The new OS we know and love...

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by M. Murcek, Dec 30, 2005.

  1. M. Murcek

    M. Murcek Guest

    M. Murcek, Dec 30, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. M. Murcek

    John Barnes Guest

    And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
    Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive for
    drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm beginning
    to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the 32-bit version
    myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some, but I like the
    32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway. Seems that 32-bit
    OS and programs will be the standard for the home user for some time to come
    and 64-bit for niche users.


    "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
    > article.
    >
    > http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1906396,00.asp
    >
    >
    John Barnes, Dec 30, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. M. Murcek

    M. Murcek Guest

    The ridiculous part is - and I'm not a programmer anymore for a long time
    now, but I once was, so if I'm wrong about this observation, please chime in
    here and educate me - that there appears to be plenty of guidance out there
    on how to port a Windows driver to 64 bit. The issue is a bean-counter one,
    in which hardware vendors won't devote the resources to doing the port until
    they see enough volume of 64 bit usage out there to justify their
    expenditures. And the adoption rate will suck until the drivers are there.

    /vicious_circle

    "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
    > Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive
    > for drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm
    > beginning to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the
    > 32-bit version myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some,
    > but I like the 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway.
    > Seems that 32-bit OS and programs will be the standard for the home user
    > for some time to come and 64-bit for niche users.
    >
    >
    > "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
    >> article.
    >>
    >> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1906396,00.asp
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    M. Murcek, Dec 30, 2005
    #3
  4. It's a fair assessment, and not surprising given the lack of a killer app.
    If Adobe had cared enough to bring out the Suite in 64 bit, that alone might
    swing the sentiment. I've often likened XP 64 bit to Windows ME... the
    bridge for users who need to upgrade something until the real new OS (Vista)
    comes along. Of course, ME was a piece of junk foisted on many poor saps,
    whereas 64 bit is a robust, yet ignored, OS. No matter. Many of us still
    like it and use it exclusively. If others don't share that enthusiasm, so be
    it. It's only a piece of software...


    "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
    > Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive

    for
    > drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm

    beginning
    > to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the 32-bit

    version
    > myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some, but I like the
    > 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway. Seems that 32-bit
    > OS and programs will be the standard for the home user for some time to

    come
    > and 64-bit for niche users.
    >
    >
    > "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
    > > article.
    > >
    > > http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1906396,00.asp
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    Dennis Gordon, Dec 30, 2005
    #4
  5. M. Murcek

    John Barnes Guest

    And system builders aren't going to install (or recommend) it on home
    machines when they know they will have dissatisfied customers the first time
    they hook up a peripheral that doesn't work or try to install their
    favourite software and it fails. Not to mention the increased help desk
    calls. At this point, and in the foreseeable future, there is just no need
    for 64-bit computing for the home user.


    "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The ridiculous part is - and I'm not a programmer anymore for a long time
    > now, but I once was, so if I'm wrong about this observation, please chime
    > in here and educate me - that there appears to be plenty of guidance out
    > there on how to port a Windows driver to 64 bit. The issue is a
    > bean-counter one, in which hardware vendors won't devote the resources to
    > doing the port until they see enough volume of 64 bit usage out there to
    > justify their expenditures. And the adoption rate will suck until the
    > drivers are there.
    >
    > /vicious_circle
    >
    > "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
    >> Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive
    >> for drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm
    >> beginning to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the
    >> 32-bit version myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some,
    >> but I like the 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway.
    >> Seems that 32-bit OS and programs will be the standard for the home user
    >> for some time to come and 64-bit for niche users.
    >>
    >>
    >> "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
    >>> article.
    >>>
    >>> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1906396,00.asp
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    John Barnes, Dec 30, 2005
    #5
  6. M. Murcek

    M. Murcek Guest

    I get by just fine using x64 Edition daily at home. I cannot use it at work
    because there's no driver for the Netgear print server (you can kludge it,
    but that's not acceptable in my work environment) Really, my biggest
    disappointment is HP - I really would love to see x64 drivers for the
    JetDirect 500 print server and for the scanners and large format color
    output devices - then I'd have everything I need. There's no doubt in my
    mind, I see little point in advocating 64 bit capable hardware platforms at
    work before I see concrete proof that 64 bit OSs (x64, Vista) will get the
    driver support needed to make the adoption as uneventful as 32 bit XP is
    now...

