Jump to content
neddie

Apple announce new iPhone

Recommended Posts

I live in a country where WiFi isn't as rife as, say, in America. I have to have good mobile connectivity for my business to run. So I care. A lot.
Understandable. I never said you should get it, just that I wanted it ;)

 

GPRS - the slowest form of data communications over cellular. Gets the job done, but slowly - and with high latency.

EDGE - GPRS on steroids. It has better bandwidth and slightly better latency.

3G - On 3G you can have latency similar to DSL. This is important to me because I use Skype often and play online games. Both of those are impossible on GPRS or EDGE but rock on 3G.

HSDPA - 3G on steroids. And then some. Not only is it much faster than 3G, but the latency is even lower. This is the closest you can come to a DSL connection on your mobile. At the moment all the big cities in South Africa are covered with HSDPA.

 

GSM and CDMA are voice-carrier technologies. They both work although GSM is far better.

Thanks for the explanation :)

 

But the bigger reason is because I have never seen our board members act this way - you all claim to hate FUD, and yet I have seen it spread in this thread!
The problem is with so little details people were free to let their minds go wild. Those who have a dislike for Apple, well, they came up with stuff to hate it for - and hate, as we all know, leads to the dark side.

 

So for me its simple, it seems you are locked to a single cell operator (Cingular) ... I would never buy a phone locked to any operator because contracts suck
As has been pointed out numerous times, this is only in America. And you aren't technologically locked in, you can still switch carriers, but you are practically locked in for 2 years as you have to pay for the service. After those two years you can cancel the service and go where ever you want (as long as they use SIM cards, I guess).

 

I think this thread has run it's course, guys, and we should let it be. No one is going to convince anyone else of anything, and really it's quite pointless, because you aren't changing anyones mind, nor are you changing Apple's decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I want it too. If I had loads of cash, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. And a Macbook Pro too, by means of accessory :rolleyes: .

Edited by Darkelve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say that I genuinely don't think I've been a party to FUD - I just really can't understand the fuss about this phone or why it's so special... Unless it's just 'cause it's Apple's first phone...

 

I suppose my opinion may well be coloured by a completely different experience of WM to SoulSe - for example I have imov installed and it works without problems... Generally I have found my phone to be pretty much all I wanted it to be... I can't see what the iPhone can do that mine can't - or many others for that matter...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Um, re: software on iPhone.....

 

Apple has said that they have no intention of releasing a SDK or anything for mass consumption, so that anyone can develop on the device. Only Apple, or companies approached by apple will be able to develop software for the iPhone. This means that any addon software, if any, is done completely via apple. Probably like it is done now for iPod gen5.5's. More games are available, apple approved on iTMS.

 

As all approval has to go through apple, it'd be extremely unlikely that any VOIP software is supported, along with a range of other software, as it would most likely be against any agreements apple have with telcos.

 

Third party. Apple are not a third party, and all the software comes via Apple. Thus, the iPhone has no third party application support.

 

I couldn't write an application for an iPhone if i had one, so in my opinion, that's as good as no application support whatsoever.

 

I wonder whether the iPhone will have much success over here. Currently, any 3G data where i live, costs an arm and a leg. Charged by the kb, and 1meg works out to about 15 bucks. 3G is nice, useful sometimes, but freakin expensive.

 

James

Edited by iphitus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder whether the iPhone will have much success over here. Currently, any 3G data where i live, costs an arm and a leg. Charged by the kb, and 1meg works out to about 15 bucks. 3G is nice, useful sometimes, but freakin expensive.

 

Maybe, but someone told me that ICT stuff in general is very expensive in Australia.

Edited by Darkelve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem is with so little details people were free to let their minds go wild. Those who have a dislike for Apple, well, they came up with stuff to hate it for - and hate, as we all know, leads to the dark side.

OK, I'll agree on details BUT I want top make this perfectly clear.. I don't hate Apple.

That is not the problem! I actually tried buying a minimac last year in the sales (the guy in front of me in the queue got the last one), my next laptop will probably be an Apple and I have recommended them to people (often over Linux) and especially with Applecare.

