Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Opinion Post: What Happens to The Geeks If Apple Conquers?

Jul 11, 2007 7:31AM PDT

What I would like to know is what Mac users and PC users alike belive is going to happen if Apple retakes the entire, or a good percentage of the PC market. Let's face it in these troubled times that Microsoft is having Apple is branching out and it's market share, and user popularity is increasing. Let's assume that this momentum will continue, but let's also add that the sale of Apple's market will increase expedentually every year, to the equation.

Essentially what I am doing is speeding up a process that may take years, for this hypothetical situation. So with Apple shares increasing so much every year, let's assume they retake control of the PC market. My question is what happens to the devoted geeks like myself who build their hardware. Their desktops, and laptops (which will continue to become more open in coming years) and who take pride in what they built. Who take pride in knowing every in and out of their system if something were to go wrong. And for the fun of it let's assume that these users do not want to use a distro of Linux. What Happens? Thanks.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Why would this be so?
Jul 11, 2007 7:40AM PDT

On the Apple I have a full command line and it's more powerful than the Windows command console. Is this a step backwards?

(no.)

Bob

- Collapse -
Ah, Bob
Jul 11, 2007 8:20AM PDT

Pardon me but I don't see your point, excatly. What does your statement have to do with the future of computer enthusiasts who build their system if Apple was to retake the market?

- Collapse -
They'll still be there.
Jul 11, 2007 8:42AM PDT

Look at the SBC market. Even I have a few of those.

Bob

- Collapse -
SBC is more like an Apple 1 Design
Jul 11, 2007 8:55AM PDT

I am talking about a normal construct, ATX motherboard, ATX chassis, etc.. What operating system would it utilize?

- Collapse -
Your choice.
Jul 11, 2007 9:05AM PDT

Microsoft didn't obliterate Apple, Linux or vice versa. Even SUN is still out there and runs on your setup.

I'm sure there is some doom sayer that says the end of the (PC) world is neigh. Your choice to buy into that. I don't.

Bob

- Collapse -
Even So
Jul 11, 2007 9:42AM PDT

Wouldn't users want to run the most widely used OS, which would be Mac OS.

- Collapse -
Then they can keep doing what they are doing.
Jul 11, 2007 10:15AM PDT

Lots of people build kit cars - and they continue to do so. Just because auto manufacturers out there dominate that industry does not mean the car-geeks go away.

Lots of people make musical instruments - and they can continue to do so. Just because electronically produced music is out there does not mean the musician-geeks go away.

Lots of people have home gardens - and they can continue to do so. Just because big agribusiness is out there does not mean home-grown fruits and vegetables and herbs and spices go away.

Why is it that it has to be an "all or nothing"? Why can't the folks you labeled as the geeks learn something new? Actually, it is much more fun and productive to support useful applications... I spent many years supporting Mac OS and Windows and the applications that run on them... I actually advocate a multi-OS, diverse, ecosystem in the enterprise (and at home) because of inherent survivability (one is attacked - the other keeps working until the first is repaired and back running).

- Collapse -
Agreed
Jul 11, 2007 10:39AM PDT

I agree with you 100 percent about having a multi OS enviroment, something that is hard to invision. Personally I feel that in a Multi OS competetive world the users win. Because the companys are rolling out ground breaking technologies and they are doing it quickly, bringing the overall technological level of society up.

As for this posting I was trying to set up a hypethetical situation in which an Apple ruled market existed. This is primarily for common knowledge. I wanted to just see what others thought the outcome or the course of action would be for people like myself who build systems. What OS would they use? My last point is that you seemed to be angry about the comment about geeks. Please I meant nothing by that, after years of being called a geek I am proud to be called that.

- Collapse -
As a former IT manager responsible for
Jul 11, 2007 11:11AM PDT

a group of self-professed geeks, I am certainly not going to be angry about being called a geek... though biting the heads off chickens tends to get feathers stuck in my teeth.

If I came off sounding irritated, that was certainly not my goal. I, like you, am rather proud of the label. It came with many years of training and learning.

