- Status
There were so many good points I had to join to give thumbs up. It's sad they need a fake email just to let me express my opionion. I don't understand why sites with comments want a database full of bogus emails that "look right" to a parser.
I agree that the WRG line were great, hackable (ie: customizable), good equipment. I have at least a half-dozen and will never part with them. But I will never buy a newer model after hearing this news.
And it IS news. It's not a "mistake", it's a planned route of taking more control of the internet experience. Back in the day, IBM sales dept would go to customers and say, well you COULD buy our competitor's equipment, but why take the chance. It was called FUD: Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt and it worked. Cisco is attempting the same game. They'll say, well you COULD buy a cheaper competitor, but our's are monitored and integrated and so on; what if your "cheap" router fails, will it notify them?
Well in my opinion, if you're not monitoring your own routers in-house, I think asking Cicso to do it isn't the solution.
This is the end of Cisco in my mind. I will not buy from them, and I will lay scorn upon those that do, from now on. It is a betrayal akin to finding out about the "pink slime" they've been putting in our hamburger meats. It's shocking that they got away with it, and they must now be punished forever; at the very least as a warning to others not to think along those lines. Cisco is no more.
I agree that the WRG line were great, hackable (ie: customizable), good equipment. I have at least a half-dozen and will never part with them. But I will never buy a newer model after hearing this news.
And it IS news. It's not a "mistake", it's a planned route of taking more control of the internet experience. Back in the day, IBM sales dept would go to customers and say, well you COULD buy our competitor's equipment, but why take the chance. It was called FUD: Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt and it worked. Cisco is attempting the same game. They'll say, well you COULD buy a cheaper competitor, but our's are monitored and integrated and so on; what if your "cheap" router fails, will it notify them?
Well in my opinion, if you're not monitoring your own routers in-house, I think asking Cicso to do it isn't the solution.
This is the end of Cisco in my mind. I will not buy from them, and I will lay scorn upon those that do, from now on. It is a betrayal akin to finding out about the "pink slime" they've been putting in our hamburger meats. It's shocking that they got away with it, and they must now be punished forever; at the very least as a warning to others not to think along those lines. Cisco is no more.
thecolorblue
Honorable
- Jun 5, 2012
- 167
- 0
- 10,630
[citation][nom]kinggremlin[/nom]Only a completely asinine fool would think everyone involved in the decision making processes at Cisco are total retards. You really think Cisco has any interest in monitoring your internet usage so they can cut you off? Can you really be that stupid? Why would Cisco have any interest in doing that?By what screwed up line of reasoning did you use to come that conclusion? How would that in any way promote Cisco products or increase their revenue? I'm really interested to hear why you think Cisco would want to do that, and what financial benefit that would provide to them.[/citation]
kinggremlin
This completely asinine move by Cisco was a land-grab to see what they could get away with. Cisco Corporation pushed a covert firmware upgrade that locked people out of their own routers forcing them the create a cloud account in order to regain access to hardware that they already own. That kind of thing cannot happen by accident. It was an intentional move and by your assessment it was 2 guys in the basement and one marketing underling who pushed that through... get a clue dude.
Step 2... all owners who are now locked out of their hardware are also locked out of the only method to regain access to their own Linksys hardware unless they agree to draconian big-brother TOS that explicitly grants Cisco Corporation the right to monitor internet usage. What part of that TOS do you not understand. It was explicitly included in their TOS as part of a forced move to push all of their customers who own the affected Linksys hardware into accepting the Cisco Cloud agreement which functions only to force customers into that BS TOS and internet usage monitoring by Cisco.
Furthermore the Cisco TOS that Linksys users are forced into accepting in order to regain access to their own hardware explicitly granted Cisco the right to lock the owners of Linksys hardware out of their own hardware... essentially bricking their hardware and knocking out their home network.
Now you come in here claiming what exactly?? that it was all a boo-boo
WOW... yes I suppose the firmware upgrade forcing users into a locked cloud system that can only be unlocked by accepting a draconian TOS granting Cisco the right to monitor internet usage and lock down peoples home networks was all an improbable accident that happened when someone pressed ctrl-alt-delete a few too many times.
what world are you living on kinggremlin?????????
