SuperJudge
Feb 21, 08:21 PM
Organizing my old pics and ran across some previous setups.
Home
Circa July 2006:
http://s159.photobucket.com/albums/t150/analogheretic/Desks%20and%20Setups/000074dr.jpg
Circa June 2008:
http://s159.photobucket.com/albums/t150/analogheretic/Desks%20and%20Setups/desk.jpg
Work
Not sure of the exact dates, but in order. Early 2009 to Late 2010
http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t150/analogheretic/Desks%20and%20Setups/pano.jpg
http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t150/analogheretic/Desks%20and%20Setups/pano-1.jpg
http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t150/analogheretic/Desks%20and%20Setups/newdesk.jpg
Before anyone says anything, I know that there are IP addresses visible in that last pic. I left the pic unredacted because those addresses currently point to nothing currently. :-p
Current pics of home and work are forthcoming.
Home
Circa July 2006:
http://s159.photobucket.com/albums/t150/analogheretic/Desks%20and%20Setups/000074dr.jpg
Circa June 2008:
http://s159.photobucket.com/albums/t150/analogheretic/Desks%20and%20Setups/desk.jpg
Work
Not sure of the exact dates, but in order. Early 2009 to Late 2010
http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t150/analogheretic/Desks%20and%20Setups/pano.jpg
http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t150/analogheretic/Desks%20and%20Setups/pano-1.jpg
http://i159.photobucket.com/albums/t150/analogheretic/Desks%20and%20Setups/newdesk.jpg
Before anyone says anything, I know that there are IP addresses visible in that last pic. I left the pic unredacted because those addresses currently point to nothing currently. :-p
Current pics of home and work are forthcoming.
iStudentUK
Mar 27, 05:22 AM
The AWACS involved are owned and operated by NATO. There may not even be US personnel on board.
Plus, Greece, USA and the RAF are also supplying aerial reconnaissance/warning craft of their own in addition to the 3 NATO ones.
I've been pleased by how cooperative the coalition has been. It hasn't been one country dominating. The French were first in, both the USA and UK fired missiles, the Canadians have been patrolling, and even countries with smaller armed forces add up to a significant proportion of the forces involved. There are rumours of UK and US special forces on the ground coordinating strikes as well.
Obviously the US makes up the biggest contribution, but France and the UK (together I think of these as the big three in this action) have still contributed plenty to the forces available.
Hopefully we will look back at this as how armed forces should be in the 21st century- sanctioned by the UN and in a real coalition.
Plus, Greece, USA and the RAF are also supplying aerial reconnaissance/warning craft of their own in addition to the 3 NATO ones.
I've been pleased by how cooperative the coalition has been. It hasn't been one country dominating. The French were first in, both the USA and UK fired missiles, the Canadians have been patrolling, and even countries with smaller armed forces add up to a significant proportion of the forces involved. There are rumours of UK and US special forces on the ground coordinating strikes as well.
Obviously the US makes up the biggest contribution, but France and the UK (together I think of these as the big three in this action) have still contributed plenty to the forces available.
Hopefully we will look back at this as how armed forces should be in the 21st century- sanctioned by the UN and in a real coalition.
justflie
Nov 15, 09:57 AM
If all you do is email and type freakin Word documents, why the heck would you spend so much money on a new Mac Pro? You could have been fine buying an iMac or even a MacBook :confused:
Using applications like After Effects, Photoshop, Flash, and other media apps these 8 core computers will ANNIHILATE my render times and cut production times in half, if not chop them into little pieces and spontaneously combust.
Obviously these machines are geared towards video editing, 3d animation, and motion graphics.... hence the PRO after the MAC.
I'll take all the cores I can get, for this will be a huge improvement!!
Lol, I think you missed the sarcasm dripping off of his comment...
Using applications like After Effects, Photoshop, Flash, and other media apps these 8 core computers will ANNIHILATE my render times and cut production times in half, if not chop them into little pieces and spontaneously combust.
Obviously these machines are geared towards video editing, 3d animation, and motion graphics.... hence the PRO after the MAC.
I'll take all the cores I can get, for this will be a huge improvement!!
Lol, I think you missed the sarcasm dripping off of his comment...