So for me its simple, it seems you are locked to a single cell operator (Cingular) ... I would never buy a phone locked to any operator because contracts suck
As has been pointed out numerous times, this is only in America. And you aren't technologically locked in, you can still switch carriers, but you are practically locked in for 2 years as you have to pay for the service. After those two years you can cancel the service and go where ever you want (as long as they use SIM cards, I guess).

 

We will have to see the announcements but first let me explain cell contracts in Europe...

You can buy a phone outright but not any phone... only ones that the retailers are allowed to sell.

 

Just to point out you still don't "own" the phone like you own a car or refrigerator ... it can still contain software specifically disabling features of that phone and its illegal to enable them. These features can be operator specific.. so even though you "own" a non operator locked phone doesn't mean you can use all the features.

These features don't need to be technically reliant on the operator... that is it could be as simple as the ring tones being locked and you can only unlock them by paying a subscription to a certain operator. Or backing up your contacts and messages can be locked ... you can pay the operator then its unlocked and you can backup to your PC.

 

Let me compare to a PC... if you bought the PC from a company with an ISP service as well. I'm disatisfied with the ISP service so I change and then my PC is crippled in some way. Perhaps I can't print or save_as is disabled? And the real problem is its illegal to enable it. .

 

From my POV this means you don't own the PC, its being leased to you dependent on paying for the contract.

 

Cell phones get away with this due to their history, nothing else.

When the portable original bricks came out they cost thousands and were almost exclusively for business use.

Businesses often prefer leasing to fixed assets, its a tax thing. Secondly a phone without a operator is kinda pointless.

 

The whole idea of contracts/leasing grew out of this...

Now the basic technology for a phone costs <$50 ... or significantly less since you can buy outright, no contract a $50 phone. However most phones are still only available under contracts... and it is usually the old models which are sold.

 

So a whole market has sprung up based on what is fundamentally a leasing model. You can take a 1yr contract and buy-to-lease but at the end the finctionality of your phone can still be reduced when you switch operator.

Now I can go and get the not-quite-latest phone for FREE ... except I don't own it... and I wouldn't expect to for free. You pay the lease (contract) and eventually you own it, usually by which time the phone is getting old and needs replacing but hey... it was FREE. I can see anyone getitng a "free" phone shouldn't be too surprised when it turns out they are locked into a contract that rips them off.

 

On the other hand however most of the very latest phones are contract only and still cost $500 .. and fundamentally these phones are still costing under $100 to make.

I can buy a 1GB mp3 player for $50 (or way less in the far east) ... or for $100 one with a decent TFT screen...

($50 in the far east) and these are retail prices... and a phone for less than $50... either way you look at it these things cost peanuts to make... so if I pay $500 (or even $200) I would expect to own it like I own my car, computer or microwave.

 

What I think really sucks is locked phones being sold and the functionality on them being restricted to one operator. This really does lead to a lot of social problems ... people get killed over their latest phone... and its just a phone... but the market for stolen phones is huge because these can then be hacked and sold on a black market... and the reason for the black market being so large is because the phones are "sold" crippled. Somewhat perversely a stolen phone has more fuctionality than the legal ones in many cases... and the market is not simply for "criminal gangs" who want untracable phones but for people who want a phone they can't pay the contract on. (ho hum such is peer pressure)

 

Now the important part

The second reason mobile phones are locked into contracts is the same reason a dog licks its balls.... its simply so simple... they do because they can because they have the ultimate control... the ability to disable your phone if they think you are exploiting parts which are not paid for.

This is exploited even further, my "owned" phone had a pay-as-you go card... you only get 3 tries at sticking in a 14 digit number .. if you make 3 mistakes your phone is LOCKED... You then must go into a store to get it unlocked and guess what, you have to sit and listen to the marketing drivel and tell the sales person 20+ times you do not want a new phone. They just keep ignoring you, you can't leave until your phone is unlocked ... legally they must unlock it ... legally they can take as long as they like... Before anyone says... sticking in a 14 digit number on a bus or train is not that easy... one mistake, no corrections allowed... and who has never had to correct a 4 digit pin on an ATM... I just want to qualify, this number is not my number, its on a scratch-card and a one off... someone stealing my phone would not be any less likely to tap this number... if the phone is locked its $5 to unlock it illegally in any of 1000 places in Paris. It doesn't protect me at all.