???
kinggremlin
This completely asinine move by Cisco was a land-grab to see what they could get away with. Cisco Corporation pushed a covert firmware upgrade that locked people out of their own routers forcing them the create a cloud account in order to regain access to hardware that they already own. That kind of thing cannot happen by accident. It was an intentional move and by your assessment it was 2 guys in the basement and one marketing underling who pushed that through... get a clue dude.
Step 2... all owners who are now locked out of their hardware are also locked out of the only method to regain access to their own Linksys hardware unless they agree to draconian big-brother TOS that explicitly grants Cisco Corporation the right to monitor internet usage. What part of that TOS do you not understand. It was explicitly included in their TOS as part of a forced move to push all of their customers who own the affected Linksys hardware into accepting the Cisco Cloud agreement which functions only to force customers into that BS TOS and internet usage monitoring by Cisco.
Furthermore the Cisco TOS that Linksys users are forced into accepting in order to regain access to their own hardware explicitly granted Cisco the right to lock the owners of Linksys hardware out of their own hardware... essentially bricking their hardware and knocking out their home network.
Now you come in here claiming what exactly?? that it was all a boo-boo
WOW... yes I suppose the firmware upgrade forcing users into a locked cloud system that can only be unlocked by accepting a draconian TOS granting Cisco the right to monitor internet usage and lock down peoples home networks was all an improbable accident that happened when someone pressed ctrl-alt-delete a few too many times.
what world are you living on kinggremlin?????????
???
kinggremlin
Distinguished
- Jul 14, 2009
- 63
- 0
- 18,580
thecolorblue, all you did was type up a bunch of BS which had nothing to do with what I asked. All I asked was why Cisco would want to do all the garbage you are claiming, and how that would make them money/expand their business.
Try again.
Try again.
They "clarified" their previous ToS. What a crock. Their previous terms were perfectly clear. I will not purchase another Linksys / Cisco product, unless I plan to DD-WRT the thing on day one.
NuclearShadow
Distinguished
- Sep 20, 2007
- 670
- 0
- 18,940
[citation][nom]thecolorblue[/nom]you are a fool apologist for a major corporation that is actively seeking to spy on customer internet history as explicitly stated in its TOS... all the apologetics in the world will not correct the intent to data-mine customer internet usage and if you buy that BS PR damage control put out by CISCO then I've got a bridge to sell you.[/citation]
Okay so let's for one second assume that you are right. 100% right. Now please explain to us what they would do with this data that you so fear them getting?
They are not a government or law enforcement of any kind.
They cannot sell your information without you agreeing which is not in the TOS.
They cannot give any information to the law without the law coming for a warrant first.
So, you really think you and every other common user is so interesting that you just have to be spied on without logical reason? Do you realize how many users and data would be going through even if they wanted spy on everyone it wouldn't be possible and would take years to monitor a full days worth of every action people on those routers take. Or do you have some sort of illusion of grandeur that you think you are special and that Cisco just has to spy on you like your actually worth stalking without a goal.
So, can you address this? If you are so right then this should be no problem for you. If not then just shut up and go back to wearing your tin foil hat in your basement. I am sick of the overly paranoid fools on the internet, grow the F up.
Okay so let's for one second assume that you are right. 100% right. Now please explain to us what they would do with this data that you so fear them getting?
They are not a government or law enforcement of any kind.
They cannot sell your information without you agreeing which is not in the TOS.
They cannot give any information to the law without the law coming for a warrant first.
So, you really think you and every other common user is so interesting that you just have to be spied on without logical reason? Do you realize how many users and data would be going through even if they wanted spy on everyone it wouldn't be possible and would take years to monitor a full days worth of every action people on those routers take. Or do you have some sort of illusion of grandeur that you think you are special and that Cisco just has to spy on you like your actually worth stalking without a goal.
So, can you address this? If you are so right then this should be no problem for you. If not then just shut up and go back to wearing your tin foil hat in your basement. I am sick of the overly paranoid fools on the internet, grow the F up.
