Jump to content
MartinBrewer

Bit of a let down?

Recommended Posts

MartinBrewer

18 months and 5 new(?) features - you can't really call a set of templates a feature?

 

Maybe I'm a bit of a sourpuss, but I was hoping for so much on the UI front.

 

I hope when I get the demo version (if they'll still let me have one?!), there'll be more than there touting on the website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David Head
18 months and 5 new(?) features - you can't really call a set of templates a feature?

 

Maybe I'm a bit of a sourpuss, but I was hoping for so much on the UI front.

 

Sorry but yes - you are a bit of a sourpuss.

 

There are a lot more than five new features. The marketing department does marketing and that is what they have come up with to push the product. When you get to use FileMaker Pro 10 you will find that there are a lot of new things that are not even in the new features list. Don't ask me why - I don't write their materials.

 

BTW, how many feature requests have you submitted for new UI tools?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MartinBrewer

Yeah I know... sorry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard Carlton

Wow. You have got to be kidding. Now FileMaker can operate on an Event model ...where user actions trigger scripts, not just pressing buttons... to manage the system. Sub-summaries in Preview Mode!!!!

 

That altra sweet!

 

Thanks you FileMaker!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ender

That altra sweet!

 

Thanks you FileMaker!!!

 

Poor Richard can't even type, he's so excited!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Josh Ormond

Now that I just finished a project 1.5 years in the making, those script triggers probably would have saved me 4 months of work. The ability to set a layout on load is AWESOME...as are some of the other triggers.

 

The new status toolbar will take some getting used too, but I like it. Only drawback, I just got my left eye trained to look to the left part of the screen without moving my right eye!!!!!!!smiley-surprised

 

The only thing so far that I actually am disappointed by...the Windows version is still trapped inside of one stinking application window. Ahhhhhhh! Oh well. I guess I will just have to continue submitting my feature requests every 2 months. smiley-tongue-out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard Carlton

jmormond,

 

I totally agree with this. Plus the draw engine that FM uses on Windows draws from the back to the front...making things constantly flicker on Windows. FMI knows about this. They just have to decide that these issues are priorities.

 

I strongly recommend filing a periodic complaint on issues that "bug" you. I already got in their face a bit. I don't want to wear out my welcome...however. :)

 

- Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Josh Ormond
Plus the draw engine that FM uses on Windows draws from the back to the front...making things constantly flicker on Windows.
Agreed...it seems like fixing the draw engine would be a vital piece of the puzzle. Although, the company I work for isn't always that concerned about consumer perception (well, at least not as much as I am).

 

In the meantime, I have just learned to avoid certain things and limit the number of graphic items as much as I reasonably can. Plus, I decreased the hardware acceleration for the Graphics Card and it isn't as bad now.

 

 

I strongly recommend filing a periodic complaint on issues that "bug" you. I already got in their face a bit. I don't want to wear out my welcome...however.
No problem there. I figure sometime in the next couple months, 2 men in 3 piece suits, driving a black lincoln with the license plate "FMGOONS" will show up at my door and "make me an offer".

 

And just a point of clarification for any nae-sayers, this is still the easiest and best product on the market for what it does. It has it's limits, but some limits that most people complain about are self-imposed by a stubborn refusal to think outside the norm...a point proven by the relatively few 'sourpusses' that do hang around the forums (and no I am not talking about you MartinBrewer, I mean real knuckle-heads, you know who you are).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AHunter3
The only thing so far that I actually am disappointed by...the Windows version is still trapped inside of one stinking application window.

 

I was in an office building newly stocked with flatscreen 1680 x 1050 resolution displays, and it again occurred to me: Microsoft is going to have to copy Apple at least one more time. Those stupid application windows, and the entire motif of "you can have lots of things open but you can only (conveniently) look at one document at a time", is really pathetic with that much screen real estate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Josh Ormond

The amazing thing is...Windows already has the ability to handle a SDI (Single Document Interface) as well as the MDI (Multiple Document Interface) that we see with FM and Excel and some other programs.

