Open Office

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by JC, Dec 22, 2005.

  1. JC

    JC Guest

    The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.
    JC, Dec 22, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. JC

    EMB Guest

    EMB, Dec 22, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. JC

    Graymond Guest

    New ?? 2.0 has been out for some time

    "EMB" <> wrote in message
    news:dof2g6$cgt$...
    > JC wrote:
    >> The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.

    >
    > There's a local mirror at
    > http://files2.inspire.net.nz/index.php?category=92
    >
    > --
    > EMB
    Graymond, Dec 22, 2005
    #3
  4. JC

    JC Guest

    Graymond wrote:
    > New ?? 2.0 has been out for some time


    2.01

    > "EMB" <> wrote in message
    > news:dof2g6$cgt$...
    >
    >>JC wrote:
    >>
    >>>The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.

    >>
    >>There's a local mirror at
    >>http://files2.inspire.net.nz/index.php?category=92
    >>
    >>--
    >>EMB

    >
    >
    >
    JC, Dec 22, 2005
    #4
  5. JC

    Graymond Guest

    Tnx

    "JC" <> wrote in message news:dof3sg$f7m$...
    > Graymond wrote:
    >> New ?? 2.0 has been out for some time

    >
    > 2.01
    >
    >> "EMB" <> wrote in message
    >> news:dof2g6$cgt$...
    >>
    >>>JC wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.
    >>>
    >>>There's a local mirror at
    >>>http://files2.inspire.net.nz/index.php?category=92
    >>>
    >>>--
    >>>EMB

    >>
    >>
    Graymond, Dec 22, 2005
    #5
  6. JC

    Graymond Guest

    Not sure what the problem is with the Inspire site but the download was
    coming down as Ver OOo_2.0.0 75.0MB
    openoffice/stable/2.0.1/OOo_2.0.1_Win32Intel_install.exe is 76.4MB from the
    following site and seems to be faster download.
    http://downloads.planetmirror.com/pub/openoffice/stable/2.0.1/OOo_2.0.1_Win32Intel_install.exe


    "Graymond" <> wrote in message
    news:1135285474.622202@ftpsrv1...
    > Tnx
    >
    > "JC" <> wrote in message
    > news:dof3sg$f7m$...
    >> Graymond wrote:
    >>> New ?? 2.0 has been out for some time

    >>
    >> 2.01
    >>
    >>> "EMB" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:dof2g6$cgt$...
    >>>
    >>>>JC wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.
    >>>>
    >>>>There's a local mirror at
    >>>>http://files2.inspire.net.nz/index.php?category=92
    >>>>
    >>>>--
    >>>>EMB
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    Graymond, Dec 22, 2005
    #6
  7. JC

    JohnO Guest

    JC wrote:
    > The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.


    Is it still bloated and slow?
    JohnO, Dec 22, 2005
    #7
  8. JC

    -=rjh=- Guest

    -=rjh=-, Dec 22, 2005
    #8
  9. JC

    JC Guest

    JohnO wrote:
    > JC wrote:
    >
    >>The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.

    >
    >
    > Is it still bloated and slow?
    >

    Doesn't seem to be slow.
    JC, Dec 22, 2005
    #9
  10. JC

    MarkH Guest

    -=rjh=- <> wrote in news:43ab329a$:

    > EMB wrote:
    >> JC wrote:
    >>
    >>> The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.

    >>
    >>
    >> There's a local mirror at
    >> http://files2.inspire.net.nz/index.php?category=92
    >>

    >
    > Also, those who are able might like to try BT, it is really fast at
    > present - I'm getting 25kB/s which is my limit. We need to support legal
    > p2p downloads whenever possible.


    Why exactly? What are you thinking the use of a torrent instead of an FTP
    site will do?

    In NZ the fast flat rate broadband that some other countries have does not
    exist, this makes torrents a poor choice when there is another option.

    On Orcon's UBS 2Mb plan the use of torrents will generate more traffic than
    with FTP and be slower, so it will cost more in terms of both money and
    time.