[citation][nom]thecolorblue[/nom]you are a fool apologist for a major corporation that is actively seeking to spy on customer internet history as explicitly stated in its TOS... all the apologetics in the world will not correct the intent to data-mine customer internet usage and if you buy that BS PR damage control put out by CISCO then I've got a bridge to sell you.[/citation]
Another Reddit user... why on earth would Cisco want to "actively seek to spy on customer internet history"? The TOS was apparently just a legal cut and paste job from a lazy legal department. Cisco never spied on users' internet history, never required you to sign up for their cloud service, and never required the cloud service to configure the router! It's all been an imaginary story by bored tech writers. The cloud service thing is only to let you alter router settings from anywhere via the Internet, that's it. What's it like living your life imagining your important enough that people are conspiring to spy on you and that you're brilliant enough to have figured out the conspiracy while no one else has?
Another Reddit user... why on earth would Cisco want to "actively seek to spy on customer internet history"? The TOS was apparently just a legal cut and paste job from a lazy legal department. Cisco never spied on users' internet history, never required you to sign up for their cloud service, and never required the cloud service to configure the router! It's all been an imaginary story by bored tech writers. The cloud service thing is only to let you alter router settings from anywhere via the Internet, that's it. What's it like living your life imagining your important enough that people are conspiring to spy on you and that you're brilliant enough to have figured out the conspiracy while no one else has?
[citation][nom]thecolorblue[/nom]Cisco had the intention of mointoring internet usage and forcing all users to use their cloud based solution which provided the added value of having Cisco monitor your internet usage as well as granting Cisco the power to kill your hardware and cut you off from the internet.Those actions were the result of a Deliberate Decision Making Process. It was no Accident. It was not a Mistake. They were stupid to try it but in doing so Cisco has revealed what it actually would like to do. They got caught with their pants around their ankles and now they are "sorry" and "it was a misunderstanding" and they are in emergency PR damage control mode. It is all meaningless at this point... their intentions have been laid bare. Cisco cannot be trusted.Only a completely asinine fool would trust a corporation like that moving forward. so yeah, I'm calling you a fool.[/citation]
1. Why would Cisco want to monitor your Internet usage? No one cares about your Internet usage.
2. Cisco never had the power to kill your Internet, blah, blah, blah. People with poor reading comprehension who read a poorly worded TOS thought the disclaimer applied TO THE CLOUD SERVICE applied TO THEIR ROUTERS, with hilarious, paranoid, tin foil hat results.
3. "Those actions were the result of a Deliberate Decision Making Process. It was no Accident. It was not a Mistake. " Yes... Cisco was plotting to take over the world and a bunch of 20-somethings on the Internet figured it all out and foiled them! Dude - life is not like a Scooby-doo episode.
4. " They got caught with their pants around their ankles", Unless you can show even one packet of private data went from the router to Cisco, no one has gotten caught doing anything.
5. Good luck living your life without corporations from now on. You may have to become roommates with Richard Stallman though.
1. Why would Cisco want to monitor your Internet usage? No one cares about your Internet usage.
2. Cisco never had the power to kill your Internet, blah, blah, blah. People with poor reading comprehension who read a poorly worded TOS thought the disclaimer applied TO THE CLOUD SERVICE applied TO THEIR ROUTERS, with hilarious, paranoid, tin foil hat results.
3. "Those actions were the result of a Deliberate Decision Making Process. It was no Accident. It was not a Mistake. " Yes... Cisco was plotting to take over the world and a bunch of 20-somethings on the Internet figured it all out and foiled them! Dude - life is not like a Scooby-doo episode.
4. " They got caught with their pants around their ankles", Unless you can show even one packet of private data went from the router to Cisco, no one has gotten caught doing anything.
5. Good luck living your life without corporations from now on. You may have to become roommates with Richard Stallman though.
