EagerDragon
Sep 9, 03:06 PM
Well, wasn't the iMac G5 restricted to 2GB, yet it was a 64-bit processor? A 32-bit computer can take up to 4GB, but due to the hardware Apple was/is using, they can't even take this.
What i find odd is that it appears to allow 1 or 2GB in either slot, but no more than 3GB in total. That is obviously the maximum the board can take, but it would have made a little more sense to allow 2GB in each. This will not really effect it's ability to run 64-bit software, just restricts how much memory can be used. Remember that you have been able to get AMD systems with 64-bit processors for some time now. They won't take more than 4GB, but will allow you to run 64-bit OSes and Apps.
I'm hoping by the time I'm after an iMac, it will take at least 4GB, have Blu-Ray as an option, (although I may opt for standard Superdrive if it is an option and buy a Mac compatible external later), include bigger hard drives and stick to a similar price point to now.
I'm tempted by the 20" now, but am not buying yet and would want about 320-400GB in there for the same price, perhaps even 2GB RAM. I've got time to wait however.
I could be wrong but...I think Manic did hit it on the head. I think some of the hardware is still 32 bits. If the memory address leads are there for 3 Gigs then they are there to the max of 4 Gigs, above that is anyones guess. Yes it is very strange since either slot can take the 2 gig chip.
Obviously the Mac Pro does not have that issue.
What i find odd is that it appears to allow 1 or 2GB in either slot, but no more than 3GB in total. That is obviously the maximum the board can take, but it would have made a little more sense to allow 2GB in each. This will not really effect it's ability to run 64-bit software, just restricts how much memory can be used. Remember that you have been able to get AMD systems with 64-bit processors for some time now. They won't take more than 4GB, but will allow you to run 64-bit OSes and Apps.
I'm hoping by the time I'm after an iMac, it will take at least 4GB, have Blu-Ray as an option, (although I may opt for standard Superdrive if it is an option and buy a Mac compatible external later), include bigger hard drives and stick to a similar price point to now.
I'm tempted by the 20" now, but am not buying yet and would want about 320-400GB in there for the same price, perhaps even 2GB RAM. I've got time to wait however.
I could be wrong but...I think Manic did hit it on the head. I think some of the hardware is still 32 bits. If the memory address leads are there for 3 Gigs then they are there to the max of 4 Gigs, above that is anyones guess. Yes it is very strange since either slot can take the 2 gig chip.
Obviously the Mac Pro does not have that issue.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 29, 12:47 AM
They've rested on laurels for a long time now.
PC sales slump will likely bring Windows down too (http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-20058038-75.html)
April 28, 2011 4:00 AM PDT
by Jay Greene, CNET
"...Windows will no longer generate the sort of buzz that keeps investors excited. And the recent decline in PC sales is ominous. ..."
This article points out that Microsoft has a hard time with large numbers of pirated copies of Windows being used out there. It made me think that there are probably people knowingly running prated copies of Windows, who visit sites like macrumors to try and champion their beloved Windows. LOL. I'm sure it happens.
PC sales slump will likely bring Windows down too (http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-20058038-75.html)
April 28, 2011 4:00 AM PDT
by Jay Greene, CNET
"...Windows will no longer generate the sort of buzz that keeps investors excited. And the recent decline in PC sales is ominous. ..."
This article points out that Microsoft has a hard time with large numbers of pirated copies of Windows being used out there. It made me think that there are probably people knowingly running prated copies of Windows, who visit sites like macrumors to try and champion their beloved Windows. LOL. I'm sure it happens.
elgrecomac
Mar 29, 12:31 PM
First let mes start by saying I use and like Microsoft products: Office Visio, MS Project and Windows 7 (under Fusion...the Vista they SHOULD HAVE released). I also have an Apple MPB, 30" Cinema display, iP4(jailbroken, of course), iP2, airport express and extreme and , if we include my wife's computer, a 27" iMac.
But when I see an article predicting MS will dominate the smartphone market in 3 years, well, I find it totally amusing given Apple and Android's overall adoption rate today and the the fact that Apple, more than any company on the planet, really understands the 'user experience'. People like the iPhone and iPad not only because Apple Marketing is extraordinary but also, the SOFTWARE is great and the App Store is not bad either. After 25+years of being force-fed a weak OS (Windows, Windows 95, XP and Vista) I am not one to bet the future on Microsoft's ability to write a great, wildly accepted OS on any platform.