    On Xtra's 2Mb plan you only get 10GB, so using torrents will use up that
    10GB faster.

    On a 256kb flat rate plan that can achieve 32k download with a torrent then
    there is no real disadvantage to using a torrent, but there is no real
    advantage either.


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 5-September-05)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    Maskerade
    MarkH, Dec 22, 2005
    #10
  11. JC

    Mutley Guest

    -=rjh=- <> wrote:

    >EMB wrote:
    >> JC wrote:
    >>
    >>> The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.

    >>
    >>
    >> There's a local mirror at
    >> http://files2.inspire.net.nz/index.php?category=92
    >>

    >
    >Also, those who are able might like to try BT, it is really fast at
    >present - I'm getting 25kB/s which is my limit. We need to support legal
    >p2p downloads whenever possible.
    >
    >http://distribution.openoffice.org/p2p/


    You are correct about BT. Downloaded it in 50 min's on Orcon's 256K
    plan. The FTP site gave nothing..
    Mutley, Dec 23, 2005
    #11
  12. JC

    -=rjh=- Guest

    MarkH wrote:
    > -=rjh=- <> wrote in news:43ab329a$:
    >
    >
    >>EMB wrote:
    >>
    >>>JC wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>There's a local mirror at
    >>>http://files2.inspire.net.nz/index.php?category=92
    >>>

    >>
    >>Also, those who are able might like to try BT, it is really fast at
    >>present - I'm getting 25kB/s which is my limit. We need to support legal
    >>p2p downloads whenever possible.

    >
    >
    > Why exactly? What are you thinking the use of a torrent instead of an FTP
    > site will do?


    Two main reasons, really. Firstly, there is a widespread assumption that
    p2p is only or mainly used for downloading illegally. If BT is ever
    challenged in court, the more existing legal use of it will help its
    case. More existing legal use of it will also convince more
    organisations to consider offering torrents of their products.

    Secondly, why should somebody who publishes something for free bear the
    entire cost of shipping the data? I'm happy to contribute, too.

    Admittedly, in this case there is a good nz mirror, and the load on it
    isn't likely to be great, but that isn't always the case.

    >
    > In NZ the fast flat rate broadband that some other countries have does not
    > exist, this makes torrents a poor choice when there is another option.


    For who? The person downloading, or the person publishing something for
    free?
    >
    > On Orcon's UBS 2Mb plan the use of torrents will generate more traffic than
    > with FTP and be slower, so it will cost more in terms of both money and
    > time.


    But I'm on an unlimited plan. Costs me nothing.

    Even if paying @ $10.00/10GB, that will be ~$1.00 for one download of
    Oo_O and 9 complete uploads. Not bad for a free office suite.

    It *does* generate more traffic for Orcon (plus, they could cache the
    file anyway) but I'm happy with how Orcon deal with p2p at present. They
    can use p2p traffic to even out traffic.

    >
    > On Xtra's 2Mb plan you only get 10GB, so using torrents will use up that
    > 10GB faster.


    Well, hey - what is broadband *for*? I think that shows the stupidity of
    the current offerings, more than anything.

    >
    > On a 256kb flat rate plan that can achieve 32k download with a torrent then
    > there is no real disadvantage to using a torrent, but there is no real
    > advantage either.


    For me, there is an advantage, it increases my share ratio. It is my
    preferred method of downloading even when ftp is available. I'm rarely
    in a hurry, my system is always on, it doesn't cost me any more, it
    helps the publisher. I'm also able to easily throttle the download
    speed, slightly harder to do using ftp and http.

    Looks like a win-win-win situation. To me - YMMV.
    -=rjh=-, Dec 23, 2005
    #12
  13. JC

    Gordon Guest

    On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 09:32:19 +1300, EMB wrote:

    > JC wrote:
    >> The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.