TheBobcat
Nov 27, 01:27 PM
Maybe Apple just needs to lower its monitor prices to sane levels as opposed to the ridiculous prices that they currently stand at. Justify them all you want, if Apple really wants to push its monitors, those prices need to come down. They might have flew 3 years ago, but enough is enough.
I just got a 22-inch LCD for $370 (US), and it's not a piece. Quite frankly, I can't really tell the difference. Plus it has better adjustments and I/O. It doesn't have the Apple look, and it only has 1050 horizontal lines of res but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me.
I just got a 22-inch LCD for $370 (US), and it's not a piece. Quite frankly, I can't really tell the difference. Plus it has better adjustments and I/O. It doesn't have the Apple look, and it only has 1050 horizontal lines of res but, that's not worth the extra dollars for me.
3N16MA
Nov 23, 09:33 PM
http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=261567&stc=1&d=1290568599
X-rays and casting. It counts as a purchase.
Hope you got a deal. :D
X-rays and casting. It counts as a purchase.
Hope you got a deal. :D
Evangelion
Jul 14, 05:33 AM
There will be more media once there are more players, and there will be more players once there is more media. Which goes first? Players, naturally. Apple and the rest of the industry will just have to begin selling the players, and then the content will follow. Very soon I'd guess. The new Blu-Ray media can be sold at premium, so I think there will be a lot of discs to buy once certain threshold of players have been installed.
Well, PS3 will have Blu-Ray in it. And if PS3 is even moderately succesfull, it would mean lots of Blu-Ray-players in the market.
Well, PS3 will have Blu-Ray in it. And if PS3 is even moderately succesfull, it would mean lots of Blu-Ray-players in the market.
yg17
Apr 9, 04:49 PM
Yup, my car's a manual.
mterlouw
Sep 6, 10:02 AM
i agree. i would never buy a computer that didn't have a dvd burner....and i'd never advise someone else to either
And neither would Steve Jobs, and so he wants you to spend $799 for the feature.
And neither would Steve Jobs, and so he wants you to spend $799 for the feature.
Galex
Sep 7, 07:39 AM
Apple keeps track of all the songs you buy anyway, so it's my opinion that you should be able to just "get another copy" if you have already purchased a song. I think this would be especially great for movies. That way you won't have to eat up precious hard drive space. You could purchase your movie, download it, watch it, delete it, and then re-download the movie if you want to view it again.
My thought exactly! Apple should be the holder of a virtual movie library, in which you would have access to all the films you have ever bought from Apple, possibly limited to a fixed number of computers per account. iTunes or some new software would keep track of the films in your library, including all kinds of information and trivia about the movies you have purchased. You should be able to save your films on your own hard drive or DVD-R if you wish, but Apple would provide the long-term storage capacity necessary for people who have large collections.
/Galex
My thought exactly! Apple should be the holder of a virtual movie library, in which you would have access to all the films you have ever bought from Apple, possibly limited to a fixed number of computers per account. iTunes or some new software would keep track of the films in your library, including all kinds of information and trivia about the movies you have purchased. You should be able to save your films on your own hard drive or DVD-R if you wish, but Apple would provide the long-term storage capacity necessary for people who have large collections.
/Galex
TheManOfSilver
Dec 10, 06:43 PM
I posted this a while ago - but I think Jobs was hinting that apple wants to be everywhere. iPod is a lifestyle product, as is the iTv.
Apple has proven that they have a true understanding of the user experience, and can spread that halo wherever a user may go. Hence the iPod's success, and perhaps the iTv and phone future success.
Bottom line, wherever there is media, apple wants to be there, showing everyone how to do it the best way.
I agree with your line about Apple wanting to be in multiple places. The one place I see them finally going themselves is the car ... not designing a car, but rather replacing the head unit on your car with a true video ipod interface. No onboard HD, just a true 3" video interface that shows your iPod's content just as it would on your iPod, while it's safely stowed in your glovebox, armrest, etc.
No one has done iPod integration right yet, because no one is Apple. Apple could go the route of designing a new iCar head unit itself for aftermarket sales and could sign deals with the automakers to offer it as an optional feature. They could partner with a big name in high quality car audio to get the sound quality right, but they would design the front end.
Perfect opportunity for Apple to fill a need that no one is addressing in an elegant, simple fashion.
Apple has proven that they have a true understanding of the user experience, and can spread that halo wherever a user may go. Hence the iPod's success, and perhaps the iTv and phone future success.