    "Dennis Gordon" <> wrote in message
    news:ODOPA$...
    > It's a fair assessment, and not surprising given the lack of a killer app.
    > If Adobe had cared enough to bring out the Suite in 64 bit, that alone
    > might
    > swing the sentiment. I've often likened XP 64 bit to Windows ME... the
    > bridge for users who need to upgrade something until the real new OS
    > (Vista)
    > comes along. Of course, ME was a piece of junk foisted on many poor saps,
    > whereas 64 bit is a robust, yet ignored, OS. No matter. Many of us still
    > like it and use it exclusively. If others don't share that enthusiasm, so
    > be
    > it. It's only a piece of software...
    >
    >
    > "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
    >> Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive

    > for
    >> drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm

    > beginning
    >> to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the 32-bit

    > version
    >> myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some, but I like the
    >> 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway. Seems that
    >> 32-bit
    >> OS and programs will be the standard for the home user for some time to

    > come
    >> and 64-bit for niche users.
    >>
    >>
    >> "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> > gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
    >> > article.
    >> >
    >> > http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1906396,00.asp
    >> >
    >> >

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    M. Murcek, Dec 30, 2005
    #6
  7. Its the application and device drivers thats causing the problems and it
    looks like its gonna be the same with Vista x64. Not until we see parallel
    support in terms of applications and device drivers for x86/x64 will users
    have confidence investing in the platform. My stance is that, Windows XP
    Professional x64 is explicitly a scientific/engineering workstation
    operating system.
    --
    --
    Andre
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
    "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
    > Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive
    > for drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm
    > beginning to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the
    > 32-bit version myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some,
    > but I like the 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway.
    > Seems that 32-bit OS and programs will be the standard for the home user
    > for some time to come and 64-bit for niche users.
    >
    >
    > "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
    >> article.
    >>
    >> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1906396,00.asp
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    Andre Da Costa, Dec 30, 2005
    #7
  8. M. Murcek

    John Barnes Guest

    Agreed. :)


    "Andre Da Costa" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > Its the application and device drivers thats causing the problems and it
    > looks like its gonna be the same with Vista x64. Not until we see parallel
    > support in terms of applications and device drivers for x86/x64 will users
    > have confidence investing in the platform. My stance is that, Windows XP
    > Professional x64 is explicitly a scientific/engineering workstation
    > operating system.
    > --
    > --
    > Andre
    > Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    > Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    > http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    > FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
    > "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
    >> Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive
    >> for drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm
    >> beginning to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the
    >> 32-bit version myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some,
    >> but I like the 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway.
    >> Seems that 32-bit OS and programs will be the standard for the home user
    >> for some time to come and 64-bit for niche users.
    >>
    >>
    >> "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
    >>> article.
    >>>
    >>> http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1906396,00.asp
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    John Barnes, Dec 30, 2005
    #8
  9. M. Murcek

    John Barnes Guest

    Works well for the wife who just uses it to surf, post to Money and
    occasionally look up a word or item in the encyclopedia.
    Many of my programs don't install or don't work properly in x64. Programs I
    use multiple times a day that do things in 1 step that mostly can be kludged
    around in x64 in multiple steps with multiple programs. Why bother when
    nothing runs faster or better. And OE crashes several times a day when
    running in the background.


    "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I get by just fine using x64 Edition daily at home. I cannot use it at
    >work because there's no driver for the Netgear print server (you can kludge
    >it, but that's not acceptable in my work environment) Really, my biggest
    >disappointment is HP - I really would love to see x64 drivers for the
    >JetDirect 500 print server and for the scanners and large format color
    >output devices - then I'd have everything I need. There's no doubt in my
    >mind, I see little point in advocating 64 bit capable hardware platforms at
    >work before I see concrete proof that 64 bit OSs (x64, Vista) will get the
    >driver support needed to make the adoption as uneventful as 32 bit XP is
    >now...
    >
    > "Dennis Gordon" <> wrote in message
    > news:ODOPA$...
    >> It's a fair assessment, and not surprising given the lack of a killer
    >> app.
    >> If Adobe had cared enough to bring out the Suite in 64 bit, that alone
    >> might
    >> swing the sentiment. I've often likened XP 64 bit to Windows ME... the
    >> bridge for users who need to upgrade something until the real new OS
    >> (Vista)
    >> comes along. Of course, ME was a piece of junk foisted on many poor saps,
    >> whereas 64 bit is a robust, yet ignored, OS. No matter. Many of us still
    >> like it and use it exclusively. If others don't share that enthusiasm, so
    >> be
    >> it. It's only a piece of software...
    >>
    >>
    >> "John Barnes" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>> And given the paucity of new posts here, not many got x64 with their
    >>> Christmas computers. Looks like there is still going to be NO incentive