    >
    > There's a local mirror at http://files2.inspire.net.nz/index.php?category=92


    Which only has 2.0.0 by my viewing. ;-(
    Gordon, Dec 23, 2005
    #13
  14. JC

    Graymond Guest

    Graymond, Dec 23, 2005
    #14
  15. JC

    MarkH Guest

    -=rjh=- <> wrote in news:43ab7c27$:

    > MarkH wrote:
    >>
    >> Why exactly? What are you thinking the use of a torrent instead of
    >> an FTP site will do?

    >
    > Two main reasons, really. Firstly, there is a widespread assumption
    > that p2p is only or mainly used for downloading illegally. If BT is
    > ever challenged in court, the more existing legal use of it will help
    > its case. More existing legal use of it will also convince more
    > organisations to consider offering torrents of their products.


    I am happy for those with flat-rate connections to use it if they wish.

    > Secondly, why should somebody who publishes something for free bear
    > the entire cost of shipping the data? I'm happy to contribute, too.


    Well, if your plan is flat rate then why not, I suppose.

    > Admittedly, in this case there is a good nz mirror, and the load on it
    > isn't likely to be great, but that isn't always the case.


    I almost always use mirrors for FTP, I generally find that the Aussie
    ones are as fast as the NZ ones.

    >> In NZ the fast flat rate broadband that some other countries have
    >> does not exist, this makes torrents a poor choice when there is
    >> another option.

    >
    > For who? The person downloading, or the person publishing something
    > for free?


    For me if there is a choice between an Aussie mirror that I can download
    from at well over 200kB or a Torrent that will struggle to reach 30kB on
    my Orcon plan then I will use the FTP mirror site thanks.

    >> On Orcon's UBS 2Mb plan the use of torrents will generate more
    >> traffic than with FTP and be slower, so it will cost more in terms of
    >> both money and time.

    >
    > But I'm on an unlimited plan. Costs me nothing.


    Unfortunately the unlimited plans are hard to find on the fast
    broadband.

    > Even if paying @ $10.00/10GB, that will be ~$1.00 for one download of
    > Oo_O and 9 complete uploads. Not bad for a free office suite.


    For me the monthly traffic is normally 80-90GB, using torrents would
    increase my bills noticeably.

    > It *does* generate more traffic for Orcon (plus, they could cache the
    > file anyway) but I'm happy with how Orcon deal with p2p at present.
    > They can use p2p traffic to even out traffic.


    Yes, but the more bandwidth I use the less there is available to others
    (Thanks Telecom for the crippling of Xtra's competition) at least until
    the NZ regulators grow some testes.

    >> On Xtra's 2Mb plan you only get 10GB, so using torrents will use up
    >> that 10GB faster.

    >
    > Well, hey - what is broadband *for*? I think that shows the stupidity
    > of the current offerings, more than anything.


    Yes, Xtra's plans suck big time.

    >> On a 256kb flat rate plan that can achieve 32k download with a
    >> torrent then there is no real disadvantage to using a torrent, but
    >> there is no real advantage either.

    >
    > For me, there is an advantage, it increases my share ratio. It is my
    > preferred method of downloading even when ftp is available. I'm rarely
    > in a hurry, my system is always on, it doesn't cost me any more, it
    > helps the publisher. I'm also able to easily throttle the download
    > speed, slightly harder to do using ftp and http.
    >
    > Looks like a win-win-win situation. To me - YMMV.


    Downloading a torrent to increase your share ratio? That really doesn't
    seem to make sense.

    If it costs you no different then there is no harm using it.

    Helping the publisher sounds very kind, can you back up your implication
    that the publishers are having problems because so many people are
    downloading from the mirror FTP sites? If the use of FTP is a burden on
    them then I may be willing to consider using torrents.

    For me the ability to throttle downloads that I can complete in less
    than 10 minutes is not a big deal.

    Clearly my mileage does vary.


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 5-September-05)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    Maskerade
    MarkH, Dec 23, 2005
    #15
  16. JC

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <dof2g6$cgt$>, says...
    > JC wrote:
    > > The next release of Open Office is out now if anyone is interested.

