pudrums
Nov 28, 08:06 AM
Custom-made gloves in black leather with cream-colored stitchings. I'll post a pic when I get them.
Kreamy
Oct 23, 07:15 PM
errr...how about the fact that I've been enjoying my MBP for months now while you've been waiting and replying on this board for those same months on whatever ancient machine you currently own? I dunno about you, but I've enjoyed these months of screaming performance while on the road. But hopefully for you, the months of checking this website on a daily basis wishing you had a MBP pays off this week.
If there wasn't some truth to his comment, you wouldn't even gander at this thread.
Resistance is futile.
If there wasn't some truth to his comment, you wouldn't even gander at this thread.
Resistance is futile.
Lollypop
Aug 25, 12:29 AM
IF the mini do get refreshed it will be minor speedbump, maybe a faster CPU, maybe bigger HDD, hopefully a better GPU (or a real GPU for that matter) :rolleyes: personally hoping for price decreases, besides a mid range, apple does need a lower costing machine as well! :D
iGav
Mar 9, 02:18 PM
So I don't think they did any modifications to the suspension.
I'd hazard a guess that they probably did� just because of the difference in preference in ride quality, European cars are naturally exceedingly firm� the same cars with sports suspension, excruciatingly so.
The Insignia's not a bad car by any means, the OPC/VXR concept looked particularly mean, especially in wagon form, but the rear of the hatchback looks a little odd to me, fussily unresolved with so many bad lines� but that is probably to be expected given it's World Car origins. It's wheelbase looks far too short as well.
http://www.motorward.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/opel-insignia-opc-sports-tourer-1.jpg
I agree. If you look at "small" cars these days, they really aren't that small. Of course, what made the Mini special was packaging, and I don't think we've seen a revolutionary new "package" since the Mini.
I'd suggest that the A2 was the last truly innovative car with regards to packaging, spaceframe, double-floor (like the A Class, but much better implemented) etc.
Something like the Smart is too compromised in achieving it's small footprint, and the IQ is as conventional as they come. As are cars like the Ka/500, i10 etc.
I think VW was on to something with their up! concept, (rear engined, 2 or 3 cylinder engine (I forget which), and a minimalist cabin) but then they decided the layout was too difficult to make work (read as too expensive, can't be bothered) and it's becoming a conventional FE/FWD hatch� when they could have launched the new people's car for the 21st century, with an innovative drivetrain and modular interior functionality, based on something like an iPad type device (which is what VW's new Hackney Cab concept looks to be implementing).
Chevy definitely has a lot of work to do to establish a brand presence in Europe - especially since Opel already covers so much territory with its lineup. Apart from niche vehicles like the Corvette, there isn't much of "American" Chevy that can make the transition to Europe. And in the long run,
I can't help but think GM would've been better repositioning Opel. They're making unnecessary (not to mention needlessly expensive) work for themselves with Chevy. It's a bit icy out isn't it? Is that the captain at the bar? ;)
Chevy can't rely on rebadged Korean cars.
They can't� especially when rival Korean cars are very, very good indeed, if still a little dull.
Damning with faint praise!
What can I say� it's ingrained. :p
In the context of this thread I am happy to see a Cruze diesel come to the US, and I think the Cruze will be an improvement over previous GM small cars,
It's considered more mid-size here if anything. In Holden form, right up until the C-Pillar it's a fine design, but like a lot of cars today, it's got bum trouble.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/21/2009-2010_Holden_JG_Cruze_CDX_sedan_02.jpg/800px-2009-2010_Holden_JG_Cruze_CDX_sedan_02.jpg
It is true that their biggest problem is coming up with a reason to buy it over other similarly anonymous cars.
I think that would be my issue, if I were thinking of dropping the �$�� on a new car, I'd be thinking to myself, is a new car so important to me as to stomach the depreciation that drops like an atom-bomb, or do I buy myself a new Golf?
And we never got to see it here.
And is it any wonder that Ford U.S. almost went the way of the muff?
if any car company has shown to have any knowledge about badge engineering/branding it's VW AG
Indeed, this alone would be a thread in itself wouldn't it. :p
believe it or not back in the 70ties Opel actually had a trendy, sporty and young reputation image
That'll be the Manta. :p
Vauxhall have never really had that image. It's no coincidence that in Cockney Rhyming Slang, that Vauxhall rhymes with Dull.
it's not exactly GM alone:
yes VW are really bland looking too, but opposed to many GM vehicles if you take the badge away you would be still able recognize that the vehicle is a VW ...