What it prevents is people randomly trying 14 digit combinations for randomly finding an unused number that is valid...

Come-on 14 digits and only a certain series valid at any one time? 3 strikes and your out is not realistic... even with 100 tries its near infinity ... because only the operator knows which ones have already been used and which have not... and 9^14 is a freakin huge number so even if a million are in circulation at once...

 

Actually 3 tries the chance is P0 (with 1 millon in circ) 1.31x10^-7 vs 4.37x10^-6 ...

with 100 million in circulation at any one time its still with 100 tries... 4.37^10-4 ...

(this excludes the tries... i.e. the number of available combinations should be decreased by one each try but this is lost in the rounding error anyway.

 

So the ultimate control of the phone is the operator being able to disable your phone whenever they like.

 

Now iPods have suffered from a part of this... but they lack the ultimate control.

They are not directly connected to the "network" 24x7 ....

Apple have already chased down people making skins... etc. and this is a legal gray area but shows their intent IMHO...

 

Apple were going bust... until the iPod... and now they are raking in money... (OK cool I actualy like Apple whatever people think) but they have just tasted the edge of a market.

 

Whatever the possibilities of an iPod 90% of them are used as Apple intends ... using iTunes and all the other deal. Yes other stuff exists like Iphitus has installed ... and perhaps that 90% is drifting to 85% ...

 

Ok this is gossip but I beleive it

http://www.boingboing.net/2004/04/16/apple...s_playfair.html

 

this is only in America
but its not... even when no law exists

Now that Apple has tasted from the cup-of-lockins I think its eager to drink more.

 

The iPod seems to be running to the end of this lock-in, in many countires its being challenged and in many way's its a near monopoly position... what is gray is the relationship between iTunes and IPod...

Are they the same company :D ??? Are apple using their near monopoly on one to control the other?

I don't expect we will agree on this entrely BUT... I think everyone has to admit Apple are approaching this and that if they were a de-facto monopoly this would be illegal in most countires.

 

Last year all the French mobile operators were found guilty of operating a cartel as a monopoly and price fixing. These same operators operate worldwide... and because of the nature of international roaming have shares in other operators ...

 

This is the crowd that Apple are joining.... and at the same time they are gaining the ultimate control they lack in the iPod.. the ability to switch it off permanently.... any time night or day its connected. If they find an illegal tune? or even think it might be illegal (for instance I have some music which I am allowed to have, the artist GAVE ME the right... Apple might just think I don't have the right.... heck it could be the actual artist themselves !!!

 

I think this thread has run it's course, guys, and we should let it be. No one is going to convince anyone else of anything, and really it's quite pointless, because you aren't changing anyones mind, nor are you changing Apple's decisions.

So far the idea is people are just against Apple.... that's really not my point... I'm against the lock-in concept which seems to be being expanded with the iPhone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually I think the main reason a lot of phones are locked into contracts is because it guarantees income... Which is also why so many phone companies subsidise the phone. If I give you £200 towards your phone but can guarantee that you'll spend at least £250 then it' worth it for me...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually I think the main reason a lot of phones are locked into contracts is because it guarantees income... Which is also why so many phone companies subsidise the phone. If I give you £200 towards your phone but can guarantee that you'll spend at least £250 then it' worth it for me...

 

Phunni, yes this is how it started out... cell phones cost thousands then hundreds and the marketing was through get it now, pay through the contract... which is to me hire purchase/leasing to buy.

 

However the majority of cell phones now are "sold" to individuals and the phones themsleves no longer cost hundreds or thousands but <100$ to make...

 

The business is now based around trying to sell something for a price people can't afford through contracts which claw the money back... but even this is not enough because they are elevating the prices of the phones and restricting what you can actually BUY outright.

 

When the phone costs $50 to make but is "sold" at $500 that's already one thing but I guess if people want to pay $500 its up to them... however I think its a step further when this is combined with not actually selling the phone and locking into a contract...

