The new Samsung iPad is apparently going to cost AU$999 in Australia. That's $200 more expensive than the original Apple iPad. And you know, the Apple one actually has applications you can run on it and a far bigger screen.
I know who won't be selling more than a dozen iPads this year. Starts with "Sam" and rhymes with "Dung."
Edited by drakino (24/09/201019:07) Edit Reason: splitting off samsung tab stuff
Dignan carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12345
Loc: Sterling, VA
Har har har. You're hilarious.
All these early pricing stories don't really say anything to me. Don't we see early pricing for all kinds of gadgets reaching insane levels?
Besides, didn't someone from Samsung say that they expect it to sell for $200 to $300? Now, I expect that number, if true, would be for a contract, in which case I would never buy one because I don't want 3G. But if that were the actual price, that would be pretty killer.
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
And you know, the Apple one actually has applications you can run on it...
I'm not even sure I know what that means. I have to assume (because you aren't actually saying anything) that you mean there aren't any apps written specifically for the device and its form factor.
Well, that's probably true. I'm sure nobody has written an app specifically for the device because nobody has one yet. However, not only should all apps in the Android Market already work on the device, if the programmers were coding correctly they should already have created their apps to support this screen resolution, and will therefore probably scale a whole lot better than iPhone apps look on the iPad (which is, to put it lightly, like ass). They might not look quite as good as apps written specifically for the iPad, but given time the developers will probably improve on that front too.
Listen, I don't think the Tab is going to be a sensation like the iPad. It's only the first big player in the Android tablet market. I most likely won't be interested in it in the least (I have to see the screen size first and see how easy it is to read comics on it). But there will be more Android tablets, and my bet is that at least one of them will be quite good.
We don't see pricing for all early release gadgets reaching insane levels. When Apple announces a price, it pretty much stays there. And while the price may often be high, with the exception of the iPhone, none have been "insane" - they're at least usually competitive with what else is out there.
I don't think the Samsung iPad is going to make even the slightest splash. Yes, $300 *may* be the price on contract with a cell provider. What kind of tablet computer needs a monthly contract? Is this thing supposed to replace your cell phone? Maybe the Australian price won't be as high as claimed, but so far it's being backed by VP's of the company in that country who go so far as to claim that $799 on contract is "fair." Hmm. That's the price of the more capable Apple version with a larger screen without any kind of contract. See, they can try to copy based on pictures and even using one, but even beyond their design failures, their marketing guys just trip all over themselves when it comes to basic business practices.
No apps = the thing is running a pre-alpha OS that's intended solely for small mobile devices with small mobile screens. Google has stated already that Android in its current form is not suited for tablets. That's what the Chrome OS was for, and as rumor has it, what may come in a future Android release. That's why I call it "pre-alpha."
The simple facts are that, as predicted, the real Apple iPad set the stage for tablet computing and everything that comes after it is, for the time being, going to be a rubbish, but pale, imitation. That's not the way things need to play out, but it's what happens when you have no-talent companies like Samsung behind the design wheel.
I love innovation, but this Samsung iPad is just crap. Like their phones.
Registered: 17/03/2010
Posts: 32
Loc: Portsmouth, UK
Not that I have actually used one but the Archos is making what appears to be a decent stab at an Android tablet. True you don't have access to the Android market, but there is it's own version and from what I have seen there seems to be quite a few apps available and I think there is an SDk available too. Haven't seen a 3G version so you are limited on the mobility, but there are many capacity choices including 500GB hard drive versions, and the prices seem pretty competative. I was toying with the Archos 5 Internet Tablet with integrated GPS to use as a carputer
Dignan carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12345
Loc: Sterling, VA
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
We don't see pricing for all early release gadgets reaching insane levels. When Apple announces a price, it pretty much stays there.
And that seems to be the part you're missing. Samsung hasn't announced a price. I don't think the prices you're seeing are ones they're setting.
*edit* Oh, and using Apple as the primary example? That just doesn't work. They're selling their own products in their own stores, so of course they set the prices (yes, I know you can buy Apple products elsewhere, but who is going to buy an iPad at Best Buy if it's $50 more?).
We're talking about a company (Samsung) which, like most companies, puts out the product with an MSRP, and the stores that sell them can decide what price they want to put on it.