:cool:
But when I see an article predicting MS will dominate the smartphone market in 3 years, well, I find it totally amusing given Apple and Android's overall adoption rate today and the the fact that Apple, more than any company on the planet, really understands the 'user experience'. People like the iPhone and iPad not only because Apple Marketing is extraordinary but also, the SOFTWARE is great and the App Store is not bad either. After 25+years of being force-fed a weak OS (Windows, Windows 95, XP and Vista) I am not one to bet the future on Microsoft's ability to write a great, wildly accepted OS on any platform.
:cool:
Chupa Chupa
Sep 5, 02:04 PM
So this tells us as much as we already knew really, only confirms the movie service. Now the question is...is the service for streaming to your home TV via a new set top box or is this service for the iPod...or both.
I don't see how Apple can legitimately sell the service for iPod unless they are going to come out with a WS iPod. The novelty of watching video on the iPods 2" screen has worn off.
That said...glad I sold both my 4gb nano and the 2 giger I got with the Mac to School promo. A black anodized nano would be cool. Just hope they come out with some male colors. The iPod mini colors were so fraking wimpy.
I don't see how Apple can legitimately sell the service for iPod unless they are going to come out with a WS iPod. The novelty of watching video on the iPods 2" screen has worn off.
That said...glad I sold both my 4gb nano and the 2 giger I got with the Mac to School promo. A black anodized nano would be cool. Just hope they come out with some male colors. The iPod mini colors were so fraking wimpy.
Alcibar
Apr 23, 09:08 AM
Back lit keyboards are great for long flights where they turn out the lights.
mrkramer
Apr 25, 03:13 AM
i thought this from my first post, but his join date is 08, and he's a regular. that is what has me thinking that what he is saying is really how he thinks/acts.
I looked through some of his older posts, and while none of them are quite as obvious about how shallow and uncaring he is you can tell that he probably doesn't include the whole story. For example, he likes to argue with his neighbors (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=978345&highlight=) I'm guessing that we only got half the story in that thread. Sounds like he was pretty rude in an Apple store. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=644656&highlight=) and one quote from that thread:
I want the genius I dealt with to get in a car wreck tonight. I want to deal with the genius you got.
Don
plus parking in a handicapped spot. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=928429&highlight=) So based on past examples of his attitude here, I think this is really the way he thinks, not just an attempt to troll.
I looked through some of his older posts, and while none of them are quite as obvious about how shallow and uncaring he is you can tell that he probably doesn't include the whole story. For example, he likes to argue with his neighbors (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=978345&highlight=) I'm guessing that we only got half the story in that thread. Sounds like he was pretty rude in an Apple store. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=644656&highlight=) and one quote from that thread:
I want the genius I dealt with to get in a car wreck tonight. I want to deal with the genius you got.
Don
plus parking in a handicapped spot. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=928429&highlight=) So based on past examples of his attitude here, I think this is really the way he thinks, not just an attempt to troll.
asdf542
Apr 14, 12:10 PM
Any thunderbolt -> USB3 adapters out there? be useful for people who have 2011 macbooks...
( I know there's USB3 -> Thunderbolt connectors.. )
So where exactly did you find these?
Thunderbolt = 10 Gbps (right now, will scale even larger in the future)
USB 3.0 = 5 Gbps
There will never be a USB 3.0 to Thunderbolt adapter, there will be Thunderbolt to USB 3.0 adapter.
Drat, I just bought a MBP, first laptop upgrade in 4 years :(
Hopefully we get a Thunderbolt-to-USB3 connector.
Don't worry, with Thunderbolt you essentially get an endless amount of options of ports. FireWire, USB 1-3, eSata, etc. It's only a matter of time until these adapters enter the market.
( I know there's USB3 -> Thunderbolt connectors.. )
So where exactly did you find these?
Thunderbolt = 10 Gbps (right now, will scale even larger in the future)
USB 3.0 = 5 Gbps
There will never be a USB 3.0 to Thunderbolt adapter, there will be Thunderbolt to USB 3.0 adapter.