 

I'm not saying companies shouldn't be allowed to do this... that is another issue..I'm saying I am not in the least interested in any phone which comes with a contract exclusively... .. Im not against contracts...I have one but I also want to be able to change as and when I want... and NOT loose functionality of the toy...

 

Look at mortgages...

They exist fundamentally to allow anyone to buy a house... Back in the 19C very few people owned houses. Even today you can't buy a house anywhere, For instance Downham near my mom is owned by the Duke of Buckley, his serfs (for that is what they are, including his ownership of them) are only allowed to lease land or houses...

The farmers lease land, they can't buy ... if their cow wanders off their leased land it belongs to the Duke...

 

I know of several other places the same where you cannot even pass on the house to your children because when you die the house reverts back...

 

anyway.. mortgages allowed the proleteriat to buy...this is commonly viewed as a good thing.

However they have completely changed ... 20 yrs ago a house could be bought for a years salary or less.

Back then lets say GBP 10,000 so you spread the cost over 5 years and then owned the house.

 

No longer is this the case in most of the UK.... even a small 2 bed house outside the M25 will set you back GBP 300,000 so once again most people in the UK no longer OWN their house because the deeds are kept by the mortgage company... what you can and cannot do to your house needs thier approval and increasing numbers of people are loosing their house...

This is somewhat sad... the enabler (mortgages) have pushed up property prices with the collusion of the lenders... (in many cases also the estate agents) ...

 

Now the average disposable income already has 75%+ being paid into a mortgage...further the lenders are encouraging people to extend mortgages and even sign away the house for a cash sum for retirement.

Many people live and die, spend 75% of what they earn on a house they never own...

 

When you consider this its no different to the old serf system where you paid your Lord the tythe. The money just goes to differnet people....

If this was a tax people would be outraged yet most people subscibe to the model because they have no real choice. At the same time people are delighted their house is worth double... but very few ever realise that value because they can't sell it without buying somewhere else.

 

Cell phones are not so much different.... least wise what you finally own is valueless ... they just target in the same way which is over extending peoples ability to pay. The phone isn't worth the GBP 200... if you say it costs $50 to make and another $50 for transport/marketing and whatever then GBP 100 is being generous ...for a GBP 250 phone ... but the cell companies are colluding with the service providors to prevent the market being opened.

 

The inital democratisation of the market via subsidising through the contract is no longer valid because cell phones no longer cost $1000 to make ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

/me stabs this thread with a stake to the heart

 

damn thing is undead!

 

I'm against the lock-in concept which seems to be being expanded with the iPhone.
Then I would suggest that to be off-topic for this thread. This thread is about the iPhone, and Apple announcing said iPhone, this thread is not about complaints/commentary on how cell phone lock-in sucks. If you want to discuss that, I suggest you start a new thread in the appropriate place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm against the lock-in concept which seems to be being expanded with the iPhone.

Then I would suggest that to be off-topic for this thread. This thread is about the iPhone, and Apple announcing said iPhone, this thread is not about complaints/commentary on how cell phone lock-in sucks. If you want to discuss that, I suggest you start a new thread in the appropriate place.

tyme, the whole point of my objections to ever owning an iPhone are soley based on this concept and most importantly the fact that without the lock-in the iPhone is about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.

 

The basis of the iPhone is that everything you can make it do is controlled if you take away the contracts, iTunes etc. then what you have is a very pretty but useless bit of electronics/art.

(Im somewhat guessing at pretty but Apple are pretty consistent on this)

 

If I might make an analogy its like discussing a super duper PC card... that is not supported under linux. It might be the coolest thing in the world under XP but it is of no interest to me. because I'm not switching to XP in order to have this card.

 

My whole point is the iPhone is based around these lock-ins... and equally restrictions.

 

Regardless of what it can do with the contract what can it do without one or with a different operator?

 

The price/value of the product is immaterial while in order to make use of these features you have to subscribe to a contract.. and in the case of mobile telecommunictions this is even more important because the cost of technologies ... be it edge or GPRS are constantly falling for NEW subscriptions... lock-in is everything whgen you are offeriing the same service to new users 6 months down the line for half the price... (not the price of the iPhone, the price of the services)

 

When I buy hardware my #1 concern is it is supported under linux.... if its not then I don't consider it, even if its the coolest thing since ice machines were invented.

