

    >
    > Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs of taxpayers,
    > then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who charge those
    > who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do not always
    > justify the means.
    >
    > Allistar.


    Well that is one opinion of course (yours).
     
    Zipper, Feb 14, 2007
    #6
  7. Mathew Good

    Earl Grey Guest

    On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:07:50 -0500, impossible wrote:

    > "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    >> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html

    >>
    >> But only 75% use it.

    >
    > What does the "but" mean exactly?


    That it remains a discretionary activity regardless of what access is
    provided by default
    We are more user pays than the Finns who just cable everyone, socialists,
    they even have citywide central heating in some towns.

    >
    > "For those under the age of 40, the figure is 100 percent."
    >
    > Sounds about right to me.



    Occasional use.
    You'ld expect to be able to say everyone had broadband if they each had a
    3G phone eh ?
     
    Earl Grey, Feb 14, 2007
    #7
  8. Mathew Good

    Earl Grey Guest

    On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:50:29 +1300, Allistar wrote:

    > Zipper wrote:
    >
    >> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>

    > http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>>
    >>> But only 75% use it.

    >>
    >> 100% for those under 40.
    >>
    >> They are outstanding figures.

    >
    > Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs of taxpayers,
    > then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who charge those
    > who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do not always
    > justify the means.
    >
    > Allistar.


    Its all private and deregulated, their biggest provider is Swedish and the
    second biggest Finnish.
    Its what might have happened if others were given local loop access here
    wayback when it would have counted, we're fucked now though.
     
    Earl Grey, Feb 14, 2007
    #8
  9. Mathew Good

    impossible Guest

    "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:07:50 -0500, impossible wrote:
    >
    >> "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    >> news:p...
    >>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>>
    >>> But only 75% use it.

    >>
    >> What does the "but" mean exactly?

    >
    > That it remains a discretionary activity regardless of what access
    > is
    > provided by default


    At 76% uptake, it's "discretionary" like driving a car is
    discretionary. But thank government for building roads that will get
    you where you need to go.

    > We are more user pays than the Finns who just cable everyone,
    > socialists,
    > they even have citywide central heating in some towns.
    >


    Ever been to Finland? Central heating is definitely **not**
    discretionary there.

    >>
    >> "For those under the age of 40, the figure is 100 percent."
    >>
    >> Sounds about right to me.

    >
    >
    > Occasional use.


    No, "regular or occasional". Which is exactly how'd you classify
    **any** internet user.

    > You'ld expect to be able to say everyone had broadband if they each
    > had a
    > 3G phone eh ?
    >


    Nothing to do with 3G phones. "Four out of five municipalities now
    offer high-speed internet connections..." Compared to how many in NZ?
    The US?
     
    impossible, Feb 14, 2007
    #9
  10. Mathew Good

    impossible Guest

    "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:50:29 +1300, Allistar wrote:
    >
    >> Zipper wrote:
    >>
    >>> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>

    >> http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>>>
    >>>> But only 75% use it.
    >>>
    >>> 100% for those under 40.
    >>>
    >>> They are outstanding figures.

    >>
    >> Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs of
    >> taxpayers,
    >> then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who
    >> charge those
    >> who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do not
    >> always
    >> justify the means.
    >>
    >> Allistar.

    >
    > Its all private and deregulated, their biggest provider is Swedish
    > and the
    > second biggest Finnish.


    But it's all driven by a government initiative to extend access
    throughout the country. Companies are not allowed to simply
    cherry-pick the most profitable locations. Competition is high, but
    the buisness environment is regulated. Imagine that!

    > Its what might have happened if others were given local loop access
    > here
    > wayback when it would have counted, we're fucked now though.
    >


    You'd be mistaken to think that competition on the local loop would in
    itself have accomplished what Finland has accomplished.
     
    impossible, Feb 14, 2007
    #10
  11. Mathew Good

    Fierce Guppy Guest

    "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Zipper wrote:
    >
    >> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>

    > http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>>
    >>> But only 75% use it.

    >>
    >> 100% for those under 40.
    >>
    >> They are outstanding figures.