Drat, I just bought a MBP, first laptop upgrade in 4 years :(
Hopefully we get a Thunderbolt-to-USB3 connector.
Don't worry, with Thunderbolt you essentially get an endless amount of options of ports. FireWire, USB 1-3, eSata, etc. It's only a matter of time until these adapters enter the market.
turbobass
Mar 22, 08:45 PM
I just want to say a big "AMERICA, **** YEAH!" about this ...
But also I wanted to say we should be rewarding WIRELESS protocols. ThunderBolt = Fast, great. Polite golf clap. No AMERICA **** YEAH for ThunderBolt. Everything should be WIRELESS now. 2011 baby!:mad:
But also I wanted to say we should be rewarding WIRELESS protocols. ThunderBolt = Fast, great. Polite golf clap. No AMERICA **** YEAH for ThunderBolt. Everything should be WIRELESS now. 2011 baby!:mad:
scu
Oct 27, 10:17 AM
I'm a Green Peace supporter, but with Bush in the Whitehouse, don't they have bigger fish to fry?
I agree. Apple is in the spotlight a great deal so they are using this as a method to market themselves.
I agree. Apple is in the spotlight a great deal so they are using this as a method to market themselves.
Flowbee
Aug 31, 07:26 PM
$14.99 for new movies, but $9.99 for older films supposedly.
Some movies aren't much longer than hour long TV shows, and people have been downloading those regularly from iTunes. And like I said, there are a lot of people out there already downloading movies from the internet. My guess is there are also a lot of people who would love to have an easy option to get their movies online, but aren't tech savvy enough to know what bit-torrent is, or where to find illegal torrent sites, etc. Those types of people would probably jump all over an easy to access and use movie downlaod site. iTunes already has a great reputation, so consumer comfort is high with Apple in that regard.
I've said it before and I'll say it again... it's really easy to hook an iPod up to a TV (http://podophile.com/2006/08/16/watch-ipod-videos-on-your-tv/) to play videos. Just one cable. You're not limited to the iPod screen or your computer screen. Download movie>copy to iPod>plug into any TV with composite video and audio jacks (yellow, red, white). It's not DVD quality, but it's pretty good. Apple could certainly make it better while still keeping download times reasonable. I downloaded the second season of Lost - all 24 episodes - from the iTMS in less than 4 hours (I'm not sure how much less because I went out while they were downloading). Anyway, that's around 1,032 minutes of video. I'm guessing Apple could raise the video quality and still keep the d/l time of a 120 minute movie to under an hour, which would be reasonable, IMO.
$10 - $15 movie downloads won't replace Netflix for me, but buying DVDs is now a thing of the past. In fact, I'm in the process of selling my prized DVD collection (http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZdz-2000QQhtZ-1). I look forward to downloadable "rentals."
Some movies aren't much longer than hour long TV shows, and people have been downloading those regularly from iTunes. And like I said, there are a lot of people out there already downloading movies from the internet. My guess is there are also a lot of people who would love to have an easy option to get their movies online, but aren't tech savvy enough to know what bit-torrent is, or where to find illegal torrent sites, etc. Those types of people would probably jump all over an easy to access and use movie downlaod site. iTunes already has a great reputation, so consumer comfort is high with Apple in that regard.
I've said it before and I'll say it again... it's really easy to hook an iPod up to a TV (http://podophile.com/2006/08/16/watch-ipod-videos-on-your-tv/) to play videos. Just one cable. You're not limited to the iPod screen or your computer screen. Download movie>copy to iPod>plug into any TV with composite video and audio jacks (yellow, red, white). It's not DVD quality, but it's pretty good. Apple could certainly make it better while still keeping download times reasonable. I downloaded the second season of Lost - all 24 episodes - from the iTMS in less than 4 hours (I'm not sure how much less because I went out while they were downloading). Anyway, that's around 1,032 minutes of video. I'm guessing Apple could raise the video quality and still keep the d/l time of a 120 minute movie to under an hour, which would be reasonable, IMO.