When I buy a phone my only concerns are what is costs me to make a call, send a text and/or use the extra functionality AND how much is costs me to get out of the contract.

As phunni said

Actually I think the main reason a lot of phones are locked into contracts is because it guarantees income... Which is also why so many phone companies subsidise the phone. If I give you £200 towards your phone but can guarantee that you'll spend at least £250 then it' worth it for me...

 

It also guarantees killing competition....because if another operator offer me more services for less $$$ I am not free to avail myself of that contract.

 

After this I look at what is available, battery life etc. BUT my #1 filter for buying a phone is the contract....and how much it costs me to get out.

By way of example here's my old phone...

http://www.phonescoop.com/phones/phone.php?p=116

 

Bluetooth Supported Profiles: HSP, HFP, DUN, OPP, Sync version 1.0b
except you can only transfer/send certain types of media... the phone can receive them fine, it just doesn't know what to do with them... and transferring ringtones is blocked... so the bluetooth turned out to be a dead duck...

 

Packet Data Technology: GPRS also HSCSD

WAP / Web Browser Browser Software: WAP 2.0 supports xHTML and WML 1.3 / WTLS class 1/2/3 and signText

Again perhaps this worked but I wasn't going to find out because to activate it was going to cost (on top of the basic contract) the same price as the phone or more ... over a year...

 

So far as Im concerned the phone is totally crap... the GPRS didn't work at all (because I didn't activate it) the ringtomes thing though not a major selling point was probably just software disabled by my service providor because they sell ringtones... and allowing me to make my own or transfer them would eat into their profits...

 

But let me ask you a question.... ? (straight-up) who's fault is this?

 

I really expect you will agree with me that its my fault... I should have checked these things before I signed a contract, not just presume that everything its advertised to do will work wothout me paying more money?

 

This is my basis of my thoughts on the iPhone... until I review the contract including the fine print, get out clauses etc. etc. it doesn't matter what the phone is technically capable and the price of the "phone" to "buy" because the price of the phone is not guaranteeing I can use that functionality without paying more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The basis of the iPhone is that everything you can make it do is controlled if you take away the contracts, iTunes etc. then what you have is a very pretty but useless bit of electronics/art.
Incorrect. You still have all the other features as long as you can connect to a phone network with the proper protocol (note that in the US, there are only two [major] GSM carriers, T-Mobile and Cingular/AT&T, so you don't have much of a choice anyways) - google maps, weather, all the other things. You can use iTunes without agreeing to a contract, you just can't purchase things from the store, but you can still use the program to interface with the device(s) and copy over any music file that iTunes can read (mp3 and a few other formats - and you don't have to use any DRM!). Aside from the 2-year contract with Cingular (note that most wireless companies require this for getting deals on your phone), there's no other contracts you need agree to in order to use the phone to it's fullest.

 

Simple point: It's really not any different than purchasing any other phone from any other carrier in the U.S., it's just from Apple. If you look at phone line-ups for U.S. carriers, you will notice that there is very little crossover in the models of phones that they sell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Simple point: It's really not any different than purchasing any other phone from any other carrier in the U.S., it's just from Apple. If you look at phone line-ups for U.S. carriers, you will notice that there is very little crossover in the models of phones that they sell.

Man, that has been my point all along!

 

Aside from the 2-year contract with Cingular (note that most wireless companies require this for getting deals on your phone), there's no other contracts you need agree to in order to use the phone to it's fullest.

 

Again my point.... it all rests on that contract...

 

Lets say another operator comes out with a "better" product ... or equal one but with a contract at half the price...

You are still locked into the Cingular contract for 2 years...

 

Its not like at $500 they are providing "financing"... $500 for a phone + mp3 player is still quite expensive... its not extortionate but its not deal of the century ... so for me it all rests on the contract and 2 yrs is a VERY long time in mobile communications...

 

But let me ask you a question.... ? (straight-up) who's fault is this?

