- Status
anamaniac
Distinguished
- Jan 7, 2009
- 1,035
- 0
- 19,230
I love the OS3... but I have some issues with it...
Visual of the console itself.
The 360 looks fairly decent in my living room right in sight. I'd have to hide the PS3.
Games... PS3 have chromehounds?
Price... This one is important. I almost got a PS3, but decided on the 360 instead somewhat because of this. I don't need a bluray player (1080p movies take to long to download).
I realize it is a great system in compaison, and Sony took a huge risk and loss making it, but no.
Visual of the console itself.
The 360 looks fairly decent in my living room right in sight. I'd have to hide the PS3.
Games... PS3 have chromehounds?
Price... This one is important. I almost got a PS3, but decided on the 360 instead somewhat because of this. I don't need a bluray player (1080p movies take to long to download).
I realize it is a great system in compaison, and Sony took a huge risk and loss making it, but no.
Shadow703793
Distinguished
- Feb 3, 2007
- 696
- 0
- 18,940
Why not just sell the PS3 as a BD high end player? I mean sell it as a bundle with one of those Sony LCDs + Sony Sound systems and sell it as an Ultimate Home Theater system.
[citation][nom]astrotrain1000[/nom]Sony wasn't amazing with the PS2 they were first to market giving the the same edge that the Xbox 360 has now.[/citation]
The Dreamcast was first to market last gen and sold half as many units in it's life as the Xbox and GC. Look how it ended up. Sony capitalized on it's PSX success, came in at a good price point (despite people thinking it expensive when it came out), timed their price drops perfectly, snagged the best third party exclusives and marketed the hell out of the thing. So yes, they were amazing with the PS2.
[citation]The PS2 was plagued with hardware problems(disc read error anyone?) just as the xbox 360 has now.[/citation]
For all it's problems, the PS2 never suffered from a 30%+ failure rate through normal use.
[citation]Sony needs their killer app. Yes, I know there are good games but there is nothing that appeals to the level of Halo 3, like it or hate it sells. Sony needed Final Fantasy 13 exclusivity, but oh well.[/citation]
I'd disagree with that. They've had numerous excellent exclusives, including sequels to series that have traditionally been console sellers, and have even sold quite well on the system. Not only that, but they've continued for the better part of a year now with a steady stream of awesome exclusives while the competition has been going through a seeming drought of good exclusives with no permanent end in sight. The only thing putting people off of the PS3 is still the price, which I'm surprised hasn't changed already. They've lowered their production costs tremendously since launch, but seem hesitant to pass that along to the consumers (even though you really get a lot more for your money now backwards compatability excluded).
The Dreamcast was first to market last gen and sold half as many units in it's life as the Xbox and GC. Look how it ended up. Sony capitalized on it's PSX success, came in at a good price point (despite people thinking it expensive when it came out), timed their price drops perfectly, snagged the best third party exclusives and marketed the hell out of the thing. So yes, they were amazing with the PS2.
[citation]The PS2 was plagued with hardware problems(disc read error anyone?) just as the xbox 360 has now.[/citation]
For all it's problems, the PS2 never suffered from a 30%+ failure rate through normal use.
[citation]Sony needs their killer app. Yes, I know there are good games but there is nothing that appeals to the level of Halo 3, like it or hate it sells. Sony needed Final Fantasy 13 exclusivity, but oh well.[/citation]
I'd disagree with that. They've had numerous excellent exclusives, including sequels to series that have traditionally been console sellers, and have even sold quite well on the system. Not only that, but they've continued for the better part of a year now with a steady stream of awesome exclusives while the competition has been going through a seeming drought of good exclusives with no permanent end in sight. The only thing putting people off of the PS3 is still the price, which I'm surprised hasn't changed already. They've lowered their production costs tremendously since launch, but seem hesitant to pass that along to the consumers (even though you really get a lot more for your money now backwards compatability excluded).
SolidSnakeHead
Distinguished
- Jun 22, 2009
- 1
- 0
- 18,510
Of course, the one and only reason why Sony is the 3rd is because of Blu-ray drive. But no, it was not the cost, it because the fact that "No One can pirate Blu-ray Disc!".
You must accept that it is very easy to install the hack firmware in Wii and made the machine fly with pirate software. Currently, you even no need to burn a disc at all, just put pirate software ISO file in Flash Drive or USB Harddisk and then you Wii can run pirate software like a bird.