    >
    > There's a local mirror at http://files2.inspire.net.nz/index.php?category=92


    Cheers, nice to find a local link - goin' good too - 240KB/s - from 250
    available over my cable connection.

    --
    Duncan
    Dave Doe, Dec 23, 2005
    #16
  17. JC

    -=rjh=- Guest

    MarkH wrote:
    > -=rjh=- <> wrote in news:43ab7c27$:
    >
    >
    >>MarkH wrote:
    >>
    >>>Why exactly? What are you thinking the use of a torrent instead of
    >>>an FTP site will do?

    >>
    >>Two main reasons, really. Firstly, there is a widespread assumption
    >>that p2p is only or mainly used for downloading illegally. If BT is
    >>ever challenged in court, the more existing legal use of it will help
    >>its case. More existing legal use of it will also convince more
    >>organisations to consider offering torrents of their products.

    >
    >
    > I am happy for those with flat-rate connections to use it if they wish.


    Thank you. I'll continue to do so.

    >
    >
    >>Secondly, why should somebody who publishes something for free bear
    >>the entire cost of shipping the data? I'm happy to contribute, too.

    >
    >
    > Well, if your plan is flat rate then why not, I suppose.
    >
    >
    >>Admittedly, in this case there is a good nz mirror, and the load on it
    >>isn't likely to be great, but that isn't always the case.

    >
    >
    > I almost always use mirrors for FTP, I generally find that the Aussie
    > ones are as fast as the NZ ones.


    Somebody is paying to provide the mirror service - I always use mirrors
    where BT is not available. But BT is my preferred choice for popular
    files larger than ~20MB.
    >
    >
    >>>In NZ the fast flat rate broadband that some other countries have
    >>>does not exist, this makes torrents a poor choice when there is
    >>>another option.

    >>
    >>For who? The person downloading, or the person publishing something
    >>for free?

    >
    >
    > For me if there is a choice between an Aussie mirror that I can download
    > from at well over 200kB or a Torrent that will struggle to reach 30kB on
    > my Orcon plan then I will use the FTP mirror site thanks.


    But, what about the publisher? Do you not consider them at all?
    >
    >
    >>>On Orcon's UBS 2Mb plan the use of torrents will generate more
    >>>traffic than with FTP and be slower, so it will cost more in terms of
    >>>both money and time.

    >>
    >>But I'm on an unlimited plan. Costs me nothing.

    >
    >
    > Unfortunately the unlimited plans are hard to find on the fast
    > broadband.
    >
    >
    >>Even if paying @ $10.00/10GB, that will be ~$1.00 for one download of
    >>Oo_O and 9 complete uploads. Not bad for a free office suite.

    >
    >
    > For me the monthly traffic is normally 80-90GB, using torrents would
    > increase my bills noticeably.


    You are saying you do 80-90GB/mo, without usuing torrents at all? What
    are you downloading?
    >
    >
    >>It *does* generate more traffic for Orcon (plus, they could cache the
    >>file anyway) but I'm happy with how Orcon deal with p2p at present.
    >>They can use p2p traffic to even out traffic.

    >
    >
    > Yes, but the more bandwidth I use the less there is available to others


    No, that is my point - p2p allows Orcon to fill up any available
    bandwidth as it becomes available. Because p2p isn't required to be done
    in realtime, they have a lot of flexibility in how they deal with the
    traffic it generates.

    > (Thanks Telecom for the crippling of Xtra's competition) at least until
    > the NZ regulators grow some testes.
    >
    >
    >>>On Xtra's 2Mb plan you only get 10GB, so using torrents will use up
    >>>that 10GB faster.

    >>
    >>Well, hey - what is broadband *for*? I think that shows the stupidity
    >>of the current offerings, more than anything.

    >
    >
    > Yes, Xtra's plans suck big time.


    Not Xtra - pretty much all the current plans aren't looking at how
    people should be using "broadband" - the offerings are all looking from
    the provider's point of view (in this case, Telecom, for pretty much
    everybody). Even the competition only has to match Telecom's offerings,
    nothing more.