+++++++++++++++++

So you build systems... Why can't you continue to build systems? If it happens to be a traditional Windows OS based machine, then build it like you have always doe... If, however, a client decides they want MacOS... So... build the system... Buy the Mac, and take all the parts out, have a really cool custom case and put the Apple parts in there... add RAM, add hard drives, add optical drives, add FireWire ports... build the system. Lots of people trick their Macs out by replacing cases, doing vehicle installations... there's lots to do with customizing Macs - contrary to popular belief...

http://www.theapplecollection.com/iMac/Pika.html
http://www.theapplecollection.com/Collection/MacAquarium/index.shtml
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/1/prweb197110.htm
http://www.macvroom.com/Macd-Ride-Jeepintosh-2005-Jeep-Grand-Cherokee

There's lots more out there - but you get the idea...

And of course, since Mac OSX is based on UNIX, you *could* go THAT route... so hardware and software opportunities abound.

- Collapse -
Mac As A Serious Technical PC
Jul 22, 2007 4:30PM PDT

The thing is with Windows I am guranteed a serious geeky, technical computer experiance, if I so want. But from the establishment of the Apple Computer, Apple has boasted at the ease of use of it's machine. And this is one of the biggest problems I have with Apple. Because I do find the machines, and their technology interesting. But I can't stand the closed hardware architecture, and the ammount of technical ops. Would getting a Mac hinder my ability to do the technical operations I am so used to doing on my Windows based PC? Can I do the technical things I do with Windows on the Macintosh Platform? And I know that this question is a broad view question, but let's consider technical in the general.

- Collapse -
Re: What Happens to the Geeks if Apple conquers?
Jul 13, 2007 2:52PM PDT

This is a good question for discussion but I don't see that it will ever happen.

Today in an article about Windows Vista it stated that Windows was the OS in 93% of PCs today. That leaves 7% for Apple, Unix and Linux to share. I can't see that any of them have a chance of gaining any kind of dominance over Windows. I'm not exactly a friend of Microsoft but considering their overwhelming lead and the way they play hard ball to squash any competition I can't see any change in the near future. I suspect that the only reason they allow all the others to exist as a deterance to regulation as a monopoly.

Anyway, back to the original question. It would be a bad day for geeks as Apple has a history of being very closed to external add-ons and internal upgrades. Their software may be user-friendly but their systems aren't. As a couple of examples - have you ever tried to add memory to an Apple IIc? Or look at the new iPhone - soldered in battery!

My preference would be Linux - or at least the ideals it is based on but there is no way that will ever happen.

- Collapse -
Reading articles
Jul 14, 2007 12:58AM PDT

The problem with reading articles is that the writer does not usually take the time to do any meaningful research when it comes to writing about the "numbers".
While Windows may be the most popular platform out there, the 93% number has been drawn from a hat, or some other place.
Usually this statement, "Windows is the OS in 93% of PC's" is a mixture of data and not a true representation..
For instance, Windows runs a variety of Cash Registers, ATM's, Cell Phones, Traffic Signals and a bunch of other things and ALL of those are counted as being on the Windows platform. They also form part of the percentage number. Strictly speaking though, those ATM's, etc., are not what the general public would regard as a PC. That makes the statement, inaccurate.
The other number you see a lot is the "market share" figure. Apple is currently around 6%(ish) of the market share but this number is based on units sold during the reporting period. It has nothing to do with the existing machines out there.
I note that you only mention Apple, Unix and Linux as operating systems that run on what we understand as a PC. There are many more than this so, if the 6% figure is to be believed, the remainder of the OS's only have 4% to share. Doesn't seem quite right.

Speaking of counting, as the iPhone is powered by OS X, will you be counting all those iPhones that have been sold since the release, as part of the Apple market share? If the rumored OS X powered iPod ever arrives and iPods continue to sell at the rate they are, the "numbers" could swing very close to the original question. Maybe the iPhone batteries will be User replaceable in the next series.

I don't recall Apple ever being "closed" to external add-ons. I have had external devices hooked to my Mac's since the Apple ][. You may be attributing manufactures unwillingness to produce peripherals for more than one platform to that statement.

As for the IIc, yep. Been there, done that. But why bother bringing up at 20+ year old machine as part of a post dealing with this millennium?

I've no doubt that Apple's OS will continue to make strides and gain a larger percentage of installed bases, but I don't think I would want to see Apple as being the majority platform. You only have to look at MS to see what happens to a company that reaches that point.

P

- Collapse -
Interesting comment to throw over the fence...
Jul 14, 2007 3:03AM PDT

"Apple has a history of being very closed to external add-ons and internal upgrades."