XBOX and XBOX360 is also, but harder, becuse of you need to install a MODCHIP.
Because of so many people virtually have no cost on software on these machine (Wii and XBOX) so it wasn't surprise that why 2 of them are lead PS3.
If you don't believe me, just search in Pirate Bay, you will easily find ISO for XBOX and Wii, but you will never find PS3 version.
I think most of software publisher love PS3 in this respect. Why Activision not?, because Activision's killer software is already immune from being pirated (at least mostly) because you need to purchase their hardware+software bundle to play the game! You can't play Guitar Hero without guitar controller, right? Its true that you need to purchase only 1 guitar then able to play later version. But they will keep making their guitar have new feature and let the bundle price so cheap until you decide to purchase their new bundle version (of cause, its mean you not pirate their software).
Since Activision selling hardware controller not software, it will cost them in certain amount (setup cost) to make hardware for each system available (For example: $1,500,000 for 50,000 initial unit,$15 each after that). And larger installation base (more console sold) mean more chance they able to sell their hardware and mean more profit for them (bigger hardware made, cheaper cost they are).
No other publisher upset on smaller PS3 base becuase they are selling software, not hardware. Being pirate free, is every publisher dream.
Sorry that my post is long and hard to read (since English is not my native language)
You must accept that it is very easy to install the hack firmware in Wii and made the machine fly with pirate software. Currently, you even no need to burn a disc at all, just put pirate software ISO file in Flash Drive or USB Harddisk and then you Wii can run pirate software like a bird.
XBOX and XBOX360 is also, but harder, becuse of you need to install a MODCHIP.
Because of so many people virtually have no cost on software on these machine (Wii and XBOX) so it wasn't surprise that why 2 of them are lead PS3.
If you don't believe me, just search in Pirate Bay, you will easily find ISO for XBOX and Wii, but you will never find PS3 version.
I think most of software publisher love PS3 in this respect. Why Activision not?, because Activision's killer software is already immune from being pirated (at least mostly) because you need to purchase their hardware+software bundle to play the game! You can't play Guitar Hero without guitar controller, right? Its true that you need to purchase only 1 guitar then able to play later version. But they will keep making their guitar have new feature and let the bundle price so cheap until you decide to purchase their new bundle version (of cause, its mean you not pirate their software).
Since Activision selling hardware controller not software, it will cost them in certain amount (setup cost) to make hardware for each system available (For example: $1,500,000 for 50,000 initial unit,$15 each after that). And larger installation base (more console sold) mean more chance they able to sell their hardware and mean more profit for them (bigger hardware made, cheaper cost they are).
No other publisher upset on smaller PS3 base becuase they are selling software, not hardware. Being pirate free, is every publisher dream.
Sorry that my post is long and hard to read (since English is not my native language)
i have both systems. If ps3 had a better on line system i think this would also help it sell some more units. I play my ps3 5 times a month and my 360 about everyday. But the only reason is to talk to friends in group chats and to have the community. i download movies on the ps3 all the time but its a problem if its HD. Max it will download is 1 mb a sec so it takes the movies for ever to download. Ive waited 5 hours to 2 hours to beable to watch the movie with out it buffering every secound. My connections isnt being boarder lined 360 it takes 15 minutes to wait then i can watch them with no buffering problems. I have 20MB DL 2MB UPLOAD CONNECTION so its never being boardlined. If ps3 can take more in consideration in this area sales make also increase
anonymousdude
Distinguished
- Jun 20, 2009
- 152
- 0
- 18,660
@reichscythe
"And Square is silly enough to make the same mistake twice"
So they will make the same mistake
I prefer the platform that they developed it on.
Xbox games usually have better textures but ps3 games have better lighting.
The best way around this is to buy it for the pc better lighting and textures.
I wasn't saying that FF7 and FF8 were bad games or unsuccessful I meant they had compatibility issues
With MGS4 Kojima took up a dual layer bluray disk which is 50gb. with xbox they use dl dvds or dvd which is about 9gigs. If kojima decide to realease the game on xbox it would take probably 5 discs with some compression albeit light, but compressed audio even a little sounds different from truly uncompressed audio. Some people can't hear the difference but i can.
With FFXIV it is not an exclusive if it is released on pc much like mass effect, bioshock, or inevitably halo 3.
Where do you think all that work that led up to that e3 trailer came from?