(continuing the off thread topic about android tablets in the iPad thread)
So a Samsung VP commenting "we believe this is a fair price." on the Australian one, and many companies around the world (including O2 Germany) setting their end user price isn't official enough? Are you assuming prices are going to be lower or higher then these practically official prices?
And Apple is a perfectly valid comparison. Apple Inc makes products, sets an MSRP, then sells them at their MSRP through official Apple stores. They also have thousands of resellers worldwide (from small privately owned stores to chains like Best Buy) that sell Apple Inc. made products.
Unless of course it's not valid to then also compare to how HP, Dell, Sony and many other vendors sell their products. They make things, set an MSRP, offer them for sale online via their sites, along with sending them out to places like Best Buy. Dell and Sony both also run their own physical stores.
All Bruno is doing is reposting info available out there and he's seeing the same pricing I see. And we aren't alone. This isn't some Apple fanboy thing, even journalists like Peter Rojas are commenting on it, based on official prices he sees on Amazon.co.uk and other locations.
And besides, who cares what the MSRP is? Thats not the amount of money leaving my pocket. It's instead the prices that Amazon and others are using now to sell the device, and so far, they are all more expensive then the iPad. I know, it goes against the widely held myth that Apple has an "Apple Tax" that automatically makes their products more expensive then everyone else, but thats the state of things today.
Splitting this off into it's own thread now, since the Samsung Tab part is being actively discussed.
Samsung posted a 9 minute video showing off the Tab and the software on it.
Looks like they spent more time on the Tab trying to mimic the Apple iOS UI compared to the Captivate phone I had. Still not quite there though, with a few UI transitions missing, and others not quite looking right. Not sure how I'd like swype on such a big screen either, seems like a lot more unnecessary finger motion compared to a phone. The full UI to the TV was slick though, something I wish Apple would do to all of their units and not just Steve's.
I think it is impressive. Meaning that, as expected, it is indeed getting there to compete.
If I get the correct impression from this video, that level of GUI effectiveness, while not yet as optimized or stylish as the iPad, would easily win my preference if coupled with 1 or 2 USB ports, support for external drives, possibly removable battery, a price at least 25% lower than an iPad. And the software hackability coming from Android.
Leaked pricing from T-Mobile is pointing to $449 with a two year contract, and a $50 mail in rebate to bring the cost to $399. Unsubsidized, $649. The comparable iPad (16GB with 3G) is $629. Looks like the Samsung tax is $20, probably to help pay for all the exclamation marks in this comparison page. Sprint leaked pricing was pointing to $399 on contract, or $599 without. In that case it would be coming in slightly cheaper then the iPad. Guess we still have to wait to see what the actual price is, but it's not looking like it's going to be dramatically different then the iPad.
It's got a smaller screen than the iPad. Build quality isn't going to be anywhere near the iPads. At this point, while Apple's offering may seem high priced, I don't think anyone else can build an equivalent product for the same price. No one has been able to match the iPhone quality/feature to price ratio yet either.
At the end of the day it's gong to be joined by a number of similar devices, all running an OS that is not suited whatsoever for tablet use. These products, just like Android phones are going to continue to carry a premium price for a generic beige-box product. It's like paying BMW prices for a random GM vehicle - sometimes sporting a BMW-like body kit. Most of these products are no better than cheap/typical no-name Chinese knock-offs in execution AND in branding/marketing.
I think Apple have even less reason to be worried about competition in the tablet space at this point than they did about phones two years ago. They'll continue to bring home the lion's share of the profits.
These guys have to stop trying to copy individual Apple products and instead start copying Apple and its business/development strategies. Everyone has their heads so far up their asses they can't see the simple writing that's been on the wall for 10 years, having started with the iPod. That means creating a true premium product, differentiate it from everything else out there, limit your sku diversification and concentrate on building the brand one iteration at a time.
What happens when a real tablet OS from Google ships? Will it be Android 3 or Chrome OS or both?