    A 2MB/s plan with a 1GB cap and 128kb/s upstream is just a cruel joke.
    >
    >
    >>>On a 256kb flat rate plan that can achieve 32k download with a
    >>>torrent then there is no real disadvantage to using a torrent, but
    >>>there is no real advantage either.

    >>
    >>For me, there is an advantage, it increases my share ratio. It is my
    >>preferred method of downloading even when ftp is available. I'm rarely
    >>in a hurry, my system is always on, it doesn't cost me any more, it
    >>helps the publisher. I'm also able to easily throttle the download
    >>speed, slightly harder to do using ftp and http.
    >>
    >>Looks like a win-win-win situation. To me - YMMV.

    >
    >
    > Downloading a torrent to increase your share ratio? That really doesn't
    > seem to make sense.


    My share ratio over the past day or so is ~20. Downloading a popular
    file early means more people will come along and upload it (or parts of
    it) from me while it is still popular. Offering files that nobody wants
    won't increase your share ratio. The better your share ratio, the better
    your performance on torrent networks. While my overall ratio is only
    1.5, many files are up around 6-8 (like nerdTV, Blue, Revelations, for
    example).

    >
    > If it costs you no different then there is no harm using it.
    >
    > Helping the publisher sounds very kind, can you back up your implication
    > that the publishers are having problems because so many people are
    > downloading from the mirror FTP sites? If the use of FTP is a burden on
    > them then I may be willing to consider using torrents.


    Sure, see one of the posts above in this very thread.

    Apart from the cost of sending data, some files have very short, peak
    demands, which can mean that some servers have trouble coping. For those
    situations, torrents are ideal. Where torrents don't work, is where
    files have a long life with few downloads, ftp works better for these.

    Many of the files I download are published for free by hobbyists or
    others who generate little or no income from their endeavours. So why
    should they also have to pay for me to download a copy of their work?
    After all, it is possible I might not even like it, so I don't want to
    pay up front.

    Often these files are announced on mailing lists that I am on, so demand
    has a short but very high peak, ideal for using torrents. To pay for ftp
    /http hosting of such short but high traffic demands is not going to be
    cheap, which is why these publishers usually ask and prefer people to
    use BT. If I want them to continue with what they are doing, (and I do)
    I need to avoid causing them any grief, so I use BT.
    -=rjh=-, Dec 24, 2005
    #17
  18. On Sun, 25 Dec 2005 10:59:32 +1300, -=rjh=- wrote:

    > A 2MB/s plan with a 1GB cap and 128kb/s upstream is just a cruel joke.


    It shows the rather poor calibre of the ISPs that offer it, IMHO.

    Broadband should be full speed (up and down!), uncapped, flat rate, and at
    a reasonable price.

    Anything less than this is not true Broadband as that technology can
    deliver.


    Undeniably Sluttish

    --
    Free software on every PC on every desk.
    Mr Undeniably Sluttish, Dec 25, 2005
    #18
  19. JC

    MarkH Guest

    -=rjh=- <> wrote in news::

    > MarkH wrote:
    >> -=rjh=- <> wrote in
    >> news:43ab7c27$:
    >>
    >>
    >>>MarkH wrote:


    > But, what about the publisher? Do you not consider them at all?


    I have no reason to believe that the publisher is having any problem
    with my use of FTP mirrors.

    >> For me the monthly traffic is normally 80-90GB, using torrents would
    >> increase my bills noticeably.

    >
    > You are saying you do 80-90GB/mo, without usuing torrents at all? What
    > are you downloading?


    I am not sure that it matters to everyone else what I am downloading.
    But my flatmate does actually download a bit through torrents.
    Personally I download around 30-40GB in a typical month. Some of my
    downloads are Linux apps, updates and distros - usually from Aussie
    mirror FTP sites. Some of my downloads are from www.easynews.com, which
    I pay for.

    >> Yes, but the more bandwidth I use the less there is available to
    >> others

    >
    > No, that is my point - p2p allows Orcon to fill up any available
    > bandwidth as it becomes available. Because p2p isn't required to be
    > done in realtime, they have a lot of flexibility in how they deal with
    > the traffic it generates.