The only reason i don't have an xbox is because of its high failure rate mostly, I have a bunch of ps2 games and my ps2 has disc read errors. I also hate Microsoft and my experience with its other products including the zune and the evil that is windows. I will give to you that the Xbox is a good machine and I do enjoy playing it at my friends house as much as they enjoy playing my ps3.
The xbox has better reviews for its games because games like halo had already made a name for themselves and at the worst it would be more halo. Mass effect would be like bioware's other rpg's. Gears of War as bad as unreal tournament. And whats to say microsoft isn't paying game reviewers to give them higher scores. Nowadays with the internet people can just go to metacritic or gamerankings and look at all the scores from various websites and publications, but how many people do you think look at all of them or just look at the average score. I've seen great games given low scores by some noname website that dropped a great games average. Without reading a review you don't know the reason why they gave it that particular score.
FFXIII is a great game no matter what console it is released on but since i have a nice surround system and receiver not the pieces of crap that samsung makes the uncompressed audio really makes a difference. I'm not a big fan of upconversion either because if it is done well it looks fine but with games like halo 3 and cod 4 there is a lot of fuzzy stuff onscreen while games that run natively high def look better and in my experience a upconverted source to 1080p looks roughly the same as maybe 720p or 1080i but is no match for true 1080p.
I have nothing against the xbox as a machine but I really hate microsoft who I nad many of my friends even the ones who own 360"s believe that microsoft is the spawn of the devil and embodies all that is evil in the world IMO and my friends of course.
"And Square is silly enough to make the same mistake twice"
So they will make the same mistake
I prefer the platform that they developed it on.
Xbox games usually have better textures but ps3 games have better lighting.
The best way around this is to buy it for the pc better lighting and textures.
I wasn't saying that FF7 and FF8 were bad games or unsuccessful I meant they had compatibility issues
With MGS4 Kojima took up a dual layer bluray disk which is 50gb. with xbox they use dl dvds or dvd which is about 9gigs. If kojima decide to realease the game on xbox it would take probably 5 discs with some compression albeit light, but compressed audio even a little sounds different from truly uncompressed audio. Some people can't hear the difference but i can.
With FFXIV it is not an exclusive if it is released on pc much like mass effect, bioshock, or inevitably halo 3.
Where do you think all that work that led up to that e3 trailer came from?
The only reason i don't have an xbox is because of its high failure rate mostly, I have a bunch of ps2 games and my ps2 has disc read errors. I also hate Microsoft and my experience with its other products including the zune and the evil that is windows. I will give to you that the Xbox is a good machine and I do enjoy playing it at my friends house as much as they enjoy playing my ps3.
The xbox has better reviews for its games because games like halo had already made a name for themselves and at the worst it would be more halo. Mass effect would be like bioware's other rpg's. Gears of War as bad as unreal tournament. And whats to say microsoft isn't paying game reviewers to give them higher scores. Nowadays with the internet people can just go to metacritic or gamerankings and look at all the scores from various websites and publications, but how many people do you think look at all of them or just look at the average score. I've seen great games given low scores by some noname website that dropped a great games average. Without reading a review you don't know the reason why they gave it that particular score.
FFXIII is a great game no matter what console it is released on but since i have a nice surround system and receiver not the pieces of crap that samsung makes the uncompressed audio really makes a difference. I'm not a big fan of upconversion either because if it is done well it looks fine but with games like halo 3 and cod 4 there is a lot of fuzzy stuff onscreen while games that run natively high def look better and in my experience a upconverted source to 1080p looks roughly the same as maybe 720p or 1080i but is no match for true 1080p.
I have nothing against the xbox as a machine but I really hate microsoft who I nad many of my friends even the ones who own 360"s believe that microsoft is the spawn of the devil and embodies all that is evil in the world IMO and my friends of course.
anonymousdude
Distinguished
- Jun 20, 2009
- 152
- 0
- 18,660
@reichscythe
"And Square is silly enough to make the same mistake twice"
So they will make the same mistake
I prefer the platform that they developed it on.
Xbox games usually have better textures but ps3 games have better lighting.
The best way around this is to buy it for the pc better lighting and textures.
I wasn't saying that FF7 and FF8 were bad games or unsuccessful I meant they had compatibility issues
With MGS4 Kojima took up a dual layer bluray disk which is 50gb. with xbox they use dl dvds or dvd which is about 9gigs. If kojima decide to realease the game on xbox it would take probably 5 discs with some compression albeit light, but compressed audio even a little sounds different from truly uncompressed audio. Some people can't hear the difference but i can.