[citation][nom]upthumb[/nom]But I will never buy a newer model after hearing this news. And it IS news. It's not a "mistake", it's a planned route of taking more control of the internet experience....Cisco is attempting the same game. They'll say, well you COULD buy a cheaper competitor, but our's are monitored and integrated and so on; what if your "cheap" router fails, will it notify them? Well in my opinion, if you're not monitoring your own routers in-house, I think asking Cicso to do it isn't the solution.This is the end of Cisco in my mind. I will not buy from them, and I will lay scorn upon those that do, from now on. It is a betrayal akin to finding out about the "pink slime" they've been putting in our hamburger meats. It's shocking that they got away with it, and they must now be punished forever; at the very least as a warning to others not to think along those lines. Cisco is no more.[/citation]
1. What's wrong with Cisco doing it? Do you do your own taxes, mow your own lawn, do all your own electrical work and plumbing, cook all your own meals, grow your own food? Personally scan all your own software with a hex editor for viruses and malware? There's nothing wrong with employing Cisco's service, just like there's nothing wrong with trusting McAfee or Norton or Eset or whomever with compiling a list of virus signatures and scanning your system for them.
2. Why do you feel the need to "scorn" those who make a different decision than you do? If you don't want to use a Cisco router, then don't use a Cisco router. Looking down your nose at everyone else to create a feeling of smug superiority in yourself is just pathetic, especially since you have a lot of the facts wrong in the first place.
3. There's nothing wrong with the "pink slime" in hamburger meat either. It's connective tissue processed with ammonia hydroxide (that's even used in pudding) and scientists say it's safe (and lean).
http
/dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/why-im-o-k-with-pink-slime-in-ground-beef/
http/maureenogle.com/2012/03/28/want-a-little-history-with-that-pink-slime/
It's "shocking" that Cisco got away with... what? Offering a cloud service? Pushing an update to people with automatic updates turned on? Writing a TOS that was going to confuse impressionable kids on the Internet? What have they done that they must be "punished forever"?????
1. What's wrong with Cisco doing it? Do you do your own taxes, mow your own lawn, do all your own electrical work and plumbing, cook all your own meals, grow your own food? Personally scan all your own software with a hex editor for viruses and malware? There's nothing wrong with employing Cisco's service, just like there's nothing wrong with trusting McAfee or Norton or Eset or whomever with compiling a list of virus signatures and scanning your system for them.
2. Why do you feel the need to "scorn" those who make a different decision than you do? If you don't want to use a Cisco router, then don't use a Cisco router. Looking down your nose at everyone else to create a feeling of smug superiority in yourself is just pathetic, especially since you have a lot of the facts wrong in the first place.
3. There's nothing wrong with the "pink slime" in hamburger meat either. It's connective tissue processed with ammonia hydroxide (that's even used in pudding) and scientists say it's safe (and lean).
http
/dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/why-im-o-k-with-pink-slime-in-ground-beef/http
/maureenogle.com/2012/03/28/want-a-little-history-with-that-pink-slime/It's "shocking" that Cisco got away with... what? Offering a cloud service? Pushing an update to people with automatic updates turned on? Writing a TOS that was going to confuse impressionable kids on the Internet? What have they done that they must be "punished forever"?????
thecolorblue
Honorable
- Jun 5, 2012
- 167
- 0
- 10,630
Kinggremlin - rather than address the actual fact of what Cisco actually did in the real world you create a straw man target and take that down instead... thereafter claiming victory. Cisco’s motivations for taking the actions they did with their Linksys products is unknowable outside of Cisco… and frankly irrelevant.
How about you address what Cisco actually did rather than your irrelevant straw-man.
http/youtu.be/v5vzCmURh7o
Fact 1) Cisco pushed an automatic firmware update on home Linksys routers that locked those routers down - people could no longer access their router settings… but never fear as they provided an option (below)
Fact 2) Cisco implemented a cloud-based system as their solution for accessing your router which users were still locked out of & by extension still locked out of their own Linksys router sitting on their desk at home… except our big brother Cisco decided to play nice and give us a way to access our routers (below)
Fact 3) The only way to gain access to Cisco's cloud-based system (and thereby gain access to your own Linksys hardware) was to AGREE to Cisco’s draconian TOS for their cloud-based system
Excerpts from the Cisco Orwellian cloud-based TOS that customers were forced to accept lest be locked out of their own Linksys hardware:
*Cisco has the right to "keep track of... network traffic and internet history"
http/www.extremetech.com/computing/132142-ciscos-cloud-vision-mandatory-monetized-and-killed-at-their-discretion?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=ciscos-cloud-vision-mandatory-monetized-and-killed-at-their-discretion?onswipe_redirect=no
Full Excerpt: "we reserve the right to take such action as we (i) deem necessary or (ii) are otherwise required to take by a third party or court of competent jurisdiction, in each case in relation to your access or use or misuse of such content or data. Such action may include, without limitation, discontinuing your use of the Service immediately without prior notice to you, and without refund or compensation to you."