    >
    > Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs of
    > taxpayers,
    > then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who charge those
    > who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do not always
    > justify the means.
    >
    > Allistar.


    That's how it ought to be my man -- not being a sponger and, at the same
    time, not being sponged off.

    FierceGuppy.
     
    Fierce Guppy, Feb 14, 2007
    #11
  12. Mathew Good

    whome Guest

    whome, Feb 14, 2007
    #12
  13. Mathew Good

    Earl Grey Guest

    On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:02:39 -0500, impossible wrote:

    > "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    >> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:50:29 +1300, Allistar wrote:
    >>
    >>> Zipper wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>>>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>> http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>>>>
    >>>>> But only 75% use it.
    >>>>
    >>>> 100% for those under 40.
    >>>>
    >>>> They are outstanding figures.
    >>>
    >>> Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs of
    >>> taxpayers,
    >>> then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who
    >>> charge those
    >>> who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do not
    >>> always
    >>> justify the means.
    >>>
    >>> Allistar.

    >>
    >> Its all private and deregulated, their biggest provider is Swedish
    >> and the
    >> second biggest Finnish.

    >
    > But it's all driven by a government initiative to extend access
    > throughout the country. Companies are not allowed to simply
    > cherry-pick the most profitable locations. Competition is high, but
    > the buisness environment is regulated. Imagine that!
    >
    >> Its what might have happened if others were given local loop access
    >> here
    >> wayback when it would have counted, we're fucked now though.
    >>

    >
    > You'd be mistaken to think that competition on the local loop would in
    > itself have accomplished what Finland has accomplished.


    I think the incentive to get big fast for the Swedish company would be a
    big driver.
     
    Earl Grey, Feb 14, 2007
    #13
  14. Mathew Good

    Earl Grey Guest

    On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 22:06:49 +1300, whome wrote:

    >
    > "Earl Grey" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    >> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html

    >>
    >> But only 75% use it.

    >
    > I had internet in finland, elisa.


    Heh, last time I was there I was dialling up to Compunet and Telecom Gold
    with an alligator clip connection.

    Broadband will eventually be as pervasive as the telephone network here
    too, its inevitable, but the previous generation of management at Telecom
    was more interested in the 3G phone network, a conflict of interest.
     
    Earl Grey, Feb 14, 2007
    #14
  15. Mathew Good

    impossible Guest

    "Fierce Guppy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> Zipper wrote:
    >>
    >>> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>

    >> http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>>>
    >>>> But only 75% use it.
    >>>
    >>> 100% for those under 40.
    >>>
    >>> They are outstanding figures.

    >>
    >> Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs of
    >> taxpayers,
    >> then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who
    >> charge those
    >> who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do not
    >> always
    >> justify the means.
    >>


    Yes, better to be stuck in an IT backwater than to ever think of
    investing tax dollars in infrastructure development.

    >
    > That's how it ought to be my man -- not being a sponger and, at the
    > same time, not being sponged off.
    >
     
    impossible, Feb 14, 2007
    #15
  16. Mathew Good

    Allistar Guest

    impossible wrote:

    > "Fierce Guppy" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> Zipper wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>>>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>>>>
    >>>>> But only 75% use it.
    >>>>
    >>>> 100% for those under 40.
    >>>>
    >>>> They are outstanding figures.
    >>>
    >>> Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs of
    >>> taxpayers,
    >>> then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who
    >>> charge those
    >>> who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do not
    >>> always
    >>> justify the means.
    >>>

    >
    > Yes, better to be stuck in an IT backwater than to ever think of
    > investing tax dollars in infrastructure development.


    You'd rather have money taken from taxpayers for a service they may not use
    that is not commercially viable? That's the current governments way I
    suppose, doesn't make it right or just.

    >> That's how it ought to be my man -- not being a sponger and, at the
    >> same time, not being sponged off.


    Allistar.
     
    Allistar, Feb 14, 2007
    #16
  17. Mathew Good

    impossible Guest

    "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > impossible wrote:
    >
    >> "Fierce Guppy" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>>
    >>> "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> Zipper wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>>>>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>

    > http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> But only 75% use it.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 100% for those under 40.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> They are outstanding figures.
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs of
    >>>> taxpayers,
    >>>> then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who
    >>>> charge those
    >>>> who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do not
    >>>> always
    >>>> justify the means.
    >>>>

    >>
    >> Yes, better to be stuck in an IT backwater than to ever think of
    >> investing tax dollars in infrastructure development.