With FFXIV it is not an exclusive if it is released on pc much like mass effect, bioshock, or inevitably halo 3.
Where do you think all that work that led up to that e3 trailer came from?
The only reason i don't have an xbox is because of its high failure rate mostly, I have a bunch of ps2 games and my ps2 has disc read errors. I also hate Microsoft and my experience with its other products including the zune and the evil that is windows. I will give to you that the Xbox is a good machine and I do enjoy playing it at my friends house as much as they enjoy playing my ps3.
The xbox has better reviews for its games because games like halo had already made a name for themselves and at the worst it would be more halo. Mass effect would be like bioware's other rpg's. Gears of War as bad as unreal tournament. And whats to say microsoft isn't paying game reviewers to give them higher scores. Nowadays with the internet people can just go to metacritic or gamerankings and look at all the scores from various websites and publications, but how many people do you think look at all of them or just look at the average score. I've seen great games given low scores by some noname website that dropped a great games average. Without reading a review you don't know the reason why they gave it that particular score.
FFXIII is a great game no matter what console it is released on but since i have a nice surround system and receiver not the pieces of crap that samsung makes the uncompressed audio really makes a difference. I'm not a big fan of upconversion either because if it is done well it looks fine but with games like halo 3 and cod 4 there is a lot of fuzzy stuff onscreen while games that run natively high def look better and in my experience a upconverted source to 1080p looks roughly the same as maybe 720p or 1080i but is no match for true 1080p.
I have nothing against the xbox as a machine but I really hate microsoft who I nad many of my friends even the ones who own 360"s believe that microsoft is the spawn of the devil and embodies all that is evil in the world IMO and my friends of course.
"And Square is silly enough to make the same mistake twice"
So they will make the same mistake
I prefer the platform that they developed it on.
Xbox games usually have better textures but ps3 games have better lighting.
The best way around this is to buy it for the pc better lighting and textures.
I wasn't saying that FF7 and FF8 were bad games or unsuccessful I meant they had compatibility issues
With MGS4 Kojima took up a dual layer bluray disk which is 50gb. with xbox they use dl dvds or dvd which is about 9gigs. If kojima decide to realease the game on xbox it would take probably 5 discs with some compression albeit light, but compressed audio even a little sounds different from truly uncompressed audio. Some people can't hear the difference but i can.
With FFXIV it is not an exclusive if it is released on pc much like mass effect, bioshock, or inevitably halo 3.
Where do you think all that work that led up to that e3 trailer came from?
The only reason i don't have an xbox is because of its high failure rate mostly, I have a bunch of ps2 games and my ps2 has disc read errors. I also hate Microsoft and my experience with its other products including the zune and the evil that is windows. I will give to you that the Xbox is a good machine and I do enjoy playing it at my friends house as much as they enjoy playing my ps3.
The xbox has better reviews for its games because games like halo had already made a name for themselves and at the worst it would be more halo. Mass effect would be like bioware's other rpg's. Gears of War as bad as unreal tournament. And whats to say microsoft isn't paying game reviewers to give them higher scores. Nowadays with the internet people can just go to metacritic or gamerankings and look at all the scores from various websites and publications, but how many people do you think look at all of them or just look at the average score. I've seen great games given low scores by some noname website that dropped a great games average. Without reading a review you don't know the reason why they gave it that particular score.
FFXIII is a great game no matter what console it is released on but since i have a nice surround system and receiver not the pieces of crap that samsung makes the uncompressed audio really makes a difference. I'm not a big fan of upconversion either because if it is done well it looks fine but with games like halo 3 and cod 4 there is a lot of fuzzy stuff onscreen while games that run natively high def look better and in my experience a upconverted source to 1080p looks roughly the same as maybe 720p or 1080i but is no match for true 1080p.
I have nothing against the xbox as a machine but I really hate microsoft who I nad many of my friends even the ones who own 360"s believe that microsoft is the spawn of the devil and embodies all that is evil in the world IMO and my friends of course.
I find it funny that a number of the people commenting have compared specs between Xbox360 and PS3. Tech specs mean almost nothing in the console world. What matters is how much fun it is to play. If YOUR favorite game is a PS2 exclusive, for instance, what does it matter that the original Xbox had a faster CPU?