 

The SDI is used for Microsoft Word...but for some reason not Excel. A number of other programs I use on Windows use the SDI, which makes it so much easier to work with multiple monitors.

 

Since, FM has chosen not to develop an SDI application for Windows, I will have to keep bugging them to hopefully make the change in an upcoming version. "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups" or something like that comes to mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ted S

Josh,

 

You've hit the nail on the head. The fact that FM10 still uses the MDI interface is the biggest disappointment for me. It isn't a huge deal if you're using only one display but when you go to two, it is very frustrating to not be able to use the 2nd screen efficiently.

 

I've also noticed with V10 that whenever you open scriptmaker, the active window shrinks. I think this was intentionally built into v10 for some reason but personally I don't like it because I prefer to run full screen.

 

I suppose to be fair I should balance my post with something positive about v10; Script triggers are nice...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jnennemann

I totally agree with Martin that this version upgrade, while having commendable improvements, is disappointingly short. Of course, I have thought that every version of filemaker since 5.5 has been disappointing. 'New interface'? Only for Filemaker. The rest of the world has been using such interfaces for 5+ years. Event model? Come on... they should have had that so many versions ago I can't count.

 

I am SOOOOOO tired of FM's poor graphics tools and widgets that date back to the 80s. Filemaker should take a hint from Apple; Interface Builder.

 

I will put it this way... Filemaker is only on the top (in my opinion) because the others suck worse. Someone could easily come along and smoke FM if there was a demand. It's not the database component that has any value. MySQL or others would be fine for the DB back-end. What Filemaker does so brilliantly is allows a dev to create an interface to access the DB in a usable and appealing way without having to know ANY coding. If someone took FM's scripting, Apple's Interface Builder (widgets and layout engine), an easy to use SQL DB manager, put them in a blender you would have one awesome cocktail.

 

FilmakerWish.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FredP

I will put it this way... Filemaker is only on the top (in my opinion) because the others suck worse. Someone could easily come along and smoke FM if there was a demand.

FilmakerWish.jpeg

 

Sorry for getting involved in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FredP

still feeling let down by the MDI interface on the pc side. That alone would have been enough to get us to upgrade our entire facility.

 

Oh No!Oh No!Oh No!Oh No!Oh No!smiley-frownsmiley-frown

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David Head
I happen to know that with the feature set in 10, it will be difficult for me to convince my office to even upgrade. Everything is working in 9, and 10 doesnt give us anything that we need, or have been able to do with plugins at this point.

 

So you are saying that you cannot use script triggers? Or that you are happy enough to continue using a plug-in for that? You can't use indirection (set field by calc)? You can't use dynamic reporting? You had no issues with the Self bug that is now fixed? You are happy using a plug-in for email? OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FredP
So you are saying that you cannot use script triggers? Or that you are happy enough to continue using a plug-in for that? You can't use indirection (set field by calc)? You can't use dynamic reporting? You had no issues with the Self bug that is now fixed? You are happy using a plug-in for email? OK.

 

Well, sure they are good features..

 

We got around the email issue, and the solution is working. Would it be better to send directly from FMP, yeah it would be better if i was starting a new database right now. But our existing one is working, without error, so why change it?

 

Script triggers I could use. Yes. LOL. But for now, we are getting on without them fine.

 

I cant use indirection, because frankly, I have no idea what it is, Opps!

 

Dynamic reporting would be nice, but what would I do with all my dozens of redundant layouts that all do some sort of similar thing.smiley-tongue-out

 

I guess my main gripe is that, if I was a developer who was constantly developing new systems for new clients, of course FMP 10 would be great. But I work for a single company writing inhouse tools. The opportunity to start from scratch will never come, so I am stuck with alot of old and sloppy scripts in my database because it was built while I was learning FMP. In this scenario, the features in FMP 10 are not enough for me to convince my employer to spend the $16,000.00 + it would cost to upgrade all our seats and server. I wish the features were more extensive, and then I could try to convince them it was worth the money.

 

 

Fred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ted S
the features in FMP 10 are not enough for me to convince my employer to spend the $16,000.00 + it would cost to upgrade all our seats and server.