Dignan carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12345
Loc: Sterling, VA
Originally Posted By: drakino
Leaked pricing from T-Mobile is pointing to $449 with a two year contract, and a $50 mail in rebate to bring the cost to $399. Unsubsidized, $649. The comparable iPad (16GB with 3G) is $629. Looks like the Samsung tax is $20, probably to help pay for all the exclamation marks in this comparison page. Sprint leaked pricing was pointing to $399 on contract, or $599 without. In that case it would be coming in slightly cheaper then the iPad. Guess we still have to wait to see what the actual price is, but it's not looking like it's going to be dramatically different then the iPad.
There are two bad things about these price rumors:
First, clearly these prices aren't low enough. Any way you cut it, the Tab is more expensive than its iPad counterparts, and that's just not acceptable. Clearly the carriers think that the public will be fooled by sticker price and not think about the contract. Of course, given the evidence, they're probably right. But still, even at $400 it's still too expensive to compete with the iPad. If it's $300 with a contract then we can start talking, but at $400 I think it's a non-starter.
Second, isn't it going to be suspicious when this thing comes out and every single carrier is essentially selling it for $400? What, has it taken so long for the price to be announced because they're all getting together and deciding how much they'll charge? Where's Michael Arrington on this?
I was never hot on the Tab for two reasons: first, the screen size is just too small for what I want to do with it, which is primarily reading comics. And the other reason is that after hearing about what Samsung has done to their Galaxy S phones (thanks to Tom), why would I put any faith in their ability to create software on top of Android for a tablet?
I'm waiting for the tablet that runs plain, straight-up Android, and isn't some crappy knock-off type product. I guess I'm waiting for the Nexus One of tablets, but I fear that that product will never come...
I'll boil down the difference between Apple iOS devices and Android devices.
I'd say that 99.9% of all iPhone customers buy the product because they're looking for that specific product - they want an iPhone/iOS phone.
In contrast, I suspect not more than 1-10% of purchasers of Android handsets make their choice based on the OS or product itself. Most of the volume is made up of people who just want a smart phone, period.
The story for tablets is going to be a bit different, but I think this concept will still play out to some degree.
Well, Steve Jobs has cast his predictions about the Samsung Tab, along with any other 7 inch tablet. (Link is to the MP3 version of Jobs talk during the Apple Q4 2010 earnings announcement.)
I'd like to comment on the avalanche of tablets poised to enter the market in the coming months.
First, it appears to be just a handful of credible entrants, not exactly an avalanche.
Second, almost all of them use 7 inch screens, as compared to iPads almost 10 inch screen. Let's start there. One naturally thinks that a 7 inch screen offers 70% of the benefits of a 10 inch screen. Unfortunately this is far from the truth. The screen measurements are diagonal, so the 7 inch screen is only 45% as large as iPads 10 inch screen. If you take an iPad and hold it upright in portrait view, and draw an imaginary horizontal line halfway down the screen, the screens on the 7 inch tablets are a bit smaller then the bottom half of the iPad display. This size isn't sufficient to create great tablet apps, in our opinion. While one could increase the resolution of the display to make up for some of the difference, it is meaningless unless your tablet also includes sandpaper, so that the user can sand down their fingers to around one quarter of their present size. Apple has done extensive user testing on touch user interfaces over many years, and we really understand this stuff. There are clear limits of how close you can physically place elements on a touch screen before users cannot reliably tap flick or pinch them. This is one of the key reason we think 10 inch screen size is the minimum size required to create great tablet apps.
Third, every tablet user is also a smartphone user. No tablet can compete with the mobility of a smart phone. It's ease of fitting into your pocket or purse, it's unobtrusiveness when used in a crowd. Given that all tablet users will already have a smartphone in their pockets, giving up precious display area to fit a tablet in our pockets is clearly the wrong tradeoff. The 7 inch tablets are tweeners, too big to compete with a smartphone, and too small to compete with an iPad.
Fourth, almost all of these new tablets use Android software, but even Google is telling the tablet manufacturers not to use their current release, Froyo, for tablets and to wait for a special tablet release next year. What does this mean when your software supplier says not to use their software in your tablet, and what does it mean when you ignore them and use it anyway.
Fifth, iPad now has over 35,000 apps on the app store. This new crop of tablets will have near zero.