Let's go back in time.

External add-ons... I suppose this needs a bit of definition, but I'll give it a try...
Networking? Got it... LocalTalk (from the old days) and ethernet and bluetooth and USB and FireWire and TCP/IP and AppleTalk... and serial and parallel (long ago).
External drives? Got it. Parallel, SCSI (also from the old days), USB and FireWire. From Western Digital, Maxtor, Seagate... SATA... whatever... LaCie, Iomega, optical drives, hard drives, tape...
Peripherals from third parties: Got it. Printers and scanners and monitors and graphics tablets and mice and keyboards and wireless stuff... HP, Canon, Kensington, the list is endless...

For a little over year or so (only because the camera was manufactured in 2005), I have been able to capture 1080i video on my Sony HDR-HC1 (at the time the "world's first consumer high-definition CMOS camcorder http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_HDR-HC1 ), import high-definition video to a (now) 3 year old G4 laptop (using FireWire), edit that footage and playback (using the laptop) to a Panasonic HDTV via the TVs computer port... Before that, as standard definition was all that was available, I was able to connect a Canon camcorder in place of the HC1...

15 years ago I thought it would be funny to use a Compaq CRT to a PowerMac... "How come your Compaq monitor has MacOS?"
"... uh... because it is connected to a PowerMac."
"How did you do that? Macs can't connect to anything else."
"With a $7 video adapter..."
15 years ago, we used networked HP laser printers; Fiery front-end print servers to Kodak color copier/printers and serial-connected external modems for dial-up connectivity, Shiva LANRover remote access, and Wacom graphics tablets that use the AppleDesktop bus... and shared all the infrastructure of connecting my company's 13 office network into a global telecom manufacturer's enterprise network through hubs and routers and switches... and Novell and Windows NT file servers among other shared-environment items...

From my experience, Apple Macintoshes have been just as "closed to external add-ons and internal upgrades" as traditional Windows machines.

Were there - and are there - occasions when Macs could/can not do things the Windows machines *could* do? Yes. Just as there were/are occasions that Windows machines could/can not do some things Macs can do. More recently, we can boot a Mac with MacOS or Windows... but I cannot do that with a traditional Windows machine... so... which one is "not open"?

Are there MORE add-ons for the traditional Windows environment? Sure - but they are not necessarily all good to do... As with cars, just because there is an add-on does not mean it is a good thing to do... and, as with cars or any other environment where there are multiple competitive manufacturers making the same thing, many parts are not interchangable - but that does not make a Cadillac a bad car because I can't use many of its parts on a Scion (or vice-versa)... When I look at the list of "options" on higher-end autos, it's typically pretty short - but that does not make them bad cars...

- Collapse -
Addendum
Jul 14, 2007 3:09AM PDT

"When I look at the list of "options" on higher-end autos, it's typically pretty short - but that does not make them bad cars..."

You're quite right, it usually means that all those add-ons are already installed as standard.

Hey, it's raining down here again.


P

- Collapse -
RE:
Jul 14, 2007 8:30AM PDT

Yes I agree with that as well. But I am not concerned with Apple taking over the market, this is not going to happen, Windows will remain the majority OS. The question was just a what if. Personally I think the real problem is that Microsoft has to begin moving again on the PC. They are churning out products and advancements all over the place and most of them are on the server/enterprise side, they need to get their PC team working again, they are getting lazy.

- Collapse -
According to Chris Perillo....
Jul 14, 2007 9:39AM PDT

... MS needs to get all the bugs worked out of Vista first. Then they can worry about adding to the windows application world.

I myself, hope that apple never becomes the dominant OS in the market place. Being hungry leads to a desire to innovate and let's face it, apple may not always hit a home run every time but they tend to keep everyone else's imagination fired up.

- Collapse -
Helluva what-if, but let's run with it...
Jul 14, 2007 2:43PM PDT

First, Apple will never take over the business world, where up to 75% of computers are used, because businesses need more choice than one vendor of hardware. It'd be like Mercedes becoming the standard for commuters all over the world; great cars but people would want more variety. Says nothing bad about the maker, just that choice is what drives purchases in people.

Second, Apple (and other makers) are selling far more laptops than desktops now, and that is where their sales growth comes from. Desktop sales are flat or declining and have been for more than 3 years now. And as you know, laptops are hardly customizable outside of the factory order.