And you highlight exactly where many/most car manufacturers go wrong when it comes to developing a World Car and why they're seldom truly successful. BMW & Mercedes have been producing World Cars for decades haven't they, some would say successfully so. Why? Because they're completely & unapologetically Germanic.
seriously the new micra is bringing the bland back to the brand ..
True that� it looks older than the car it replaced. :eek:
at least hyundai finally realised that those names they were putting on their models weren't the brightest idea in 95% of all cases
The i10 has gotten rave reviews over here, frequently voted best city-urban-girls car or something� I heard that when a man drives one, his balls shrink and he assumes a pre-pubescent state. ;)
I'd hazard a guess that they probably did� just because of the difference in preference in ride quality, European cars are naturally exceedingly firm� the same cars with sports suspension, excruciatingly so.
The Insignia's not a bad car by any means, the OPC/VXR concept looked particularly mean, especially in wagon form, but the rear of the hatchback looks a little odd to me, fussily unresolved with so many bad lines� but that is probably to be expected given it's World Car origins. It's wheelbase looks far too short as well.
http://www.motorward.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/opel-insignia-opc-sports-tourer-1.jpg
I agree. If you look at "small" cars these days, they really aren't that small. Of course, what made the Mini special was packaging, and I don't think we've seen a revolutionary new "package" since the Mini.
I'd suggest that the A2 was the last truly innovative car with regards to packaging, spaceframe, double-floor (like the A Class, but much better implemented) etc.
Something like the Smart is too compromised in achieving it's small footprint, and the IQ is as conventional as they come. As are cars like the Ka/500, i10 etc.
I think VW was on to something with their up! concept, (rear engined, 2 or 3 cylinder engine (I forget which), and a minimalist cabin) but then they decided the layout was too difficult to make work (read as too expensive, can't be bothered) and it's becoming a conventional FE/FWD hatch� when they could have launched the new people's car for the 21st century, with an innovative drivetrain and modular interior functionality, based on something like an iPad type device (which is what VW's new Hackney Cab concept looks to be implementing).
Chevy definitely has a lot of work to do to establish a brand presence in Europe - especially since Opel already covers so much territory with its lineup. Apart from niche vehicles like the Corvette, there isn't much of "American" Chevy that can make the transition to Europe. And in the long run,
I can't help but think GM would've been better repositioning Opel. They're making unnecessary (not to mention needlessly expensive) work for themselves with Chevy. It's a bit icy out isn't it? Is that the captain at the bar? ;)
Chevy can't rely on rebadged Korean cars.
They can't� especially when rival Korean cars are very, very good indeed, if still a little dull.
Damning with faint praise!
What can I say� it's ingrained. :p
In the context of this thread I am happy to see a Cruze diesel come to the US, and I think the Cruze will be an improvement over previous GM small cars,
It's considered more mid-size here if anything. In Holden form, right up until the C-Pillar it's a fine design, but like a lot of cars today, it's got bum trouble.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/21/2009-2010_Holden_JG_Cruze_CDX_sedan_02.jpg/800px-2009-2010_Holden_JG_Cruze_CDX_sedan_02.jpg
It is true that their biggest problem is coming up with a reason to buy it over other similarly anonymous cars.
I think that would be my issue, if I were thinking of dropping the �$�� on a new car, I'd be thinking to myself, is a new car so important to me as to stomach the depreciation that drops like an atom-bomb, or do I buy myself a new Golf?
And we never got to see it here.
And is it any wonder that Ford U.S. almost went the way of the muff?
if any car company has shown to have any knowledge about badge engineering/branding it's VW AG
Indeed, this alone would be a thread in itself wouldn't it. :p
believe it or not back in the 70ties Opel actually had a trendy, sporty and young reputation image
That'll be the Manta. :p
Vauxhall have never really had that image. It's no coincidence that in Cockney Rhyming Slang, that Vauxhall rhymes with Dull.
it's not exactly GM alone:
yes VW are really bland looking too, but opposed to many GM vehicles if you take the badge away you would be still able recognize that the vehicle is a VW ...
And you highlight exactly where many/most car manufacturers go wrong when it comes to developing a World Car and why they're seldom truly successful. BMW & Mercedes have been producing World Cars for decades haven't they, some would say successfully so. Why? Because they're completely & unapologetically Germanic.
seriously the new micra is bringing the bland back to the brand ..