Fred,

 

You should check into volume licensing. I'm running a fairly large install and for an annual fee we always get the latest FMP and FMS versions automatically as part of the deal.

 

The folks at FMI like volume licensing because it gives them regular dependable income. My finance people like the annual license because it is predictable and gets us a lower per seat cost and I like volume licensing because there is only one license key which means that installation can be fully automated.

 

Give your FM rep a call, you may like what you hear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
J Wenmeekers

10 is the first significant step forward since 7 - since it is providing core tools what can change the way we write systems - so that if we use these tools users will have to upgrade.

 

I am distinguishing the improved indirection facilities from, for example, the previous introduction of say web viewer and better script debugger which were both great but did not change, in my view, the way we write the systems.

 

When we reduce a few hundreds of lines of scripting to just half a dozen using set field by name or calc, it will break the entire system for anyone not running 10 - so I see 10 as a significant divide in development terms, which is probably less of a paradigm shift than the upgrade from FMP 6 to FMP 7.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jnennemann
So you are saying that you cannot use script triggers? Or that you are happy enough to continue using a plug-in for that? You can't use indirection (set field by calc)? You can't use dynamic reporting? You had no issues with the Self bug that is now fixed? You are happy using a plug-in for email? OK.

 

David... You are right these are good features, but their pace is slow. It is not enough features, or extensive enough of an upgrade to justify shelling out the dough. I have felt this way about 9, 8.5, 8, and to some extent the earlier versions. Don't get me wrong; there isn't a better solution out there in my opinion... but that is just it... they don't have to innovate that much as they are still ahead of the pack.

 

Version 11 wishlist (same wishlist I had for 8, 8.5, 9,...)

 

-Visual 'snap tos' and alignment guides like you see in Interface Builder, iWorks. Smart ones that snap to Apple's GUI guidelines

 

-A modern widget set that makes my solution look like a full-fledged native application without having to 'cheat' it into looking like a poor imitation. I want sliders... I want a column view for my data... progress indicators... I go through the widget set on Interface Builder and I can come up with real-world uses for at least half of the widgets there.

 

-Graphics capabilities that are untapped to ANY extent in FM. Alpha channel, filters, graphic manipulation. I would like to see some script steps that can resize the graphic in a container field, crop it, adjust color, apply Core Graphics filters, reflection, perspective reflection (Which I think iWorks 09 STILL CAN'T DO!).

 

-A more visual script builder interface like Automator. Scripting is a great thing in Filemaker... just make it easier to visualize large scripts.

 

-Calculation fields that are color coded like you see in Apple's 09 version of Numbers

 

-Interface widget set to be instantly switchable between a Windows widget set and Mac widget set for layout on either platform. I want to develop for both platforms... just don't want to develop ON both platforms. In addition... make FM Advanced compile for both platforms regardless of which one you are developing ON.

 

-iPhone widget set and the ability to make a iPhone solution (yes I have seen what is out there, but native widget man... NATIVE WIDGETS)

 

 

Bit over the top? I think FM's competition is iLife, iWorks, Mac OS X and not Access and other DB dev environments. iLife, iWorks, Mac OS X show what FM --CAN-- be and what I have hopped for in every version over the last 5 years. Any open source project or small developer in Cocoa could probably put the above together with a extensible architecture to a DB back-end before FM would come out version 11. I hope someone does; it may light a fire under their back side.

 

I suppose that to some extent FM is hampered by maintaining cross-platform capability. I work on all computers; I am definitely a Mac user first; but I hope that Filemaker always remains cross-platform.

 

Now I must go back to work... on my hospital cash register solution... built in FM 9. FM is still the best thing out there.

 

-James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard Carlton

Wow...a Full Graphics manipulation engine? Alpha Channels, cropping, etc. If you want these, your going to need to stick to writing your own Java or C++ apps for a plug in. FileMaker doesn't even have charting built in. These other capabilities are bordering on a drawing application, which FileMaker is decidedly not.