Aside from that, the one thing geeks won't be able to tweak to their hearts' content in Apple systems is the CPU/motherboard, because Apple buys/makes custom hardware for their machines. Most everything else is configurable, from RAM to drives to video/sound processors.

Needless to say, the dearth of Apple-compatible high-end video cards is due to their small market share; if your prediction came true, there'd be top-end gaming cards from all the makers -- the lack of which seems to be the #1 gripe from the PC geek crowd.

So I'd say that if Apple became dominent in desktop sales -- Woot! Go Apple! -- you'd be able to go your merry geek way just as you do now. Customize any Mac machine with faster GPU, more RAM, audio in/out, video co-processors, RAID, optical and hard drives, fans, utilities, tweak fan speeds, buy better speakers, add peripherals...you name it. Oh, and run OS-X (or whatever it is by then...). And if their market share improved that much, perhaps they'd license to AMD as well as Intel and you could replace CPUs too...who knows?

- Collapse -
Oh, I forgot...
Jul 14, 2007 2:47PM PDT

I should have mentioned that you can already upgrade from the dual-core Xeon processors in current Apple Macs to faster quad-cores, as has been reported earlier this year when the faster Intel variants were released. So you can upgrade to faster CPUs right now!

- Collapse -
I Like What If's Here's Why
Jul 14, 2007 3:08PM PDT

I like a good debate and nothing beats a great debate in my passion, computers. I mean most of us spend most of our online CNET time helping other's find computers and answering tech service questions. I feel that sometimes it's good when we go at it like in this post. I like it because I can play devil's advocate, even though I am a Microsoft apologist (probably a bad idea saying that in the Mac forum) that doesn't crowd my opinion, and I learn something.

Anyway the fact is that the Apple market share is never going to surpass the Windows market share. That stands for Linux as well, Linux has been around since the early 90's and from that point has stood as the Microsoft Windows killer. Last time I checked Windows still runs on 95% of the worlds computer. And everytime a new release of Windows is launched we always experiance this turmopil time period were everyone is in between OSes which usually lasts between launch and SP1, and the Linux foundation beigns to start their "we are going to do it this time, we are going to beat MS crap."

The difference this time is we have experianced a 6 year gap since the installment of XP. Now Microsoft is not at total fault, yes they pushed Vista out the door not quite ready. But I have been running Vista because to me XP was getting stale, for the last month and a half. As an IT guy I know that, that is not good practice and that you should wait until the SP, but I was involved with the beta testing and figured I could compensate for any problems. I so far have had no problems with Vista. My software ran with no problem, I'll give the benefit of the doubt and say that some programs required a little tweaking to work, but nothing major. All my hardware minus my onboard sound card works (company refuses to release Vista compatible drivers). The sound card is supported by one of the Universal drivers MS writes in their framework, but because it is a proprietary device it refuses some of the Vista commands, in which case I have to manually terminate the commands being sent to the device and restart the device, but not Vista's fault it's the hardware vendor.

And that is the major two problems Vista needs some patch work which can easily be fixed with a serivce pack. Developers need to get on the ball whether they write code for their devices or they write software. Meaning they need to get in there and start using the new API's like DirectX 10. Most importantly they need to not be stuborn and neglect those running 64-bit OSes, Microsoft and Apple both said it was time for a transistion. When strictly comparing MS and Apple, MS said it first with XP 64 bit and now Vista, and Apple said it with OS X Leopard.

I have much more to say on the subject but I will wait for a another person to respond.

- Collapse -
I'm responding, thanks
Jul 14, 2007 7:06PM PDT

OK, I'm glad you like playing devil's advocate, and you are happy with Vista despite your audio problems (due mainly to Microsoft's digital rights management programming, by the way, not your sound card vendor). Developer drivers and Vista aside, what's this got to do with the OP's query? I don't see any comment about geeking on Apple hardware here.

- Collapse -
RE:
Jul 15, 2007 1:47AM PDT

The sound card problem I am experiancing does not have to do with the Win DRM Code. It is strictly that the device's firmware ie: driver was not built ot handle the Win Vista Driver Framework. The easy solution is for the vendor to develope a Vista compatible driver.