And sixth and last, our potential competitors are having a tough time coming close to iPads pricing, even with their far smaller, far less expensive screens. The iPad incorporates everything we've learned about building high value products, from iPhones, iPods, and Macs. We create our own A4 chip, our own software, our own battery chemistry, our own enclosure, our own everything. And this results in an incredible product at a great price. The proof of this will be in the pricing of our competitors products, which will likely offer less for more.
These are among the reasons we think the current crop of 7 inch tablets are going to be DOA, dead on arrival. Their manufacturers will learn the painful lesson that their tablets are too small, and increase the size next year, thereby abandoning both customers and developers who jumped on the 7 inch bandwagon with an orphaned product. Sounds like lots of fun ahead.
Only time will tell if these statements are from fear of the upcoming tablets cannibalizing the iPad, or if they are warnings the rest of the industry should heed.
I was curious about the screen size part, and did the math. The iPad screen is 9.7 inches, in a 4:3 form factor. Thus roughly 7.75 x 5.83 inches, or 45.19 square inches of usable touch area, at a 1024x768 resolution. The Samsung Tab has a 7 inch 16:9 form factor screen. Thus roughly 3.43 x 6.1 inches, or 20.92 square inches at 1024x600 resolution. The ~45% figure Jobs mentioned seems to be right, and isn't something I've considered before. I wonder how many of the Android tablet developer will keep this in mind, and adjust their UI appropriately.
Dignan carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12345
Loc: Sterling, VA
I'm not saying he isn't right about all of that, but how often does Steve write up something like that about competing products? I wouldn't think he'd usually waste his time commenting on something he didn't consider a competitor...
Very good point, and clearly he sees the other tablets as valid competition. The question is in what way? Two important lesson he learned with a previous big battle he was involved in (Windows vs Mac), is that being better and first doesn't guarantee long term success. You also need enough of the market to adopt it and set their expectations high so that they will then disregard competitors. Apple was pretty much first to mass market with a GUI, and maintained a superior GUI to the competition for a number of years. Due to Apple's missteps after Jobs was forced out, along with the efforts of Microsoft and IBM, most people use Windows on PCs today because it became good enough.
His comments about the competing tablets in the 7 inch space may be an attempt to try and push people to the iPad first, to ensure their expectations are set very high when considering competitors. If an end user picks up a 7 inch tablet running a version of Android not optimized for tablets, they still may see it as good enough, and not investigate the iPad deeply to understand the differences.
The tablet clearly has a lot of potential, and will probably continue to shape personal computing well into the next decade. Due to it's potential to cannibalize the notebook market, an area Apple has a decent presence in, the tablet market is something they wants to hang onto for long term success.
The earnings call is directed at media an analysts, so it's important to take that into consideration. Steve was definitely heading off a lot of questions he knew would be coming Apple's way from these folks.
I suspect Steve is more confident in the iPad than I am. And I don't personally think any of the current crop of 7" products stands any chance whatsoever. I suspect most of them will be abandoned within 5 to 6 months.
Second, almost all of them use 7 inch screens, as compared to iPads almost 10 inch screen. Let's start there. One naturally thinks that a 7 inch screen offers 70% of the benefits of a 10 inch screen. Unfortunately this is far from the truth. The screen measurements are diagonal, so the 7 inch screen is only 45% as large as iPads 10 inch screen.
Oh, cool. It sounds like a tablet that's just the right size for me. I don't need a tablet the size of a pad of paper.
Quote:
Third, every tablet user is also a smartphone user.
Well, maybe every current tablet user, but I'm not a smartphone user. In fact, I don't have a cell-phone at all. But I wouldn't mind having one of these small tablets for travel.
Quote:
Fifth, iPad now has over 35,000 apps on the app store. This new crop of tablets will have near zero.
And how many of those iPad apps are just iPhone apps that also work on the tablet, just like the way bunches of Android phone apps will also just work on the tablet? "Near zero?" Umm... okay.
Oh, cool. It sounds like a tablet that's just the right size for me. I don't need a tablet the size of a pad of paper.
I think from Jobs' perspective, he sees the iPad as a separate type of device, and the usable screen size factors into it. iPad apps can be distinctly different then iPhone apps due to the extra space, allowing for things like Keynote, Pages and Numbers (Apple's office products) to feel more like desktop apps, and less like at a glance or minimal editing apps on the iPhone side. When you cut the usable surface area down 45%, that comes with a 45% shrinkage in valid touchable areas, and thus in Jobs' mind, the apps become slightly larger versions of iPhone apps instead of closer to desktop apps.