Bottom line, wherever there is media, apple wants to be there, showing everyone how to do it the best way.
I agree with your line about Apple wanting to be in multiple places. The one place I see them finally going themselves is the car ... not designing a car, but rather replacing the head unit on your car with a true video ipod interface. No onboard HD, just a true 3" video interface that shows your iPod's content just as it would on your iPod, while it's safely stowed in your glovebox, armrest, etc.
No one has done iPod integration right yet, because no one is Apple. Apple could go the route of designing a new iCar head unit itself for aftermarket sales and could sign deals with the automakers to offer it as an optional feature. They could partner with a big name in high quality car audio to get the sound quality right, but they would design the front end.
Perfect opportunity for Apple to fill a need that no one is addressing in an elegant, simple fashion.
SciFrog
Oct 9, 06:08 PM
Yup, but actually almost at 4mio with points of my old team combined ;)
What I am shooting for is the #5 overall spot of the team, maybe by year end...
What I am shooting for is the #5 overall spot of the team, maybe by year end...
SeaFox
Dec 28, 01:52 AM
anything is possible minus 1 thing: the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
I think an iPod dock is a great idea. It would be nice to be able to use your iTV for something without a computer running. Hey, take your iPod to a friend's house and you can all watch a movie at their house from your collection, just like taking your entire video library with you.
There are two problems with this:
1) HD content takes up a huge amount of space. So if Apple did offer HD movies, the copy iTunes will transfer to your iPod would be reduced quality.
2) iTunes purchases would not be playable on the component outputs on the iTV. The movie studios would require you use an HDMI connection or something else that supported HDCP to ensure you didn't copy the movie out of the iTunes ecosphere.
As several of us have discussed before, my hope is that iTV will be able to stream all forms of content on my computer, but with particular emphasis on digital media. So if I want to bring a word doc up and type or a movie I am working on in final cut pro, I can do so. Similarly, and with more fully developed components all my digital media can be run on my tv. The goal is to make this experience integrate all the entertainment features we love, but throughout our homes. Quality preservation is essential and I think they will work to ensure that takes place.
The issue here is you're asking your iTV to open other files, in other words, you're asking it to be a regular computer. That isn't going to work because it makes the OS/interface more complicated. A home entertainment component needs to be simple and fast. This is where Apple's embedded OSX rumors would be coming in. Everyone read that and thought about the Apple Phone because that was the hot topic of the week and the was the notion of a PDA Apple phone. But an embedded real-time operating system is just what the iTV needs.
People need to stop comparing the iTV to a Mac Mini, they should thinking of it the same way you think of an XBox compared to a Windows PC. Yeah, they're both made by Microsoft, but the XBox doesn't run Windows, it runs a smaller GUI on top of what is mostly a DirectX back end.
What's funny is the reason people keep thinking of the Mini is because what consumers really want is an Apple DVR, a Mac Mini with a little stronger hardware, no external power supply, and a built in tuner. Add PVR functionality to Front Row and maybe a little bit more expansive remote and you'd have that. But since the Mini isn't expandable, it isn't even possible for a consumer to cobble together the solution themselves from a PCI tuner card and DVR software available, the closest they can do has lots of "extra parts" lying around from the ElGato external tuner, a monitor adapter to give them the connection they need, and the Mini's power supply, and it still would not be as easy to navigate since a keyboard would probably be needed at some point.
So a MacMini wont download and play a HD movie or display a word doc, and you need the iTV to accomplish this basic task?
No, it will do those things, but a MacMini costs $600. Not everyone wants to keep their main computer hooked up to the TV. The iTV allows them to watch their iTunes Store-purchased movies on a larger screen than their regular monitor without moving their computer.
Also, most people don’t need final cut pro or photo shop. So, that’s why I was thinking this could be a basic computer. If not you will need the mac mini to go with it, and why not simply include the iTV with the Mac Mini so you don’t have two devises in a limited shelf space.
The iTV is meant to be an add-on to an existing Macintosh household. Not a self-contained entertainment product like a CableCo box or a PS2.
The idea is the iTV would support more common TV connection methods out of the box, be designed to fit in better aesthetically with home entertainment components, offer better video performance, overall stability, and lower power usage than a MacMini for less.
Is the problem the iTV will address processing the images or scaling them?