The original post was what happens to geeks but throughout the entire post it has become a hybird question. This is what usually happens when you deal with Microsoft and Apple. It is both about what would happen to geeks and why it will not happen. I was answering the latter in my response.

As far as messing around with the Apple hardware let's look at it this way. Let's say in the next year or so Apple has the majority share, something I very disagree is ever going to happen. Now what some people have suggested is that you can mess around with the Mac, you can change the case, add/remove memory, buy different Video Cards, and what not, but as you said you can't touch the motherboard or the Processor. So I go to Apple and I buy an extremely overely priced overely rated Mac Pro for an easy $5,000. What the hell am I going to want to buy now to make changes to this system.

The point is that buying a system and making changes is different, then buying all your own components, and building from scratch. And that is where Apple holds there so called stability in Mac OS. They only need to build their software on a platform they can control, meaning there is no guessing of the hardware and it's device controllers, it is programmed directly into a framework contained inside the Mach Kernel, because they use their own propietary hardware. Any other hard ware you buy, comes with a sticker that says Mac edition, why? Because Apple has coded for that specific device, so the Mac OS is designed, builit, and ran on controlled hardware, that the OS has been coded to run on.

Where as in windows MS has to make their OS readily available to run on anything that any user has in that machine. And like I said I have had no problems with Vista.

The point here is both the Apple versus Microsoft battle, and if apple takes over, why computer design and construct will never be the same. Because apple will never release the ROM chip that sits on the motherboard that the Mach Kernerl cross checks with to make sure it is running on a Macintosh. They will never open of their platform.

- Collapse -
An observation
Jul 15, 2007 3:13AM PDT

"because they use their own propietary hardware."

As far as I recall, the only hardware that is proprietary on a Mac is the Logic Board.

I would speculate that an ASUS/Megatrends/ProTech/Eagle/Insert the name of your favorite Logic board manufacturer, logic board is a proprietary piece of hardware, as is just about any other logic board out there.
Everything else that goes on that Mac board is standard equipment.

It is possible to change processors on some Mac boards, not encouraged, but possible. It is not always possible to change processors on a PC board. It depends on what the board was designed to support.

BTW, Apple does not code for the devices that "might" be added to one of their computers. That is the job of the manufacturer of the device. Obvious exceptions are USB flash drives, ZIP drives and a bunch of USB devices. Support for these are built into the OS, as they are with XP and Vista. Video cards need drivers on both platforms, the manufacturer produces them. If the manufacturer has decided not to produced Mac drivers for the device, there will be no Mac logo on the box. Likewise, if a device is only produced for the Mac, there will be no WIndows logo on the box. The Mac logo indicates that the manufacturer has produced drives that meet the specifications laid down by Apple. There is nothing at all to stop MS from requiring the same thing.

Apple does not restrict what you add to your computer, and if you purchase something that has the Mac logo on it, you know it is going to work. The same cannot be said for the Windows logo.

As a final aside, MS does not have "to make their OS readily available to run on anything that any user has in that machine", they choose to do so. They could just as easily demand that manufacturers follow a strict set of guidelines, without which the piece of equipment would not be capable of running Windows.


P

- Collapse -
They already do...
Jul 16, 2007 2:49AM PDT

Like Vista's DRM, which some hardware won't work with.

- Collapse -
You missed the point here
Jul 15, 2007 6:12AM PDT

And you are saying things that aren't true besides. First, peripheral drivers, especially sound and video card drivers, aren't Vista compatible primarily because of more restrictive DRM in Vista, and many vendors chose not to rewrite their drivers to comply, opting to sell new hardware instead than supporting older tech. Thant's because DRM challenges all applications and hardware to detect and deny "stolen" digital content, and if one component isn't playing along it shuts down all subsequent communication between the offending software and the system.

Second, computers from Apple's most popular desktop segment sells for around $2,000, not $5,000, and are hardly overrated; instead they are praised as being some of the most capable and bulletproof equipment available on any platform. You cannot buy anything off-the-shelf from Apple for over $3,500 in any case. Only build-to-order Macs have higher price tags.

Third, once you pay $2,000 for your maximum-capability Mac, what do you have an itch to replace? That's like saying "I just bought this amazing $4,000 Alienware PC with all the bells and whistles, but now I want to spend another $1,000 upgrading parts." And $4,000 is pretty much the base for a high-end Alienware, Falcon Northwest, etc; with similar components -- OK, these PCs usually have $200 more in RAM and a $500 video card, but not worth double the price of a Mac. As is well established, even a bargain-basement Dell with similar insides costs hundreds more than a factory Apple.