The TOS then continues to grant Cisco the right to: “[discontinue] your use of the Service immediately without prior notice to you, and without refund or compensation to you."
Since the firmware upgrade forced use of the cloud-based “service” in order to access your router, locking Linksys users out of Cisco’s service effectively kills their Linksys Networking Gear.
It could not be more clear. Address the actions that Cisco intentionally did, not your straw man, and then we have something to talk about.
How about you address what Cisco actually did rather than your irrelevant straw-man.
http
/youtu.be/v5vzCmURh7oFact 1) Cisco pushed an automatic firmware update on home Linksys routers that locked those routers down - people could no longer access their router settings… but never fear as they provided an option (below)
Fact 2) Cisco implemented a cloud-based system as their solution for accessing your router which users were still locked out of & by extension still locked out of their own Linksys router sitting on their desk at home… except our big brother Cisco decided to play nice and give us a way to access our routers (below)
Fact 3) The only way to gain access to Cisco's cloud-based system (and thereby gain access to your own Linksys hardware) was to AGREE to Cisco’s draconian TOS for their cloud-based system
Excerpts from the Cisco Orwellian cloud-based TOS that customers were forced to accept lest be locked out of their own Linksys hardware:
*Cisco has the right to "keep track of... network traffic and internet history"
http
/www.extremetech.com/computing/132142-ciscos-cloud-vision-mandatory-monetized-and-killed-at-their-discretion?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=ciscos-cloud-vision-mandatory-monetized-and-killed-at-their-discretion?onswipe_redirect=noFull Excerpt: "we reserve the right to take such action as we (i) deem necessary or (ii) are otherwise required to take by a third party or court of competent jurisdiction, in each case in relation to your access or use or misuse of such content or data. Such action may include, without limitation, discontinuing your use of the Service immediately without prior notice to you, and without refund or compensation to you."
The TOS then continues to grant Cisco the right to: “[discontinue] your use of the Service immediately without prior notice to you, and without refund or compensation to you."
Since the firmware upgrade forced use of the cloud-based “service” in order to access your router, locking Linksys users out of Cisco’s service effectively kills their Linksys Networking Gear.
It could not be more clear. Address the actions that Cisco intentionally did, not your straw man, and then we have something to talk about.
thecolorblue
Honorable
- Jun 5, 2012
- 167
- 0
- 10,630
Lots of personal attacks there NuclearShadow but I’ll address your main points nonetheless.
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom] Now please explain to us what they would do with this data. [/citation]
I can only present possibilities as I do not work for Cisco or Linksy, although I might ask you to explain why you would freely sacrifice liberty and privacy to Cisco? Some possibilities however:
*Data Mining for Profit & other potential market insights
*collaborating with the NSA
https/www.eff.org/press/releases/three-nsa-whistleblowers-back-effs-lawsuit-over-governments-massive-spying-program
http/www.democracynow.org/2012/4/20/exclusive_national_security_agency_whistleblower_william
http/www.democracynow.org/2012/4/20/we_do_not_live_in_a
http/www.democracynow.org/2012/4/20/whistleblower_the_nsa_is_lying_us
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom] They are not a government or law enforcement of any kind. [/citation]
Was AT&T a government or Law Enforcement agency of any kind when the NSA installed a listening room to all bay-area traffic? (Check out the EFF link above and the democracynow links above)
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom] They cannot give any information to the law without the law coming for a warrant first. [/citation]
That is the assumption that most Americans make regarding their civil liberties but it is frankly not true. FISA Amendments & CISPA
http/www.democracynow.org/2012/5/24/senate_advances_expanded_orwellian_govt_surveillance
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom] So, you really think you and every other common user is so interesting that you just have to be spied on without logical reason? [/citation]
http/www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/
http/www.democracynow.org/2012/4/23/more_secrets_on_growing_state_surveillance
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom]
Do you realize how many users and data would be going through even if they wanted spy on everyone it wouldn't be possible and would take years to monitor a full days worth of every action people on those routers take. [/citation]
This comment is amusing because this is old news and the US Govt has built a facility to do just that. Same 2 links as directly above as well as Google for reference.