$10 - $15 movie downloads won't replace Netflix for me, but buying DVDs is now a thing of the past. In fact, I'm in the process of selling my prized DVD collection (http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZdz-2000QQhtZ-1). I look forward to downloadable "rentals."
nfable
Mar 30, 11:38 AM
It seems that App on its own is generic, but the combination with another word to define a particular thing is not... see
Lady + Gaga
Best + Buy
Fack + Book
Micro + Soft
General + Electric
Pintos + Cheese .. okay, maybe not that
Lady + Gaga
Best + Buy
Fack + Book
Micro + Soft
General + Electric
Pintos + Cheese .. okay, maybe not that
etoiles
Sep 15, 07:15 PM
It's a stupid law and not enforced. I talk on my phone all the time, while driving a stick shift with no problems. You just have to be willing to take the phone away from your ear when you need two hands.
...this law just got passed (today?). It won't be enforced until July next year, I think.
I wouldn't say it is stupid. The other day, I saw a woman driving a big SUV, a cellphone in one hand and an icecream in the other :eek:
...this law just got passed (today?). It won't be enforced until July next year, I think.
I wouldn't say it is stupid. The other day, I saw a woman driving a big SUV, a cellphone in one hand and an icecream in the other :eek:
chedda
Apr 19, 07:21 AM
If they try shafting apple on parts i'm sure another crippling law suit would occur. Isn't apple now capable of making it's own chips didn't they buy up something ? Lot's of telephones and all the tablets are mac copies to some degree i suppose it's the best form of flattery, most people see this.If i'm right all these items are at a lower price point than apple ? I mean come on you would never pay more than an apple product for an item which is heavily influenced right ?
Front page of The New York
toddybody
Apr 30, 08:06 PM
not as cpu/gpu demanding
Compared to what?
Its MUCH more "cpu/gpu" demanding than say
28, 2009 in New York#39;s Times
796 Newspaper Front Pages
[Images - Front page New York
[Images - Front page New York
New York Times Front Page,
Compared to what?
Its MUCH more "cpu/gpu" demanding than say
BornAgainMac
Aug 23, 05:53 PM
May be Apple also figured if they settle now, may be Creative could use this precedence to sue Microsoft and other competitors over their UI and make them pay for licenses too.
That would put a nice hit on the smaller competitors. Nice move, Apple!
That would put a nice hit on the smaller competitors. Nice move, Apple!
BRLawyer
Apr 28, 04:03 PM
"Awesome?"
*jumps into Windows 7 in Parallels to check it out again*
"Awesome???" :confused:
Awesome to those used to sub-par products...
The perfect analogy would be you and your lazy cousin: you pass school every year with excellent grades and get normal Christmas presents since this is your expected performance.
But when your lazy/stupid cousin, who has failed school two or three years in a row, passes with reasonable grades, he gets a Ferrari...get it? :rolleyes:
*jumps into Windows 7 in Parallels to check it out again*
"Awesome???" :confused:
Awesome to those used to sub-par products...
The perfect analogy would be you and your lazy cousin: you pass school every year with excellent grades and get normal Christmas presents since this is your expected performance.
But when your lazy/stupid cousin, who has failed school two or three years in a row, passes with reasonable grades, he gets a Ferrari...get it? :rolleyes:
aristotle
Nov 13, 07:07 PM
As a professional developer, I do need to point a couple of items out…
The link that DARING FIREBALL points to (mentioned earlier in this thread) sighting "Public APIs" is not an ADC documentation site.
One of the Desktop APIs being used (sited via the Public API link) is being used in a manner that is specifically reaching into "/System/Library/CoreServices/CoreTypes.bundle/Contents/Resources", this is a very large red flag… Your reaching
into someone else's bundle here.
The other Desktop API is requesting the icon of a document type - I would sure be peeved if I found someone else's Desktop application broadcasting one of *MY* hand made graphics or icons out to their iPhone application.
Regardless, Both of the API being used to obtain the graphics/icons are being called are from the Mac OS X Desktop SDK, not from the iPhone SDK. In addition, the result is being broadcast out to another machine (the phone), an image they don't hold rights to.
Just because you can get hold of an arbitrary image (including a users document) via a "Public" API, doesn't give you the right to use it without permission.
Thank you. You said it better that I could right now as I'm trying to fight off a cold. :o
I'm also a professional developer for that other platform with a monopoly in the desktop market (windows client/server). I've only dabbled with OS X but the general principles are the same regardless of whether you are using OS X APIs or Win32. Just because an API can give you access to an image, it does not mean that you can use it wherever however you wish.