 

Not that they are bad ideas. I personally like your ideas. But they are not data manipulation or management issues. Some of your ideas are "super fancy" things that would be a "nice to have."

 

In my opinion, based on the attitudes to see at FMI, I wouldn't hold my breath for these types of improvements. I think your going to continually final yourself disappointed with the product updates.

 

- Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jnennemann
Wow...a Full Graphics manipulation engine? Alpha Channels, cropping, etc. If you want these, your going to need to stick to writing your own Java or C++ apps for a plug in.

 

That is what we love Filemaker for, isn't it? To develop programs (solutions) without having to be programmers?

 

FileMaker doesn't even have charting built in. These other capabilities are bordering on a drawing application, which FileMaker is decidedly not.

 

The iWorks suite is not a drawing program, yet it does these things. Why??? Because they should be core components of any program that reports data and has a presentation layer. Another purpose of Filemaker is to report, right? There should be graphs; just like in iWorks.

 

Not that they are bad ideas. I personally like your ideas.

 

Thanks! I like your feedback.

 

But they are not data manipulation or management issues. Some of your ideas are "super fancy" things that would be a "nice to have."

 

I guess I am getting spoiled in the Mac world. No dis' to Windows, but every time an Apple product comes out they get more and more able to 'work together' yet still stay consistent in how they work. I think that your comment 'they are not data manipulation or management issues' probably indicates a difference in ideas about what Filemaker is. My argument is that Filemaker is not a Database program any more than any other application on a computer is. Manipulation and management are developer issues; if the end user has to worry about these things then I feel I have failed as a developer.

 

All programs use databases (almost all, anyway). This is why with Apple they have built a 'core data' framework as all programs have data to sort and manipulate. To me, Filemaker is an application development studio that requires no programming skills (if you don't want to). The database part of it is fairly irrelevant. The main purpose of Filemaker to me, is to help people find information and that happens by presenting it in an intuitive and consistent way.

 

In my opinion, based on the attitudes to see at FMI, I wouldn't hold my breath for these types of improvements. I think your going to continually final yourself disappointed with the product updates.

 

I think you're right ;-)

 

I will continue to use Filemaker, but there is a huge gap between FMP now and what other programs offer. It is obvious that FMI recognizes this. Look at Bento. It shows promise, but it lacks all of the power of FMP. Why did they have to use those tweaked widgets? Are they afraid of someone mistaking it for an 'application' instead of a 'solution'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jnennemann
Wow...a Full Graphics manipulation engine? Alpha Channels, cropping, etc. If you want these, your going to need to stick to writing your own Java or C++ apps for a plug in.

 

BTW - On the Mac side they would have very little to add since the graphics manipulation engine is a framework. Any program can access and use this engine on Leopard. The problem is that I know of nothing on the Windows side that is equivalent, thus a parity issue between versions. I suppose they would have to do tons of programming on the Windows side to match it. Maybe they will just have to part with parity? Would that be so bad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Richard Carlton

Parity is a HUGE issue for FMI. Their sales are 60% on Windows. So they can't make cool Mac stuff...and risk causing their Windows customer to get Mad. I have to agree. I use a Mac, but most of my customers are on Windows. I would hate to loose the parity.

 

Maybe we can get everyone to use a Mac. HA LOL Thanks for the feedback.

 

- Richard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FredP

I agree with jnennemann's wish list.

 

 

Version 11 wishlist (same wishlist I had for 8, 8.5, 9,...)

 

-Visual 'snap tos' and alignment guides like you see in Interface Builder, iWorks. Smart ones that snap to Apple's GUI guidelines

 

-A modern widget set that makes my solution look like a full-fledged native application without having to 'cheat' it into looking like a poor imitation. I want sliders... I want a column view for my data... progress indicators... I go through the widget set on Interface Builder and I can come up with real-world uses for at least half of the widgets there.

 

-Graphics capabilities that are untapped to ANY extent in FM. Alpha channel, filters, graphic manipulation. I would like to see some script steps that can resize the graphic in a container field, crop it, adjust color, apply Core Graphics filters, reflection, perspective reflection (Which I think iWorks 09 STILL CAN'T DO!).