True that� it looks older than the car it replaced. :eek:
at least hyundai finally realised that those names they were putting on their models weren't the brightest idea in 95% of all cases
The i10 has gotten rave reviews over here, frequently voted best city-urban-girls car or something� I heard that when a man drives one, his balls shrink and he assumes a pre-pubescent state. ;)
toddybody
Apr 19, 11:29 AM
Current imac with the 5750 is technically a 5850m. A 6850m is a slight downgrade from the 5850m. The 6950m is only a slight upgrade from the current imac.
Let's hope for a 6970m. Temps and power requirements are similar between the two but the performance gain is decent. It's the best we can hope for. And given the higher resolution of the 27" I would say it needs it.
I think it's safe to say they will get sandy bridge and thunderbolt but what I would also like to see is better speakers.
You misunderstood me friend...I meant an HD 6950 2GB (Desktop Card)
Yes, its a pipe dream...but cant a man dream:rolleyes:
Let's hope for a 6970m. Temps and power requirements are similar between the two but the performance gain is decent. It's the best we can hope for. And given the higher resolution of the 27" I would say it needs it.
I think it's safe to say they will get sandy bridge and thunderbolt but what I would also like to see is better speakers.
You misunderstood me friend...I meant an HD 6950 2GB (Desktop Card)
Yes, its a pipe dream...but cant a man dream:rolleyes:
balamw
Sep 7, 12:58 PM
I'm sure apple engineers can do these same napkin calculations. There would have to be some alternative to the straight dl. Maybe a torrent of some kind built into iTunes 7. I don't know. Just thinking.
The torrent isn't going to increase your DL speed to > 150 kBps (typical for 1.5 Mbps links including overhead) if that's all your pipe can do.
Perhaps what they'll do is more like a TiVo suggestions like service where it'll download movies you might want to watch in the background at night or while you are away and "unlock" them when you start to watch it.
We'll see next week.
B
The torrent isn't going to increase your DL speed to > 150 kBps (typical for 1.5 Mbps links including overhead) if that's all your pipe can do.
Perhaps what they'll do is more like a TiVo suggestions like service where it'll download movies you might want to watch in the background at night or while you are away and "unlock" them when you start to watch it.
We'll see next week.
B
nilk
Mar 25, 01:50 PM
You can upgrade to the latest 5870 card if you wanted to right now. It might not be 'officially' supported but you can still do it.
Supposedly the 5870 won't work on Mac Pro 1,1 with specific firmware (MP11.005C.B08 won't work).
From a comment at store.apple.com:
With regard to the Mac Pro 1,1, it apparently depends on your system's firmware and your version of Mac OS X. If your firmware version is MP11.005C.B00 or MP11.005D.B00, it should work. If your Mac Pro's firmware version is MP11.005C.B08, it will NOT work. If you have the correct firmware, you must have at least Snow Leopard 10.6.4 to use the card to its fullest.
Supposedly the 5870 won't work on Mac Pro 1,1 with specific firmware (MP11.005C.B08 won't work).
From a comment at store.apple.com:
With regard to the Mac Pro 1,1, it apparently depends on your system's firmware and your version of Mac OS X. If your firmware version is MP11.005C.B00 or MP11.005D.B00, it should work. If your Mac Pro's firmware version is MP11.005C.B08, it will NOT work. If you have the correct firmware, you must have at least Snow Leopard 10.6.4 to use the card to its fullest.
Eduardo1971
Mar 22, 05:00 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
135 GB and not a single pirated song/album in there!
Some people really, really, love music!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
135 GB and not a single pirated song/album in there!
Some people really, really, love music!
gugy
Sep 6, 05:53 PM
Bring It On!
But hopefully these are a better resolution than the current TV show on Itunes. It should be at least DVD quality, If not these price model will bomb IMHO.
But hopefully these are a better resolution than the current TV show on Itunes. It should be at least DVD quality, If not these price model will bomb IMHO.
Object-X
Nov 28, 03:25 AM
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?

MattyMac
Aug 6, 09:40 PM
"Hasta la Vista, Vista" image on flickr:
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=207241970&context=photostream&size=l
:D
I see black curtains:D
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=207241970&context=photostream&size=l
:D
I see black curtains:D
bursthead
Mar 25, 04:09 PM
http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/cellphone/e75a/
Joystick for ipad
Joystick for ipad

jtmx29
Jan 10, 12:17 PM
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k256/JTM29/IMG_0367.jpg?t=1294683410
1991 Honda Accord LX. Nothing pretty, but she gets the job done.
1991 Honda Accord LX. Nothing pretty, but she gets the job done.
NameUndecided
Apr 2, 05:16 PM
On a happier note -- I don't think I've seen this mentioned yet -- DP 2 seems to be taking about 1.5gb less space.