    If you read the posts on this newsgroup you would realize that there are
    people finding the torrents too slow with Orcon. This is because there
    is too much demand on the system for the bandwidth allocation from
    Telecom.

    >> Helping the publisher sounds very kind, can you back up your
    >> implication that the publishers are having problems because so many
    >> people are downloading from the mirror FTP sites? If the use of FTP
    >> is a burden on them then I may be willing to consider using torrents.

    >
    > Sure, see one of the posts above in this very thread.


    I don't recall any evidence, only your assertion that torrents
    alleviated the strain on the server. If you wait until the files have
    propagated through all the mirrors then you would normally find that the
    FTP servers are coping well. The whole idea of the mirror sites is to
    spread the load.

    > Apart from the cost of sending data, some files have very short, peak
    > demands, which can mean that some servers have trouble coping. For
    > those situations, torrents are ideal. Where torrents don't work, is
    > where files have a long life with few downloads, ftp works better for
    > these.
    >
    > Many of the files I download are published for free by hobbyists or
    > others who generate little or no income from their endeavours. So why
    > should they also have to pay for me to download a copy of their work?
    > After all, it is possible I might not even like it, so I don't want to
    > pay up front.
    >
    > Often these files are announced on mailing lists that I am on, so
    > demand has a short but very high peak, ideal for using torrents. To
    > pay for ftp /http hosting of such short but high traffic demands is
    > not going to be cheap, which is why these publishers usually ask and
    > prefer people to use BT. If I want them to continue with what they are
    > doing, (and I do) I need to avoid causing them any grief, so I use BT.


    My method of not worrying about downloading a Linux distro on the day
    that it is released works just as well for taking the pressure off the
    FTP servers. When I download the file a week later the servers have no
    problem giving me full speed (around 250kbyte/sec).


    --
    Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
    See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 5-September-05)
    "The person on the other side was a young woman. Very obviously a
    young woman. There was no possible way she could have been mistaken
    for a young man in any language, especially Braille."
    Maskerade
    MarkH, Dec 26, 2005
    #19
  20. On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 06:04:43 +0000, MarkH wrote:

    > I don't recall any evidence, only your assertion that torrents
    > alleviated the strain on the server. If you wait until the files have
    > propagated through all the mirrors then you would normally find that the
    > FTP servers are coping well. The whole idea of the mirror sites is to
    > spread the load.


    And the whole idea of using torrents is that mirrors are not needed,
    because the load is shared by all persons who want a copy of whatever it
    is that the torrent is for.

    torrents enable the providers of Free material to easily distribute it
    worldwide without requiring the massive bandwidth and expense of a huge
    server/mirror infrastructure.

    So you don't want the cost of the upload. Now imagine the cost of millions
    of downloads all centralised on the one huge server/mirror infrastructure.

    Now do you see the advantage?


    Undeniably Sluttish

    --
    Free software on every PC on every desk.
    Mr Undeniably Sluttish, Dec 26, 2005
    #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. Marc

    Office 97 to Office XP User guide upgrade

    Marc, Apr 14, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    579
  2. Jimmy Clay

    Microsoft Office Specialist Study Guide Office 2003 Edition

    Jimmy Clay, Sep 10, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,290
    Guest
    Sep 10, 2004
  3. =?Utf-8?B?SGFyZGlw?=

    Front Office and Back Office Upgrade

    =?Utf-8?B?SGFyZGlw?=, Apr 8, 2006, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    518
    =?Utf-8?B?SGFyZGlw?=
    Apr 8, 2006
  4. Robert Baer

    Open Office VS Micro$oft Office

    Robert Baer, Feb 4, 2007, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    459
    j1mb0jay
    Feb 15, 2007
  5. Muze Gruppes

    Greater memory hog: Open Office or MS Office 2003?

    Muze Gruppes, Nov 25, 2007, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    730
    wisdomkiller & pain
    Nov 25, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page