 

-A more visual script builder interface like Automator. Scripting is a great thing in Filemaker... just make it easier to visualize large scripts.

 

-Calculation fields that are color coded like you see in Apple's 09 version of Numbers

 

-Interface widget set to be instantly switchable between a Windows widget set and Mac widget set for layout on either platform. I want to develop for both platforms... just don't want to develop ON both platforms. In addition... make FM Advanced compile for both platforms regardless of which one you are developing ON.

 

-iPhone widget set and the ability to make a iPhone solution (yes I have seen what is out there, but native widget man... NATIVE WIDGETS)

 

 

Bit over the top? I think FM's competition is iLife, iWorks, Mac OS X and not Access and other DB dev environments. iLife, iWorks, Mac OS X show what FM --CAN-- be and what I have hopped for in every version over the last 5 years. Any open source project or small developer in Cocoa could probably put the above together with a extensible architecture to a DB back-end before FM would come out version 11. I hope someone does; it may light a fire under their back side.

 

I suppose that to some extent FM is hampered by maintaining cross-platform capability. I work on all computers; I am definitely a Mac user first; but I hope that Filemaker always remains cross-platform.

 

Now I must go back to work... on my hospital cash register solution... built in FM 9. FM is still the best thing out there.

 

-James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David Head
Perhaps some will think its not fair, but the bar is raising every quarter! Users expect leaps and bounds with every upgrade. With each upgrade to Ilife, there are major improvements. with each upgrade of any professional app, the expectation is the same. If the new feature set is lacking, make it version 9.4, or 9.5 and make it cheaper. But an entire new version, and a long development cycle is going to create expectations.

 

I am just amazed that the expectations are raised and then people don't want to pay for it. Does anyone really think that FileMaker Inc. spent any longer on FileMaker Pro 10 than it took to develop, test and release the new features? So who is going to pay for 18 months of engineer's wages? I have not seen anyone who has whined about the lack of features who is a current system engineer or product manager for a large company. My point is that they are whining about a process they know little or nothing about. And no matter what anyone has said, they cannot show any better performance from any competitors in the market. Maybe that's because it is not possible.

 

Do you really expect to buy FileMaker upgrades on the basis of what you think they are worth. The vendor sets the price. If people see value, they buy. If not, they don't. No-one has a gun to your head to buy. Case in point is Microsoft's abject failure of Vista. Little, no or negative perceived value.

 

The version argument is just silly (should it be 10 or 9.5 or 9.1?). It will be the same product, so why does it matter if it is called 9.1 or 9.5 or 10? Does making it 10 make it worth more? Does making it 9.5 make it worth less? Does it having less features than you would like mean that it should be cheaper? What if they brought out 9.5 - should that be cheaper than 10? IIRC, 8.5 was sold for a full upgrade price. Many people skipped that because there was little perceived value.

 

Fred, it is your opinion that the v10 feature set is lacking. My opinion is that it contains at least one big thing that people have been asking for for many many years. Now it is here, it is dismissed by many as a single feature that they don't need!!! You just can't win.

 

Any FileMaker customer has a choice:

 

If ( PerceivedValue > WalletTension ; Get ( Upgrade ); Null )

 

As some have said in another list, FileMaker Pro 10 is what it is. Make your value judgements, then upgrade or stay where you are. All the whining is not going to change this product OR the next one OR the one after that.

 

I have a wish list for FileMaker Pro. Some of my wishes came true this version. Many did not. There is always a next version. I am now optimising my solutions to take advantage of what I can do now.

 

And just for interest sake, I would suggest that the feature set for FileMaker Pro 11 is just about in the can if not already locked away. So any requests you make probably won't make it until 12 if they are not already on the board. That is the way the upgrade cycle works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David Head
Higher end graphical abilities would be amazing, modern widgets! better cross platform graphical standards! These are not unreasonable in my opinion. My grandparents expect better graphical integration!