MacSA
Aug 29, 09:08 AM
Does anyone know how much the Core Duo chips will be now that we have Core 2 Duo. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Intel were reducing the prices again. If thats th case, i'd be a bit disappointed to see the Mini stay the same price.
moneyman118
Jun 22, 11:55 AM
Could be what the magic track pad was developed for?!?
thejedipunk
Jan 7, 01:36 AM
Not that any more predictions from anyone from this point on matter any longer, but what the hell? ;)
LEOPARD LEOPARD LEOPARD
IPOD IPOD IPOD
MACS MACS MACS
iTV will be named with release/ship date
My thoughts on the phone:
I've read much stuff on here about this much epically fabled device. Several good and bad points. First, if the rumor gods are saying that they will release a basic/media phone as well as a smart phone, then, as some have already pointed out, what can Apple bring that is new to the table of basic/media phones? I think Apple should just make a smart phone, considering that more and more people are looking towards smart phone market, which I think has some room for innovation. Plus, at the same time, they can capture that oh-so-crucial enterprise market. SWITCHERS GALORE!!! Even with that, I don't see them being stupid enough to cannibalize iPod/nano/shuffle sales. At most, 2 gigs of space on the phone, which will have to be shared with the phone and any media files.
Take this also into consideration. Why would children even need Apple branded cell phones? Most children today are obviously on a family plan. Which means they get the free phones. The Apple phone would not be priced reasonably enough for me to buy all my kids (if I had kids) such a phone. What if Apple just decides to make the iPod into a super device that can even cook breakfast for you. That kills off all iPod music player sales. Not everyone would buy the phone because what they really wanted was just a music player and not a Digital Age Swiss Army Knife.
But I still want an Apple smart phone. :)
LEOPARD LEOPARD LEOPARD
IPOD IPOD IPOD
MACS MACS MACS
iTV will be named with release/ship date
My thoughts on the phone:
I've read much stuff on here about this much epically fabled device. Several good and bad points. First, if the rumor gods are saying that they will release a basic/media phone as well as a smart phone, then, as some have already pointed out, what can Apple bring that is new to the table of basic/media phones? I think Apple should just make a smart phone, considering that more and more people are looking towards smart phone market, which I think has some room for innovation. Plus, at the same time, they can capture that oh-so-crucial enterprise market. SWITCHERS GALORE!!! Even with that, I don't see them being stupid enough to cannibalize iPod/nano/shuffle sales. At most, 2 gigs of space on the phone, which will have to be shared with the phone and any media files.
Take this also into consideration. Why would children even need Apple branded cell phones? Most children today are obviously on a family plan. Which means they get the free phones. The Apple phone would not be priced reasonably enough for me to buy all my kids (if I had kids) such a phone. What if Apple just decides to make the iPod into a super device that can even cook breakfast for you. That kills off all iPod music player sales. Not everyone would buy the phone because what they really wanted was just a music player and not a Digital Age Swiss Army Knife.
But I still want an Apple smart phone. :)
nporteschaikin
Feb 26, 09:43 AM
http://www.porteschaikin.com/personal/macsetup.jpg
roadbloc
Apr 1, 10:13 AM
Guess why they are the only two removable apps?
http://cl.ly/5gbA/img.png
Were them two apps downloaded via the Mac App Store by any chance?
http://cl.ly/5gbA/img.png
Were them two apps downloaded via the Mac App Store by any chance?
Multimedia
Oct 23, 11:32 PM
I've got a dual 2.33ghz Core 2 Duo in my mac mini and its FASTTTTT the new mbps will be nice BUY BUY BUYDid you photograph your installation process for us to learn by? How much did you pay for the 2.33GHz Merom?
guzhogi
Jul 18, 09:56 AM
Why not offer both a subscription and an a-la-carte system? The rental movies could be cheaper, lesser quality and last for only a certain amount of plays/days while the ones you buy to own can be of higher quality, more expensive and you get to keep it.
Linito
Aug 25, 01:02 PM
Hope the new mac minis have a new face... since the change to intel it's been all pretty much the same, the macbook pro and the mac pro are almost identical to the old ones:(
Come on apple get CREATIVE:p
Come on apple get CREATIVE:p
budugu
Sep 6, 11:28 PM
Is the 160GB BTO HD perpendicular?
yup!
yup!
GeekOFComedy
Nov 24, 09:54 AM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41C0o2GAJGL._SS500_.jpg
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.
Props if anyone knows who used that bag.