    >
    > You'd rather have money taken from taxpayers for a service they may
    > not use
    > that is not commercially viable? That's the current governments way
    > I suppose, doesn't > make it right or just.



    76 percent of Findlanders use the service -- 100 percent of those
    under age 40. And businesses there are doing very well, thanks in no
    small part to the fact that broadband internet access is almost
    universal. So what exactly is your complaint?

    >>> That's how it ought to be my man -- not being a sponger and, at
    >>> the
    >>> same time, not being sponged off.

    >


    Creating a scarcity when none need exist is the sponger's way of
    making a profit, I would say.
     
    impossible, Feb 14, 2007
    #17
  18. Mathew Good

    Allistar Guest

    impossible wrote:

    > "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Fierce Guppy" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>>
    >>>> "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>> Zipper wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>>>>>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>

    >>

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> But only 75% use it.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> 100% for those under 40.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> They are outstanding figures.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs of
    >>>>> taxpayers,
    >>>>> then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who
    >>>>> charge those
    >>>>> who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do not
    >>>>> always
    >>>>> justify the means.
    >>>>>
    >>>
    >>> Yes, better to be stuck in an IT backwater than to ever think of
    >>> investing tax dollars in infrastructure development.

    >>
    >> You'd rather have money taken from taxpayers for a service they may
    >> not use
    >> that is not commercially viable? That's the current governments way
    >> I suppose, doesn't > make it right or just.

    >
    >
    > 76 percent of Findlanders use the service -- 100 percent of those
    > under age 40. And businesses there are doing very well, thanks in no
    > small part to the fact that broadband internet access is almost
    > universal. So what exactly is your complaint?


    That if it's commercially viable, then let private businesses set it up
    here. No need for the taxpayer.

    >>>> That's how it ought to be my man -- not being a sponger and, at
    >>>> the
    >>>> same time, not being sponged off.

    >
    > Creating a scarcity when none need exist is the sponger's way of
    > making a profit, I would say.


    What scarcity? NZ has had no decent broadband access since Kupe first
    arrived. Now you're saying that a commercially viable venture should be
    propped up with the forced "donations" of hard working New Zealanders?

    Allistar.
     
    Allistar, Feb 14, 2007
    #18
  19. Mathew Good

    impossible Guest

    "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > impossible wrote:
    >
    >> "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> impossible wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Fierce Guppy" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:...
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>> Zipper wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>>>>>>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>

    > http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> But only 75% use it.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> 100% for those under 40.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> They are outstanding figures.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs
    >>>>>> of
    >>>>>> taxpayers,
    >>>>>> then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who
    >>>>>> charge those
    >>>>>> who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do
    >>>>>> not
    >>>>>> always
    >>>>>> justify the means.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes, better to be stuck in an IT backwater than to ever think of
    >>>> investing tax dollars in infrastructure development.
    >>>
    >>> You'd rather have money taken from taxpayers for a service they
    >>> may
    >>> not use
    >>> that is not commercially viable? That's the current governments
    >>> way
    >>> I suppose, doesn't > make it right or just.

    >>
    >>
    >> 76 percent of Findlanders use the service -- 100 percent of those
    >> under age 40. And businesses there are doing very well, thanks in
    >> no
    >> small part to the fact that broadband internet access is almost
    >> universal. So what exactly is your complaint?

    >
    > That if it's commercially viable, then let private businesses set it
    > up
    > here. No need for the taxpayer.


    NZ's been there, done that. Business has so far utterly failed at this
    task, because there's no one willing to invest in the necessary
    capacity. Just how long are you going to cling to that ideological
    pipe-dream of yours?

    >
    >>>>> That's how it ought to be my man -- not being a sponger and, at
    >>>>> the
    >>>>> same time, not being sponged off.

    >>
    >> Creating a scarcity when none need exist is the sponger's way of
    >> making a profit, I would say.