You may be sick of paranoid fools on the internet, who isn’t. But you don’t just get to throw that label around willy-nilly and declare victory.
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” - Benjamin Franklin
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom] Now please explain to us what they would do with this data. [/citation]
I can only present possibilities as I do not work for Cisco or Linksy, although I might ask you to explain why you would freely sacrifice liberty and privacy to Cisco? Some possibilities however:
*Data Mining for Profit & other potential market insights
*collaborating with the NSA
https
/www.eff.org/press/releases/three-nsa-whistleblowers-back-effs-lawsuit-over-governments-massive-spying-programhttp
/www.democracynow.org/2012/4/20/exclusive_national_security_agency_whistleblower_williamhttp
/www.democracynow.org/2012/4/20/we_do_not_live_in_ahttp
/www.democracynow.org/2012/4/20/whistleblower_the_nsa_is_lying_us[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom] They are not a government or law enforcement of any kind. [/citation]
Was AT&T a government or Law Enforcement agency of any kind when the NSA installed a listening room to all bay-area traffic? (Check out the EFF link above and the democracynow links above)
[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom] They cannot give any information to the law without the law coming for a warrant first. [/citation]
That is the assumption that most Americans make regarding their civil liberties but it is frankly not true. FISA Amendments & CISPA
http
/www.democracynow.org/2012/5/24/senate_advances_expanded_orwellian_govt_surveillance[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom] So, you really think you and every other common user is so interesting that you just have to be spied on without logical reason? [/citation]
http
/www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/http
/www.democracynow.org/2012/4/23/more_secrets_on_growing_state_surveillance[citation][nom]NuclearShadow[/nom]
Do you realize how many users and data would be going through even if they wanted spy on everyone it wouldn't be possible and would take years to monitor a full days worth of every action people on those routers take. [/citation]
This comment is amusing because this is old news and the US Govt has built a facility to do just that. Same 2 links as directly above as well as Google for reference.
You may be sick of paranoid fools on the internet, who isn’t. But you don’t just get to throw that label around willy-nilly and declare victory.
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.” - Benjamin Franklin
All you fools saying 'honest mistake' or 'they trying to fix it', could you be any more stupid? They tried to pull a fast one. Tried to do something truly crooked here and the ONLY reason they backpedaled was because the backlash was above the threshold of acceptable opposition for them. In other words, it wasn't paying off. People that accept these scams as innocent are part of the problem. Wake the !@#$ up. Only a naive fool believes any corporation gives a damn about them. Unreal.
Then again if you like being taken advantage of...
Then again if you like being taken advantage of...
jkflipflop98
Distinguished
- Feb 3, 2006
- 207
- 0
- 18,830
kristoffe
Distinguished
- Jul 15, 2010
- 47
- 0
- 18,580
i got a gb cisco router and love it, its range, style, interface, and now i know not to update its firmware....ever. wtf such a shame companies are trying to legally grease us up for rights to spy and sell info. a new world trend thanks to bad people and technophobes.
jungleboogiemonster
Distinguished
- Aug 19, 2007
- 42
- 0
- 18,580
After reading through most of the comments I'm left wondering if some were left by Cisco shills. The writing and grammar of the pro-Cisco posts isn't typical for Tom's and leaves me wondering if they weren't the work of Cisco's PR department. I'm sure they'll down vote my observation, but whatever.
Backpedaling only works on the gullible. Nothing will ever convince me to trust this company again, or to buy their products again. It's just that simple.
- Status
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Question Need a substitute for my Galaxy Book 2!
- Started by hunnu
- Replies: 0
-
-
Question What games are good right now?
- Started by waxon
- Replies: 0
-
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
-
Facebook
Twitter