Each person's opinion is going to be different on what the best console is. Mine is that the Xbox360 and the PS3 are virtually the same in both pricepoint and fun factor. The average person who is considering buying a PS3 and then takes a look at the Xbox360, for instance, realizes that to get a comparable Xbox360 setup you actually spend MORE in the long-run due to online subscription costs and the price of the wireless adapter for the Xbox360. I own both, and PS3 cost me $475 with an extra controller and an HDMI cable, which is all I needed. Xbox360 cost me a pretty penny... the console was $350 at the time, the wireless adapter, one extra controller, and a subscription to Xbox Live put me at $550.
Even though Xbox 360 cost more, I find it to be more fun due to its dynamic content. Both PS3 and Xbox360 offer casual gaming with PSN and Xbox Live Arcade. I've been having tons of fun recently playing Jak & Daxter: The Precursor Legacy on PS2, which is nowhere near the graphics level of any newer console... but because it's fun, it's what I'm playing. I should mention that I do not own a Wii because the games are shallow and generally are not engrossing.
Each person's opinion is going to be different on what the best console is. Mine is that the Xbox360 and the PS3 are virtually the same in both pricepoint and fun factor. The average person who is considering buying a PS3 and then takes a look at the Xbox360, for instance, realizes that to get a comparable Xbox360 setup you actually spend MORE in the long-run due to online subscription costs and the price of the wireless adapter for the Xbox360. I own both, and PS3 cost me $475 with an extra controller and an HDMI cable, which is all I needed. Xbox360 cost me a pretty penny... the console was $350 at the time, the wireless adapter, one extra controller, and a subscription to Xbox Live put me at $550.
Even though Xbox 360 cost more, I find it to be more fun due to its dynamic content. Both PS3 and Xbox360 offer casual gaming with PSN and Xbox Live Arcade. I've been having tons of fun recently playing Jak & Daxter: The Precursor Legacy on PS2, which is nowhere near the graphics level of any newer console... but because it's fun, it's what I'm playing. I should mention that I do not own a Wii because the games are shallow and generally are not engrossing.
Activision is just bluffing, they don't have much out except for that gimmick guitor hero series, which was made successful by the PS2. AB just wants more profit and cutting a segment of the market off will not sit well as being the largest gaming company because somebody is going to pay for that merger. Blizzard part is mainly PC fans, so there is a lot of PS3 bashing here. (where is my Diablo 3 already)
So, Microsoft 175,000 Xbox 360 units vs Sony 131,000 PS3 means Sony is in serious trouble? Huh? (not to mention 100k+ PS2 consoles sold)
I don't own any console, but Sony's upcoming camera + new controller demo made me excited. I would be surprise if it won't dominate microsoft's laggy (check live demo videos) offering, that seems to need external processing module. I still wonder, how do I trigger anything with microsofts solution.
I don't own any console, but Sony's upcoming camera + new controller demo made me excited. I would be surprise if it won't dominate microsoft's laggy (check live demo videos) offering, that seems to need external processing module. I still wonder, how do I trigger anything with microsofts solution.
They don't have to, since they are making profit. They'd increase the price, if anything.
gamerk316
Distinguished
- Jul 8, 2008
- 325
- 0
- 19,060
You can't ever say the PS3 was a flop; You pay Sony for every Blu-Ray produced from here on out, so it goes as a win as far as Sonys concerned.
The 360 is close to maxed out; that much is clear. The PS3 is simply too dificult to program for though, due to its unique architecture (at least the 360 is PowerPC based...)
The PS3 easily wins the "exclusive games" battle; I owned both (prior to my 4th 360 going dead), and Sony wins the head to head department. If sony finds a way to sell, the PS3 will start to overtake.
I think the biggest problem has become the fact that the PC now overlaps with consoles, and I'm suspecting sales are being hit quite a bit as a result...
The 360 is close to maxed out; that much is clear. The PS3 is simply too dificult to program for though, due to its unique architecture (at least the 360 is PowerPC based...)
The PS3 easily wins the "exclusive games" battle; I owned both (prior to my 4th 360 going dead), and Sony wins the head to head department. If sony finds a way to sell, the PS3 will start to overtake.