I don't personally see this as a big deal currently, as most of my iPad usage is in apps that would work pretty much the same way on either device. I however don't use a lot of the apps Jobs probably has in mind.
I do see developers needing to make the mentality switch from the old resolution based UIs, and towards DPI based ones. A mouse cursor isn't affected by resolution changes much in terms of usability, but a human finger is.
canuckInOR
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3212
Loc: Portland, OR
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
Originally Posted By: canuckInOR
And how many of those iPad apps are just iPhone apps that also work on the tablet,
None. That figure is for iPad-specific apps. iPhone app count is approaching 300k. And pretty much all of those also work on the iPad.
My point being that Steve is trying to make it sound like there won't be any apps available for the tablets when they come out, which is a pretty dubious claim.
Quote:
If you're interested in a 7" tablet, you might be more interested in an iPod touch or a small Android PMP from Archos. Much more portable.
If I wanted something the size of a PDA, I'd already have a smartphone, or an iPod touch. But I don't... I want something in-between. A 7" tablet is, for me, a happy medium -- the ideal size. I had been looking at some of the smaller netbooks (such as the ASUS T91mt), but will wait a bit, now.
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4180
Loc: Cambridge, England
Originally Posted By: drakino
Originally Posted By: canuckInOR
Oh, cool. It sounds like a tablet that's just the right size for me. I don't need a tablet the size of a pad of paper.
I think from Jobs' perspective, he sees the iPad as a separate type of device, and the usable screen size factors into it.
Usually when Steve Jobs is particularly vitriolic about a certain market segment, all that means is that Apple haven't got a product in that segment for this product cycle and that he's cross about that. His anti-cheapo-flash-player ranting reached its peak one product cycle before the Ipod Shuffle came out.
The thing is, Apple had 7" prototypes. Apple produces at least as many devices/variations they don't release as they do release. At least that was the norm up until 5 years ago when I was last in the direct loop.
Originally Posted By: canuckInOR
My point being that Steve is trying to make it sound like there won't be any apps available for the tablets when they come out, which is a pretty dubious claim.
But he's already right. 7" Android tablets are already available, but there are no Android tablet apps.
Android tablet apps won't come until Google release a tablet version of Android - and that won't be until some time next year.
canuckInOR
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3212
Loc: Portland, OR
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
Originally Posted By: canuckInOR
My point being that Steve is trying to make it sound like there won't be any apps available for the tablets when they come out, which is a pretty dubious claim.
But he's already right. 7" Android tablets are already available, but there are no Android tablet apps.
There's a difference between "there are no apps written specifically for an Android tablet," and "there are no apps for an Android tablet." The latter is the "oh noes" FUD mindset that Jobs wants to propagate. The former just elicits a big "so?"
To make one thing perfectly clear: This is a compatible device; Android Market is there and you can download apps and they run. [...] Most apps work fine, and pretty well all of them look better on the bigger screen. There are still some here and there that drop into shoeboxed compatibility mode, but fewer every day.
Ok, then the iPad has 300000 apps. But Apple doesn't make that leap, they're comparing Apples to Apples. As much as people think there's a reality distortion field around Jobs, it's nothing compared to the BS around most other executives at other companies.
canuckInOR
carpal tunnel
Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3212
Loc: Portland, OR
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
Ok, then the iPad has 300000 apps. But Apple doesn't make that leap, they're comparing Apples to Apples.
Because it makes for a statistic that helps them look good, but which is pretty meaningless for... well... anyone else. It's not impressive to say "iPad users can choose from 300000 apps, but Android tablet users can only currently select from 80000 apps." Jobs is specifically trying to create the impression that Android tablet users can't run anything. Lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Quote:
As much as people think there's a reality distortion field around Jobs
I'm not claiming there's a reality distortion field around Jobs, I'm claiming he's spreading FUD through cherry-picked statistics couched in language that lets people like you get hung up on semantics, rather than being honest about what he's trying to do. I'm calling a spade a spade.
Quote:
it's nothing compared to the BS around most other executives at other companies.