If I was an icon artist, I might be upset if my icons were being used on an iPhone app which were only licensed for use in a specific desktop app whether directly or indirectly because it was set as the default icon for a data type on the server.
The link that DARING FIREBALL points to (mentioned earlier in this thread) sighting "Public APIs" is not an ADC documentation site.
One of the Desktop APIs being used (sited via the Public API link) is being used in a manner that is specifically reaching into "/System/Library/CoreServices/CoreTypes.bundle/Contents/Resources", this is a very large red flag… Your reaching
into someone else's bundle here.
The other Desktop API is requesting the icon of a document type - I would sure be peeved if I found someone else's Desktop application broadcasting one of *MY* hand made graphics or icons out to their iPhone application.
Regardless, Both of the API being used to obtain the graphics/icons are being called are from the Mac OS X Desktop SDK, not from the iPhone SDK. In addition, the result is being broadcast out to another machine (the phone), an image they don't hold rights to.
Just because you can get hold of an arbitrary image (including a users document) via a "Public" API, doesn't give you the right to use it without permission.
Thank you. You said it better that I could right now as I'm trying to fight off a cold. :o
I'm also a professional developer for that other platform with a monopoly in the desktop market (windows client/server). I've only dabbled with OS X but the general principles are the same regardless of whether you are using OS X APIs or Win32. Just because an API can give you access to an image, it does not mean that you can use it wherever however you wish.
If I was an icon artist, I might be upset if my icons were being used on an iPhone app which were only licensed for use in a specific desktop app whether directly or indirectly because it was set as the default icon for a data type on the server.
kurosov
Mar 29, 11:41 AM
So basically their prediction is that all those with a current nokia phone, even non smartphones will simply switch over to the wp7 nokia phones by 2015?
not likely.
not likely.
Popeye206
Apr 22, 08:51 AM
You never OWNED any of this stuff. You owned the physical media, and you had an unlimited license to you. The technology is just clarifying this.
If you had actually owned it, you could have copied it as much as you wanted-- legally-- and resold the copies to others. You have been capable of doing this, but it was illegal; it also was difficult to enforce the law. Now the technology is actually starting to match your legal rights. It's actually wonderful. You are not losing anything you had legally, but the true owners (the content creators and the people who support them financially) can stop getting ripped off by criminals.
+1 LOL!
Have to laugh... so many people here are upset about nothing. All it says in this rumor is that you would have the option of storing your libraries on-line and access them from multiple points. And if you upload something you already "own" they will take that too. Not just what you've purchased from iTunes.
It's a value added service that I'm sure Apple is looking to do something different with and I'm sure there's more to the story... like that this will be used for Video, books and other media too. The advantages:
If you had actually owned it, you could have copied it as much as you wanted-- legally-- and resold the copies to others. You have been capable of doing this, but it was illegal; it also was difficult to enforce the law. Now the technology is actually starting to match your legal rights. It's actually wonderful. You are not losing anything you had legally, but the true owners (the content creators and the people who support them financially) can stop getting ripped off by criminals.
+1 LOL!
Have to laugh... so many people here are upset about nothing. All it says in this rumor is that you would have the option of storing your libraries on-line and access them from multiple points. And if you upload something you already "own" they will take that too. Not just what you've purchased from iTunes.
It's a value added service that I'm sure Apple is looking to do something different with and I'm sure there's more to the story... like that this will be used for Video, books and other media too. The advantages:
jz1492
Nov 13, 03:56 PM
The difference is with a client I can show them a prototype, or mock up, prior to having to put all the resources into creating a fully functioning app.
I don't know about you, but I have done it many, many times, and I have never encountered a client who doesn't want at the end to tweak and add and tweak and sometimes reject, then conditionally approve, their way to deployment.
I don't know about you, but I have done it many, many times, and I have never encountered a client who doesn't want at the end to tweak and add and tweak and sometimes reject, then conditionally approve, their way to deployment.
TheManOfSilver
Sep 5, 04:27 PM
It's Showtime. Obvious reference to movies. What do (consumers) want? What does apple like to sell? HARDWARE. Steve will introduce some sort of on-line movie service. I have no idea what it will be, other than different from other options. To me, the on-line movie store is not a bit sexy.