    >> for
    >>> drivers to be updated for 64-bit or software programs either. I'm

    >> beginning
    >>> to think that when Vista arrives, I will probably opt for the 32-bit

    >> version
    >>> myself. Driving a racing car in the city may be for some, but I like
    >>> the
    >>> 32-bit accessories since nothing I use benefits anyway. Seems that
    >>> 32-bit
    >>> OS and programs will be the standard for the home user for some time to

    >> come
    >>> and 64-bit for niche users.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "M. Murcek" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>> > gets roughed up in ExtremeTech's "Ten Failed Tech Trends for 2005"
    >>> > article.
    >>> >
    >>> > http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1906396,00.asp
    >>> >
    >>> >
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    John Barnes, Dec 30, 2005
    #9
  10. M. Murcek

    Richard Guest

    In his posting of Fri, 30 Dec 2005, Andre Da Costa writes
    >Its the application and device drivers thats causing the problems and it
    >looks like its gonna be the same with Vista x64. Not until we see parallel
    >support in terms of applications and device drivers for x86/x64 will users
    >have confidence investing in the platform. My stance is that, Windows XP
    >Professional x64 is explicitly a scientific/engineering workstation
    >operating system.
    >--


    Dear Andre

    You are forgetting the marketing benefit.....all those 32bit machines
    are old and you really should get a 64 bit future proofed because this
    is the future etc. crap!

    I've just spent half today with Adobe support trying to get Photoshop
    CS2 sorted on both the OS's on this quad box. As many will know this
    version of PS needs to be activated via a special code, and whilst Adobe
    is happy to allow one to have a copy running on both OS on the same
    computer they had not realized what could happen. Install the code on
    say the 64bit OS, then close that down and do it again on the 32bit OS
    and that's fine too. Close that down and restart in 64bit and open up
    PS and yes you have guessed it....it demands to be re-activated with a
    new key! Has anyone else seen this behaviour? Oh yes I know that
    officially Adobe do not support XP64.

    Cheers
    --
    Richard
    Richard, Dec 30, 2005
    #10
  11. I wish I had found this group before I rebuilt my machine to 64 bit and new
    mobo. I have future proofed to 2010 and to what use, sic, sic.
    JO
    "Richard" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > In his posting of Fri, 30 Dec 2005, Andre Da Costa writes
    >>Its the application and device drivers thats causing the problems and it
    >>looks like its gonna be the same with Vista x64. Not until we see parallel
    >>support in terms of applications and device drivers for x86/x64 will users
    >>have confidence investing in the platform. My stance is that, Windows XP
    >>Professional x64 is explicitly a scientific/engineering workstation
    >>operating system.
    >>--

    >
    > Dear Andre
    >
    > You are forgetting the marketing benefit.....all those 32bit machines are
    > old and you really should get a 64 bit future proofed because this is the
    > future etc. crap!
    >
    > I've just spent half today with Adobe support trying to get Photoshop CS2
    > sorted on both the OS's on this quad box. As many will know this version
    > of PS needs to be activated via a special code, and whilst Adobe is happy
    > to allow one to have a copy running on both OS on the same computer they
    > had not realized what could happen. Install the code on say the 64bit
    > OS, then close that down and do it again on the 32bit OS and that's fine
    > too. Close that down and restart in 64bit and open up PS and yes you have
    > guessed it....it demands to be re-activated with a new key! Has anyone
    > else seen this behaviour? Oh yes I know that officially Adobe do not
    > support XP64.
    >
    > Cheers
    > --
    > Richard
    >
    >
    JoSoap Braunton North Devon, Dec 30, 2005
    #11
  12. M. Murcek

    M. Murcek Guest

    This is an example of how multi-booting and VMs are going to blow some
    applications (like those that need an activation key) out of the water...