But we aren't talking about "most other executives at other companies," so I don't really care what they're saying, nor how much of whatever they're saying is BS, and I'm certainly not giving Jobs a pass because he's not as bad as the other guys. I might as well vote for a lizard.
I suppose in this instance I agree with Jobs. There are no Android tablet apps. That doesn't mean you can't run mobile phone Android apps on a 7" Android device. And he didn't imply that. I think he was very clear in the message he gave and the audience he addressed is well versed in the products being discussed as well as what's currently available for them. This was an analyst/media event.
The pont he made well is that a 7" screen doesn't make for a compelling tablet experience and the producer of the OS itself is advising partners not to use their OS on tablet products. So consumers would be ill-advised to buy in to the current offerings. He did admit that Android is where the tablet competition will come from however.
The comment I objected to myself was the one about the sandpaper because a 7" tablet would be too small to use with normal fingers. That would certainly be the case if trying to use software designed for a 10" screen, but obviously software could be designed for a smaller screen in the same way alternative UI is implemented for the even smaller mobiles.
Dignan carpal tunnel
Registered: 08/03/2000
Posts: 12345
Loc: Sterling, VA
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
Originally Posted By: canuckInOR
And how many of those iPad apps are just iPhone apps that also work on the tablet,
None. That figure is for iPad-specific apps. iPhone app count is approaching 300k. And pretty much all of those also work on the iPad.
If you're interested in a 7" tablet, you might be more interested in an iPod touch or a small Android PMP from Archos. Much more portable.
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you here, but I'll point out that the same will apply for Android apps (that they'll all at least work on the tablets), and if they're written properly (to Google's guidelines), they should be relatively resolution independent, so they might look better than iPhone apps do on the iPad (which is to say, like ass). But there will still be issues, as aspect ratios will be different, and the main problem is that none of them are designed with the tablet in mind, so they'll still have a "small screen" mindset.
I think I'll be waiting a while.
Oh, and I have one more comment on Steve's little Android rant. He should at least be accurate when dragging his developers into the F.U.D. with him Maybe he was thinking of the wrong developer...
Registered: 13/07/2000
Posts: 4180
Loc: Cambridge, England
Originally Posted By: hybrid8
As much as people think there's a reality distortion field around Jobs, it's nothing compared to the BS around most other executives at other companies.
I always thought the "reality distortion field" thing wasn't really about whether Steve Jobs BS'es more than other executives do (Ballmer!), it was about whether his BS was taken more seriously. When Zune was all "welcome to the social", people just rolled their eyes; when Jobs started talking about the Retina Display, it got reported as if "retina" was a competing technology to LCD or OLED.
it got reported as if "retina" was a competing technology to LCD or OLED.
Really? I think I recall only ever reading anyone describe it as a high resolution IPS LCD.
But I wouldn't be surprised to hear that someone(s) out there misreported it. Having worked so many tradeshows, I've heard a lot of different interpretations for things I'd always thought of as simple facts or specs.
The iTab is going to be $600 at Verizon starting November 11th. Good luck with that. $100 more expensive than the base iPad and only $30 cheaper than the iPad+MiFi bundle Verizon is also selling.
Why is every generic and brown-bag manufacturer using a 7" panel to make their generic and yawn-inducing "tablet" products? No one finds it strange that not one of them wants to distinguish themselves from their contemporaries? None of them wants to setup up to the big leagues to compete with a tier 1 company like Apple? Outright copying Apple's industrial design is not competition.
Did Jobs call these products a "bag of hurt" this time around? That's an understatement if so.
The smartest (though also most obvious) thing I've read lately comes from LG:
Quote:
Windows 7 is based on the same paradigm as 1985 -- it's really an interface that's optimized for a mouse and keyboard
And of course that Android isn't currently suited for functioning tablets.
Third, every tablet user is also a smartphone user.
Well, maybe every current tablet user, but I'm not a smartphone user. In fact, I don't have a cell-phone at all. But I wouldn't mind having one of these small tablets for travel.
I'm not a smartphone user either. My current cellphone is like a Sony Ericsson W518a (and I had to look that up in our system) that work gave me, or I wouldn't have a cellphone.
Previous Topic
Index