I hope so. Maybe it will be upconverting for watching current iTunes movies on an HDTV?
gdeputy
Nov 26, 09:37 PM
http://www.yugatech.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/macbook-air-2010.jpg
just came in the mail this morning :)
just came in the mail this morning :)
JoeG4
Jan 10, 08:55 PM
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_zZDRx0MKYqE/TSu-x0eQu1I/AAAAAAAAA64/_d8vR0gg4C4/s800/TheCar%20026.JPG
Still fantastic. :D And gorgeous!
Still fantastic. :D And gorgeous!
.jpg "Jasmine Villegas at the back")
edinz
Jan 7, 08:54 PM
ITV is a private independant TV channel in the UK so Apple may run into trouble with that name for it's home media centre.
iStudentUK
Mar 27, 10:58 AM
Oh? He chose to leave those two significant letters out of his post. :confused:
Some more cynical than me (impossible) might consider that disinformation. :rolleyes:
That guy in the MSN video rasmasyean linked is a bit of a douche. Especially when he says "if we take our toys home this is all over ... its pretty much us [USA]". This isn't a game and these aren't toys. A little under half the forces are US, Britain and France are next, but there are over a dozen countries that have committed forces.
Many of the countries in this coalition could do this alone- US, France and Britain all have airbases within range, attack subs/ships to fire missiles, reconnaissance planes, special forces to gain intelligence and easily enough fighters to attack ground targets and what is left of the Libyan airforce. However, it just looks like everyone is trying to make sure that no single country dominates.
With Iraq and Afghanistan the West need to be careful not to make this look like another invasion, but instead helping repressed people succeed in their revolution. Contributions and support from some Middle Eastern states (Qatar and the UAE have both sent fighters) help reinforce this. Making sure the UN and NATO are involved keeps this from becoming one country attacking another and hopefully avoids more hatred targeted towards the West.
Some more cynical than me (impossible) might consider that disinformation. :rolleyes:
That guy in the MSN video rasmasyean linked is a bit of a douche. Especially when he says "if we take our toys home this is all over ... its pretty much us [USA]". This isn't a game and these aren't toys. A little under half the forces are US, Britain and France are next, but there are over a dozen countries that have committed forces.
Many of the countries in this coalition could do this alone- US, France and Britain all have airbases within range, attack subs/ships to fire missiles, reconnaissance planes, special forces to gain intelligence and easily enough fighters to attack ground targets and what is left of the Libyan airforce. However, it just looks like everyone is trying to make sure that no single country dominates.
With Iraq and Afghanistan the West need to be careful not to make this look like another invasion, but instead helping repressed people succeed in their revolution. Contributions and support from some Middle Eastern states (Qatar and the UAE have both sent fighters) help reinforce this. Making sure the UN and NATO are involved keeps this from becoming one country attacking another and hopefully avoids more hatred targeted towards the West.
SactoGuy18
Jan 2, 04:41 PM
I personally think we'll see this:
1) 2G iPod nano available in 16 GB edition. Apple drops the 2 GB edition and lowers the price of the 4 GB to $175 and 8 GB to $225.
2) 30 GB 5.5G iPod dropped, replaced by new 40 GB model. 80 GB model has no changes.
3) "True" video iPod (about the size of the Samsung Q1 handheld computer) arrives with 16:9 aspect ratio screen with full touchscreen functions. Will offer either 80 GB or 120 GB hard disk drive capacities.
1) 2G iPod nano available in 16 GB edition. Apple drops the 2 GB edition and lowers the price of the 4 GB to $175 and 8 GB to $225.
2) 30 GB 5.5G iPod dropped, replaced by new 40 GB model. 80 GB model has no changes.
3) "True" video iPod (about the size of the Samsung Q1 handheld computer) arrives with 16:9 aspect ratio screen with full touchscreen functions. Will offer either 80 GB or 120 GB hard disk drive capacities.
7even
Sep 18, 03:18 AM
Got the Griffin Outfit Gloss at Best Buy.. it's not bad. Hate how the buttons are uncovered and the bottom isn't well-protected, but otherwise it isn't too bad.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:38 PM
I am a current law student who has concentrated in IP, particularly trademark law.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
It was my understanding that Apple filed in 2008 and got some level of approval in early 2011. I imagine it is analogous to a "patent pending".
I imagine this case will then bear on the final full approval of the trademark.