    "Richard" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > In his posting of Fri, 30 Dec 2005, Andre Da Costa writes
    >>Its the application and device drivers thats causing the problems and it
    >>looks like its gonna be the same with Vista x64. Not until we see parallel
    >>support in terms of applications and device drivers for x86/x64 will users
    >>have confidence investing in the platform. My stance is that, Windows XP
    >>Professional x64 is explicitly a scientific/engineering workstation
    >>operating system.
    >>--

    >
    > Dear Andre
    >
    > You are forgetting the marketing benefit.....all those 32bit machines are
    > old and you really should get a 64 bit future proofed because this is the
    > future etc. crap!
    >
    > I've just spent half today with Adobe support trying to get Photoshop CS2
    > sorted on both the OS's on this quad box. As many will know this version
    > of PS needs to be activated via a special code, and whilst Adobe is happy
    > to allow one to have a copy running on both OS on the same computer they
    > had not realized what could happen. Install the code on say the 64bit
    > OS, then close that down and do it again on the 32bit OS and that's fine
    > too. Close that down and restart in 64bit and open up PS and yes you have
    > guessed it....it demands to be re-activated with a new key! Has anyone
    > else seen this behaviour? Oh yes I know that officially Adobe do not
    > support XP64.
    >
    > Cheers
    > --
    > Richard
    >
    >
    M. Murcek, Dec 30, 2005
    #12
  13. M. Murcek

    M. Murcek Guest

    JoSoap -
    Your hardware investment will pay off - eventually. The grousing going
    on here is geared toward trying to make that happen sooner, rather than
    later. The squaky wheel, the grease, and all that...

    "JoSoap Braunton North Devon" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I wish I had found this group before I rebuilt my machine to 64 bit and new
    >mobo. I have future proofed to 2010 and to what use, sic, sic.
    > JO
    > "Richard" <> wrote in message
    > news:p...
    >> In his posting of Fri, 30 Dec 2005, Andre Da Costa writes
    >>>Its the application and device drivers thats causing the problems and it
    >>>looks like its gonna be the same with Vista x64. Not until we see
    >>>parallel
    >>>support in terms of applications and device drivers for x86/x64 will
    >>>users
    >>>have confidence investing in the platform. My stance is that, Windows XP
    >>>Professional x64 is explicitly a scientific/engineering workstation
    >>>operating system.
    >>>--

    >>
    >> Dear Andre
    >>
    >> You are forgetting the marketing benefit.....all those 32bit machines are
    >> old and you really should get a 64 bit future proofed because this is the
    >> future etc. crap!
    >>
    >> I've just spent half today with Adobe support trying to get Photoshop CS2
    >> sorted on both the OS's on this quad box. As many will know this
    >> version of PS needs to be activated via a special code, and whilst Adobe
    >> is happy to allow one to have a copy running on both OS on the same
    >> computer they had not realized what could happen. Install the code on
    >> say the 64bit OS, then close that down and do it again on the 32bit OS
    >> and that's fine too. Close that down and restart in 64bit and open up PS
    >> and yes you have guessed it....it demands to be re-activated with a new
    >> key! Has anyone else seen this behaviour? Oh yes I know that
    >> officially Adobe do not support XP64.
    >>
    >> Cheers
    >> --
    >> Richard
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
    M. Murcek, Dec 30, 2005
    #13
  14. Well, I am not saying you should not get 64-bit hardware, it makes sense
    doing so since the long term benefits are definitely worth it. But the value
    in the software such as operating system is irrelevant in certain segments
    of the market. Traditional business and consumer markets are best staying
    with 32 bit Windows since the majority of devices and software thats
    developed to specifically take advantage of 32-bit Windows readily available
    is just more predictable knowing that it will work.
    --
    --
    Andre
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
    FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm
    "Richard" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > In his posting of Fri, 30 Dec 2005, Andre Da Costa writes
    >>Its the application and device drivers thats causing the problems and it
    >>looks like its gonna be the same with Vista x64. Not until we see parallel
    >>support in terms of applications and device drivers for x86/x64 will users
    >>have confidence investing in the platform. My stance is that, Windows XP
    >>Professional x64 is explicitly a scientific/engineering workstation
    >>operating system.
    >>--