Seriously, who fault was it that my phone never had GPRS (or whatever else)....

Which is why I keep saying... or you put it best

It's really not any different than purchasing any other phone from any other carrier in the U.S., it's just from Apple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're turning circles around your own argument, Gowator. Like I said, your complaint doesn't appear to be about the iPhone, but about how the cell phone carriers operate their business. Such a discussion is not the topic of this thread. You've just agreed to this assessment by agreeing with my statement:

It's really not any different than purchasing any other phone from any other carrier in the U.S., it's just from Apple.
Basically you're picking on Apple because Apple is the topic of this discussion, but you're entire argument/issue is not actually about Apple at all, it's about cell phone carriers - which again, is not the topic of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're turning circles around your own argument, Gowator. Like I said, your complaint doesn't appear to be about the iPhone, but about how the cell phone carriers operate their business. Such a discussion is not the topic of this thread. You've just agreed to this assessment by agreeing with my statement:
It's really not any different than purchasing any other phone from any other carrier in the U.S., it's just from Apple.
Basically you're picking on Apple because Apple is the topic of this discussion, but you're entire argument/issue is not actually about Apple at all, it's about cell phone carriers - which again, is not the topic of this thread.

Apple can/could set up their own network... they could lease bandwidth from one or both carriers and just do it themselves...

This is exactly what Virgin did ... both in the UK and France and the selling point of Virgin was not being locked into contracts. OK this might not be possible in the US... (I'm guessing some legislation exists in Europe about this)... but the whole point of the Virgin mobile business is flexibility and non lock-in...

 

Now if Apple were to do the same (and I had the contract to read) then I might be excited... like I say $500 is a reasonable price for a phone..+mp3. and as I have said many times... Apple make great HW and Human interfaces..

 

Yes, Im picking on Apple because they are the subject of the thread... I'm trying to keep it as much on-topic as possible ;) (really) .. its just I look at mobile phones differently, and the fact is the $500 price tag is completely irrelevant ... until I see the contract and read every work...

 

My experience with mobile operators is that the fine print is the important part. The 6pt grey "some functionality can only be enabled with an additional contract/subscription" parts actually become the most relevant parts of the contracts...

 

Apple have always been a lock-in type company... (fair enough) in my opinion (for what its worth) at least a lot more transparently than Sony... (and a few others) and my perception is that with the iPod/iTunes combination they realised they were sitting on a cash cow but one which could dissapear (quite quickly) because of the legislation under review in a few countires ...

 

As I previously mentioned my experience of ALL mobile operators (Virgin less so) is that they are the ultimate lock-in. Lock-in is core to their business models and these are the people Apple is climbing into bed with.

 

Soulse asked why we are dumping on Apple... ? etc. and I'm explaining my total lack of enthusiasm is because of the cell market itself ... the fact is its a cell phone and seperating it from the contract is in my opinion not productive because without that contract you can't even make a basic call.

 

Until I actually SEE a contract, read it and discect the fine print it remains just another cell phone...

It doesn't seem exciting, its finctionality doesn't seem much better than sticking an elastic band around my MP4 player and phone... (even if it looks much prettier) ...

 

The fact you can't download music directly for instance seems lame... because I can already do this on my Palm... I just stick in the Wifi or GPRS card and I can download music directly. (with a suitable GPRS contract or free Wifi which is available everywhere for the prioce of a coffee...)

(Im betting Apple sound fidelity is much better but this isn't the point for me)... its the fact it remains a pretty version of my phone, PDA and MP4 player stuck together...

 

So far as I know the contracts are not available yet, nor the pricing... those lucky people testing them are doing so gratis... with everything unlocked BUT I have no seen a statement from Apple like

 

1/ Capabilites (OK this is hyped and stuff but details... can I dload music direct or not?)

2/ contract price - duration and cost to terminate

3/ capabilities of the phone wthout any contract...

 

Some people might chose to assume this but now me...

The thing is that perhaps all the stuff will work without a contract but perhaps not ... and $500 +contract+other incidentals+ is quite a bit of money if you find out later it doesn't do everything without a contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

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.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...