What will be sexy are the other three devices he will introduce that will use that service...
1) True Video iPod. With some sort of wireless transfer method. There is no point in on-line service (for apple) if it ain't mobile.
2) The Apple Movie Machine, probably looking a lot like a Mini, to interface wirelessly to your computer with your TV seamlessly, using an improved Front Row. It will have DVR capability and ability to work with streamed high quality video from iTunes movie store.
3) 23" iMac with a TV tuner, and the ability to pickup streamed movies from the ITunes movie store, and built-in DVR capacity upon which to view those nice movies.
I can skip the Video iPod for now, but I'm seriously hoping for exactly what you have for #2 and #3. I'm due for a return to the mac (I've been stuck in a PC-only world for school for the past few years) and my DVD player went belly-up last month, and I've been delaying replacing it, preferring to get a DVD-burner with HD. If Apple comes out with the big iMac and Living room wonder next week, I'll be upgrading just as soon as Leopard comes preinstalled (although the movie machine might come first).:cool:
What will be sexy are the other three devices he will introduce that will use that service...
1) True Video iPod. With some sort of wireless transfer method. There is no point in on-line service (for apple) if it ain't mobile.
2) The Apple Movie Machine, probably looking a lot like a Mini, to interface wirelessly to your computer with your TV seamlessly, using an improved Front Row. It will have DVR capability and ability to work with streamed high quality video from iTunes movie store.
3) 23" iMac with a TV tuner, and the ability to pickup streamed movies from the ITunes movie store, and built-in DVR capacity upon which to view those nice movies.
I can skip the Video iPod for now, but I'm seriously hoping for exactly what you have for #2 and #3. I'm due for a return to the mac (I've been stuck in a PC-only world for school for the past few years) and my DVD player went belly-up last month, and I've been delaying replacing it, preferring to get a DVD-burner with HD. If Apple comes out with the big iMac and Living room wonder next week, I'll be upgrading just as soon as Leopard comes preinstalled (although the movie machine might come first).:cool:
cube
Apr 24, 07:48 AM
I did say next gen.
I don't think Bobcat+. I would say Stars+ this year or Bulldozer+ next year.
I don't think Bobcat+. I would say Stars+ this year or Bulldozer+ next year.
asdf542
Apr 14, 01:14 PM
Wait, you mean you completely ignored the title of this post and thought that Intel was suddenly also not going to stop supporting Thunderbolt?
Dammit man, not everyone on these boards understands subtlety and context thread titles. If you are going to say something, don't be subtle. Spell it out so everyone can understand you. Otherwise we end up with some short-bus kids thinking everyone is picking a fight with them and posting worthless arguments when it's clear that Thunderbolt is the superior technology in every regard and will also be natively supported.Fixed just for you.
I think it is too early to really get a read one way or the other. I am hopeful that TB will take off. But this time I think it will be more the drive and peripherals vendors that will make or break it. If they can do a USB3 drive and it will work with any system that has USB3 and/or TB, why would the also do a TB version? I am not saying they won't, but there is certainly an incentive to drop the extra sku and investment that a TB version would require.
LOL, yet here you are claiming Thunderbolt is DOA. Hilarious.
Dammit man, not everyone on these boards understands subtlety and context thread titles. If you are going to say something, don't be subtle. Spell it out so everyone can understand you. Otherwise we end up with some short-bus kids thinking everyone is picking a fight with them and posting worthless arguments when it's clear that Thunderbolt is the superior technology in every regard and will also be natively supported.Fixed just for you.
I think it is too early to really get a read one way or the other. I am hopeful that TB will take off. But this time I think it will be more the drive and peripherals vendors that will make or break it. If they can do a USB3 drive and it will work with any system that has USB3 and/or TB, why would the also do a TB version? I am not saying they won't, but there is certainly an incentive to drop the extra sku and investment that a TB version would require.
LOL, yet here you are claiming Thunderbolt is DOA. Hilarious.
Avalontor
Apr 28, 07:30 PM
Really? I mean really? Zune? You forgot to write down Vista too kid. LOL!
Vista still has a larger market share then OSX.
Vista still has a larger market share then OSX.