    >
    > Dear Andre
    >
    > You are forgetting the marketing benefit.....all those 32bit machines are
    > old and you really should get a 64 bit future proofed because this is the
    > future etc. crap!
    >
    > I've just spent half today with Adobe support trying to get Photoshop CS2
    > sorted on both the OS's on this quad box. As many will know this version
    > of PS needs to be activated via a special code, and whilst Adobe is happy
    > to allow one to have a copy running on both OS on the same computer they
    > had not realized what could happen. Install the code on say the 64bit
    > OS, then close that down and do it again on the 32bit OS and that's fine
    > too. Close that down and restart in 64bit and open up PS and yes you have
    > guessed it....it demands to be re-activated with a new key! Has anyone
    > else seen this behaviour? Oh yes I know that officially Adobe do not
    > support XP64.
    >
    > Cheers
    > --
    > Richard
    >
    >
    Andre Da Costa, Dec 30, 2005
    #14
  15. M. Murcek

    fb Guest

    Richard wrote:

    > In his posting of Fri, 30 Dec 2005, Andre Da Costa writes
    >
    >> Its the application and device drivers thats causing the problems and it
    >> looks like its gonna be the same with Vista x64. Not until we see
    >> parallel
    >> support in terms of applications and device drivers for x86/x64 will
    >> users
    >> have confidence investing in the platform. My stance is that, Windows XP
    >> Professional x64 is explicitly a scientific/engineering workstation
    >> operating system.
    >> --

    >
    >
    > Dear Andre
    >
    > You are forgetting the marketing benefit.....all those 32bit machines
    > are old and you really should get a 64 bit future proofed because this
    > is the future etc. crap!
    >
    > I've just spent half today with Adobe support trying to get Photoshop
    > CS2 sorted on both the OS's on this quad box. As many will know this
    > version of PS needs to be activated via a special code, and whilst Adobe
    > is happy to allow one to have a copy running on both OS on the same
    > computer they had not realized what could happen. Install the code on
    > say the 64bit OS, then close that down and do it again on the 32bit OS
    > and that's fine too. Close that down and restart in 64bit and open up
    > PS and yes you have guessed it....it demands to be re-activated with a
    > new key! Has anyone else seen this behaviour? Oh yes I know that
    > officially Adobe do not support XP64.
    >
    > Cheers


    Yep! Sure have.
    Frank
    fb, Dec 30, 2005
    #15
  16. M. Murcek

    Richard Guest

    In his posting of Fri, 30 Dec 2005, fb writes
    >Richard wrote:

    Snip

    >> I've just spent half today with Adobe support trying to get
    >>Photoshop CS2 sorted on both the OS's on this quad box. As many
    >>will know this version of PS needs to be activated via a special
    >>code, and whilst Adobe is happy to allow one to have a copy running
    >>on both OS on the same computer they had not realized what could
    >>happen. Install the code on say the 64bit OS, then close that down
    >>and do it again on the 32bit OS and that's fine too. Close that down
    >>and restart in 64bit and open up PS and yes you have guessed it....it
    >>demands to be re-activated with a new key! Has anyone else seen
    >>this behaviour? Oh yes I know that officially Adobe do not support XP64.
    >> Cheers

    >
    >Yep! Sure have.
    >Frank


    Dear Frank

    Would you care to expand on your comment please so that I can get a good
    handle on this because Adobe Europe have said that they have not come
    across this before, and they say they have not had anyone want to run
    CS2 on both the 32 and 64 OS systems of one computer

    Thanks
    --
    Richard
    Richard, Dec 31, 2005
    #16
    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. Really Interesting Guy

    Kieslowski's new Killing and Love DVDs?

    Really Interesting Guy, May 12, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    454
    BubbCoop
    May 18, 2004
  2. DVD Verdict
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    370
    DVD Verdict
    Feb 15, 2005
  3. wewa
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    676
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64]
    Nov 10, 2005
  4. Doug MacLean
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    522
    Doug MacLean
    Sep 11, 2007
  5. Doug MacLean
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    481
    Doug MacLean
    Mar 11, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page