Finally, aside from the video cards (which I mentioned previously as being withheld because of market size) and motherboard, everything you can access in the Mac can be swapped Mac-label free, from Intel CPUs to Crucial RAM, from Sony DVD-burners to Seagate drives. You can add more USB, Firewire, IDE or SATA port cards, replace video fans, you name it. Buy 'em anywhere, from PC stores or whatever. Of course many of the internal components are better than 3rd-party makers can come up with (pro-quality internal sound in/out, bluetooth and WiFi components) so there's no market for replacing these parts. But if you need $1,000+ video processors or outboard audio processing cards, they're available.

If your Mac still isn't junky enough to just replace after three or four years, you can upgrade nearly everything. And while PC owners replace their machines far sooner (in part because many non-technical owners throw up their hands and buy new PCs rather than pay to get the spyware off their old ones), Macs' lifespans are far longer, which means many parts don't NEED immediate replacement.

The discussion here mainly tracked what would happen if Apple increased its market share and whether hardware makers would increase availability of upgrade parts. Of course they would; vendors follow the money. So logically, geeky home-builders would have things to play with even if they started from a pre-built framework, just as if you went to a local Frys or MicroCenter and bought a bare-bones PC then added your own upgrades. But the dollars equation puts it more into the custom high-end factory modders ballpark where it's tougher to justify spending the money with all you already get with your purchase.

I'm not picking on you, if you post, have a reason and be factual.

- Collapse -
While we're speculating.......
Jul 15, 2007 2:14PM PDT

What would it take to make a truly competitive multiplatform PC market? If people are waiting for MS to self-destruct with each release of an updated OS, they're going to be disappointed. MS has had their share of debacles, but they do seem to learn their lessons. Don't look for a repeat of the mistakes they made with Win95 or WinME. Vista's not as much of an improvement as it might have been, but it's hardly the stinking turd that some had hoped it would be. Much is made of MS's anti-competitive behavior, but there seems to be plenty of blame to go around. The marginal position of their competitors is as much due to their limitations as MS's actions.

Since the Intel switch, the divide between Mac and PC is artificial. The Hackintoshers have proved that. What's to prevent Apple from releasing an unrestricted version of their OS? My guess is that it would be something people would be willing to pay a little extra for, especially with Vista's pricing scheme. It would also require a change in the philosophy that's been manifest at Apple ever since they pulled the PowerPC license. But it seems the growth potential of such a move would eclipse that which exists under the closed platform approach that dominates their thinking.

Can the open source model develop a system that truly challenges the commercial OSs in the consumer market? There's been some fine work done developing Linux desktops, but there's still some evolution that needs to occur. What does the Linux community need to do to finish the job and deliver the quality control, support, and applications that can break through to common users? And is the Linux community ready to confront the political decisions that are inherent in these tasks? Interesting to watch the sparring over the GPL.

- Collapse -
I think you are off topic...
Jul 15, 2007 3:20PM PDT

The original question: "Opinion Post: What Happens to The Geeks If Apple Conquers?"

My opinion: Nothing. They continue to do whatever they want to do. Frankly, there are geeks that work in the the Macintosh world... Unix world... VMS, whatever... They will always be there.

Employment follows the money. In the PC support world, the workers also follow the money. Whether PC support, network admin, security, coding, technical writing, circuit design, whatever... people will follow the money. Smart people will be "there" first, but there will always be room for more geeks.

Always.

- Collapse -
(NT) That Is Exactly The Second Point I Am Trying To Make!
Jul 16, 2007 1:41AM PDT
- Collapse -
What Happens to The Geeks If Apple Conquers?
Jul 17, 2007 5:26AM PDT

The PC Geeks will become Mac Geeks...

- Collapse -
re: geeks
Jul 19, 2007 5:30AM PDT

ummmm...learn to spell?

- Collapse -
ummm, get a life..
Jul 19, 2007 8:32AM PDT

Please, I spelled two words incorrectly, first off the word believe, I was typing fast and missed one key. And secondly exponentially, well to be truthful I can't explain what happened there.