I think the biggest problem has become the fact that the PC now overlaps with consoles, and I'm suspecting sales are being hit quite a bit as a result...
cptnjarhead
Distinguished
- Jun 22, 2009
- 131
- 0
- 18,630
From a business point of view, why would a company spend more time and resources developing a game for a console that has a falling market share if the xbox and wii are economically viable to program for and have a strong market? The PS3 is a great console for the consumer, however I believe sony negated the 3rd party in the equation.
crockdaddy
Distinguished
- Apr 20, 2007
- 32
- 0
- 18,580
Seems simple to me. Activision love 'em or hate ... has a massively popular franchise or two that Sony NEEDS to stay viable. Attach rates are not high enough for current PS/3 owners to make up for the lack of console sales.
For the record, I game on a PC primarily. I own a Wii (I should say my wife and kids own a Wii I could care less). I will likely buy a newer 360 this year ...... and will just have to wait for the likely price drops in '10 to get a PS/3 IF I feel the need to get one.
To the guy saying hacking is the main reasons for Wii and 360 success ... I agree there are many more games available for download for Wii and 360 ... but hacking is NOT why those consoles are successful. I mean seriously, the 360 has the HIGHEST purchase rate of any console for games. Besides how many people beyond those whom read a site like Tom's is likely to have a clue at hacking a console??
For the record, I game on a PC primarily. I own a Wii (I should say my wife and kids own a Wii I could care less). I will likely buy a newer 360 this year ...... and will just have to wait for the likely price drops in '10 to get a PS/3 IF I feel the need to get one.
To the guy saying hacking is the main reasons for Wii and 360 success ... I agree there are many more games available for download for Wii and 360 ... but hacking is NOT why those consoles are successful. I mean seriously, the 360 has the HIGHEST purchase rate of any console for games. Besides how many people beyond those whom read a site like Tom's is likely to have a clue at hacking a console??
Dave_69
Distinguished
- Mar 27, 2009
- 68
- 0
- 18,580
IMO, the PS3 represents too much too early. I think it's a great console, my favorite of the bunch, but it's too expensive. And they're right, I bought a PS2 just last year. I can play GH with my kids, God of War (still a great game), GTA, you name it. And some games like Gran Turismo are in HD even. Plus it plays DVDs, has online gameplay through cat-5 cable (I still play Call of Duty 3 occasionally) and has 5.1 optical output for sound. So I think the PS3 could have had a heck of a run if it had been built like the others and cost a bit less.
With no HDMI on my primary HDTV, the PS3 and Blu-Ray in general has limited use here. Not that I wouldn't TAKE one if offered, but the current cost can't be justified. Meanwhile my Xbox 360 is just fine in analog 1080i.
If I do get one, I'll certainly use it, but MY game attach rate may be a touch light, since I'd probably only get PS3 exclusives and the rest would be the Xbox 360 version...
If I do get one, I'll certainly use it, but MY game attach rate may be a touch light, since I'd probably only get PS3 exclusives and the rest would be the Xbox 360 version...
I like the PS3 alot and I wish it was available at a price that didn't make me wince. That being said, Sony is being quite shady and it's having negative consequences for them and deservedly so. Both PS3 and Bluray were Sony's next big moves, and by attaching them at the hip so to speak, both will ultimately succeed or fail based on each other. What did winning the heated HD/Bluray battle do for sony? Very little. People are still largely happy with their DVD players and libraries. Sony anticipated this and built bluray into their ps3, in the hopes that if it is even nearly as successful as ps2, that there will be 1 in most households 4 years after launch, thus solidifying their two target markets that they have pitched all their success in the future upon.
PS3 is superior to Xbox360 in every way though. No thanks microsoft I already own a computer and EVERYTHING in your gaming library is available on my superior machine. But no thanks Sony as well, I don't need to fork cash over to you for a system that's primarily designed to support your Bluray domination plan either.
PS3 is superior to Xbox360 in every way though. No thanks microsoft I already own a computer and EVERYTHING in your gaming library is available on my superior machine. But no thanks Sony as well, I don't need to fork cash over to you for a system that's primarily designed to support your Bluray domination plan either.
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Question Lenovo Yoga book 9i vs. Asus Zenbook duo
- Started by szcad
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Question Question about if an older model laptop with upgraded parts will work as well for video editing
- Started by Reese Miller
- Replies: 3
-
-
Question Transferring iPhone 8 (iOS 14.5) to new 15: Upgrade 8’s iOS & best method of transfer
- Started by autozonejawana
- Replies: 0
Facebook
Twitter