 

Just as an exercise, can anyone please point to a fully cross platform application that currently does this? One that takes full advantage of the current OS standards for Win XP, Vista, Tiger and Leopard. I think you will find that difficult smiley-wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FredP

There are many professional graphics programs that have fully feature cross platform feature sets. Several that cross Mac, Windows as well as linux. But that is besides the point.

 

I just wanted to apologize for getting involved in this thread. Should have listened when someone told me to say nothing at all if you can't say something nice.

 

Fred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jnennemann
Parity is a HUGE issue for FMI. Their sales are 60% on Windows. So they can't make cool Mac stuff...and risk causing their Windows customer to get Mad. I have to agree. I use a Mac, but most of my customers are on Windows. I would hate to loose the parity.

 

It is a tough case to make either way. If a platform vendor (Apple) offers frameworks that make it trivial to add these 'modern' features, then what is a developer like FMI to do? I guess one option would be to have the graphics engine be an optional plugin, but how would you charge for something that is essentially 'done' in the OS' framework? "Sorry Windows folks, you will have to wait for the port of Core Graphics before you get the $10 plugin".

 

Maybe we can get everyone to use a Mac. HA LOL

 

Ha! I won't go there, though it would make my life with Windows toting relatives easier. I like a pluralistic world with competition (even if I don't think that Redmond is offering much competition right now).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jnennemann
Just as an exercise, can anyone please point to a fully cross platform application that currently does this? One that takes full advantage of the current OS standards for Win XP, Vista, Tiger and Leopard. I think you will find that difficult smiley-wink

 

Come on, Dave... the graphics widget set dates to MacDraw 1987 and Clarus the Dogcow(Moof!!). Take a look at this:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MacDraw_2.0_screenshot.png

 

Any widgets there look familiar? Hell... the hatch patterns are the same. There is still the same old magnify/reduce button. 21 years old are many of the widgets. They did away with the record navigator in v10 and I am suppose to say 'wow'?

 

I agree with you about If ( PerceivedValue > WalletTension ; Get ( Upgrade ); Null ). The truth is I will probably buy FM 10 pro if I have grant money burning a hole in my pocket, but you definitely can't fault me for venting my frustration with what I consider slow progress on Filemakers part.

 

I doubt either one of us has a good idea of what is going on in the halls of FMI, but I am just saying:

 

if (alternateToFilemaker = 1, customersLeave, sitAndSpin)

 

BTW

All the whining is not going to change this product OR the next one OR the one after that.

 

I think 'whining' is a poor choice of words. I love to know what my customers are looking for and expect and 'whining' implies ingratitude. I do appreciate the hard work of the programmers, project managers and others at FMI and that is why I still use their product.

 

I think Fred and my points are valid. It is hard to measure Apples to Oranges when considering how much good NEW stuff is in a major platform revision, but in my opinion FMP needs a lot more. The price tag doesn't bother me; its the threshold of what we consider a major revision change that differ. I think that we are paying for versions that are 'catching up' to other programs and not truly innovating new features. For that matter, my suggestions are just catch up items too, but ones that get you to the 'state of the art'.

 

And just for interest sake, I would suggest that the feature set for FileMaker Pro 11 is just about in the can if not already locked away. So any requests you make probably won't make it until 12 if they are not already on the board. That is the way the upgrade cycle works.

 

You are probably right. They probably have a good idea of what version 12 will have too. I bet if enough people 'whine' they might listen.

 

-Best regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MartinBrewer

Just to jump back in, seeing as I started something (that I'm sure happens with every version upgrade), the MDI/SDI and GUI is my biggest bugbear. I am writing a new system for windows clients, and its just painful trying to work within one window. Any new windows that open up are stacked, the main window becomes un-maximised and the potential for disaster looms.

If only I could create 'fake' dialogue boxes that just sit over a main window without minimising/maximising stuff my db could look and feel so much better.

The key to a good system (I believe) is simplicity of use, and there's nothing to beat that better than a clean interface.

 

All that said I love script triggers, as usual once you know ow to use and abuse them they're great.

 

Thanks for everyones help throughout this site, if I could afford to I would become a paid member (honest).

smiley-laughing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please start a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use