    >
    > What scarcity? NZ has had no decent broadband access since Kupe
    > first
    > arrived. Now you're saying that a commercially viable venture should
    > be
    > propped up with the forced "donations" of hard working New
    > Zealanders?
    >


    If you can't see that universal broadband internet access is a
    minimum condition today for any developed country, then of course
    you're going to resent supporting that goal through taxes. Enjoy the
    backwater, if you want, but hopefully others will not be so so
    short-sighted.
     
    impossible, Feb 15, 2007
    #19
  20. Mathew Good

    Allistar Guest

    impossible wrote:

    > "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> impossible wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>> impossible wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Fierce Guppy" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Allistar" <> wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:...
    >>>>>>> Zipper wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Earl Grey wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 11:10:59 +1300, Mathew Good wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>

    >>

    http://www.theage.com.au/news/Techn...adband-internet/2007/02/14/1171129008262.html
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> But only 75% use it.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> 100% for those under 40.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> They are outstanding figures.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Yes - depending on how they got there. If it was on the backs
    >>>>>>> of
    >>>>>>> taxpayers,
    >>>>>>> then it's a disgrace. If it was through private companies who
    >>>>>>> charge those
    >>>>>>> who use the service then what an awesome result. The ends do
    >>>>>>> not
    >>>>>>> always
    >>>>>>> justify the means.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yes, better to be stuck in an IT backwater than to ever think of
    >>>>> investing tax dollars in infrastructure development.
    >>>>
    >>>> You'd rather have money taken from taxpayers for a service they
    >>>> may
    >>>> not use
    >>>> that is not commercially viable? That's the current governments
    >>>> way
    >>>> I suppose, doesn't > make it right or just.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> 76 percent of Findlanders use the service -- 100 percent of those
    >>> under age 40. And businesses there are doing very well, thanks in
    >>> no
    >>> small part to the fact that broadband internet access is almost
    >>> universal. So what exactly is your complaint?

    >>
    >> That if it's commercially viable, then let private businesses set it
    >> up
    >> here. No need for the taxpayer.

    >
    > NZ's been there, done that. Business has so far utterly failed at this
    > task, because there's no one willing to invest in the necessary
    > capacity.


    Then it can't be commercially viable.

    > Just how long are you going to cling to that ideological
    > pipe-dream of yours?


    Until we get closer to it.

    >>>>>> That's how it ought to be my man -- not being a sponger and, at
    >>>>>> the
    >>>>>> same time, not being sponged off.
    >>>
    >>> Creating a scarcity when none need exist is the sponger's way of
    >>> making a profit, I would say.

    >>
    >> What scarcity? NZ has had no decent broadband access since Kupe
    >> first
    >> arrived. Now you're saying that a commercially viable venture should
    >> be
    >> propped up with the forced "donations" of hard working New
    >> Zealanders?
    >>

    >
    > If you can't see that universal broadband internet access is a
    > minimum condition today for any developed country, then of course
    > you're going to resent supporting that goal through taxes. Enjoy the
    > backwater, if you want, but hopefully others will not be so so
    > short-sighted.


    If it is so worthwhile, then economically it must be sound. If it is
    economically sound then companies should be laying new cables as we speak.
    Perhaps it's not economically worthwhile? In which case why should the tax
    payer be the loser?

    Allistar.
     
    Allistar, Feb 15, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Victoria Chin

    20 percent off Pearson Vue Exams

    Victoria Chin, May 4, 2005, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    14,535
    =?Utf-8?B?U2hpbmdvb29vbw==?=
    May 10, 2005
  2. Techie
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    415
    Techie
    Aug 3, 2003
  3. chris kirk
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    590
    chris kirk
    Aug 4, 2003
  4. Derek Janssen

    Six Things to Know about HDTV (and I have to)

    Derek Janssen, Jun 1, 2007, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    33
    Views:
    1,617
    Geena Phillips
    Jul 8, 2007
  5. Tzorzakakis Dimitrios

    six six six the number of the beast:-)

    Tzorzakakis Dimitrios, Jun 20, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    393
    Tzorzakakis Dimitrios
    Jun 20, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page