Apple should file for "The App Store" in the interim as well as "appstore". The latter is used by amazon.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
It was my understanding that Apple filed in 2008 and got some level of approval in early 2011. I imagine it is analogous to a "patent pending".
I imagine this case will then bear on the final full approval of the trademark.
Apple should file for "The App Store" in the interim as well as "appstore". The latter is used by amazon.
guzhogi
Nov 15, 01:03 PM
You are not a developer, I take it?
Are you seriously suggesting that a developer should ship a product with features that are not only untested, but haven't even been tried out?
What do you prefer: Unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, 50 percent CPU usage, or unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, kaboom!
I don't think that's what he meant. I think he means instead of hard coding a program to use 8 (or however many cores), have the program dynamically use however many cores are in your computer. So if he wrote it on a 2 core machine, the program would use 2 cores. When he puts it on an 8 core computer, it'll automatically use all 8 w/o having to reprogram. The programmer should still test it and make corrections as necessary.
Are you seriously suggesting that a developer should ship a product with features that are not only untested, but haven't even been tried out?
What do you prefer: Unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, 50 percent CPU usage, or unpack 8 core Mac Pro, install Handbrake, run it, kaboom!
I don't think that's what he meant. I think he means instead of hard coding a program to use 8 (or however many cores), have the program dynamically use however many cores are in your computer. So if he wrote it on a 2 core machine, the program would use 2 cores. When he puts it on an 8 core computer, it'll automatically use all 8 w/o having to reprogram. The programmer should still test it and make corrections as necessary.
apb3
Aug 16, 11:47 AM
Not hard for Apple to stop this with something like a digital signature allowing your pod to only sync with your library
Oh great! more DRM....I don't think that's the way to go from a PR standpoint as far as Apple is concerned and in terms of what makes iTunes and the iPod sell so well ... and not as easy as you make it seem. Also, I think this may iimpact one of the features I use most, Lib sharing at home.
Agreed but this feature could be used for you to listen to your friends ipod music if they have a song they want you to hear OR in the work place. You should be in range for at least 8 hrs of the day :p
Shared music libs already address this. And again, the cost/benefit analysis of what we need to expend to do this power-wise, price-wise, PR-wise, etc... (in my opinion) just don't cut it.
Oh great! more DRM....I don't think that's the way to go from a PR standpoint as far as Apple is concerned and in terms of what makes iTunes and the iPod sell so well ... and not as easy as you make it seem. Also, I think this may iimpact one of the features I use most, Lib sharing at home.
Agreed but this feature could be used for you to listen to your friends ipod music if they have a song they want you to hear OR in the work place. You should be in range for at least 8 hrs of the day :p
Shared music libs already address this. And again, the cost/benefit analysis of what we need to expend to do this power-wise, price-wise, PR-wise, etc... (in my opinion) just don't cut it.
rjgonzales
Aug 16, 08:09 AM
That way, I can stream my music from iPod to Airport Express directly.
I would also love that feature.:D
I would also love that feature.:D
sineplex
Sep 18, 05:51 PM
I got the silicone case today, but then I also decided to go with Belkin Grip Vue.
Silicone case - quite nice and fits well with the iPod Touch.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4087/4991075021_c700b1aec9_z.jpg
Is that an actual Belkin Silicon case ?
Silicone case - quite nice and fits well with the iPod Touch.
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4087/4991075021_c700b1aec9_z.jpg
Is that an actual Belkin Silicon case ?
itsmeGAV
Jan 31, 04:23 PM
As a person who owns 2 MK4 VWs and who's 4 closest friends drive MK4 Jettas, I'd never want to be associated with that.
This is how you make a MK4 look nice:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4119/4794436687_2a531d48e5_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4143/4794433771_2a2014c124_b.jpg
Just have to wait for the snow to go away to mount my r32 sideskirts and get my spacers on the wheels.
imo, it needs deep dish wheels.. (or ronal turbo's)
still it's a nice ride non the less!
This is how you make a MK4 look nice:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4119/4794436687_2a531d48e5_b.jpg
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4143/4794433771_2a2014c124_b.jpg
Just have to wait for the snow to go away to mount my r32 sideskirts and get my spacers on the wheels.
imo, it needs deep dish wheels.. (or ronal turbo's)
still it's a nice ride non the less!