http://gamingtrend.com
October 02, 2014, 02:53:42 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Calendar Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 12
41  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: July 12, 2011, 12:27:40 AM
42  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: July 07, 2011, 06:52:52 PM
43  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: July 05, 2011, 06:55:53 PM
44  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: June 15, 2011, 02:35:09 AM
*dies laughing*
45  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Anyone have a Windows Phone? on: June 13, 2011, 09:32:15 PM
I think MS is pretty much All In on WP7. It can't afford to be a non-entity in mobile. They may become one, but it won't be as a result of a strategic decision to pull out of mobile.
46  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Upcoming smartphone releases on: June 12, 2011, 08:05:59 PM
Its looking like the next Pre is going to be a great phone, and everyone seems to agree that it is hands down the best OS, but its never going to catch up on Apps, so I say make the Android switch. I'm using an unrooted Incredible 2 on Verizon's network and am very pleased. I was a very happy owner of the original Incredible before that. They're great phones and the options are endless (which is either a great think or a horrible thing, depending on the user). HTC makes great phones.
47  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: June 10, 2011, 10:36:49 PM

Quote from: CeeKay on June 10, 2011, 02:15:38 PM

Quote from: Bullwinkle on June 10, 2011, 12:50:41 PM

Quote from: rshetts2 on June 10, 2011, 12:39:02 PM

Quote from: CeeKay on June 10, 2011, 01:18:16 AM

oh Eel, you and your raper wit!

Im assuming you meant "rapier wit" and not raper but then I could be mistaken.

I'm pretty sure CeeKay meant what he wrote there.
\

rhsetts needs to catch up on Celebrity Jeopardy  icon_lol

I will take the rapists for $500 Alex ....
48  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: June 09, 2011, 11:16:50 PM
49  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: June 09, 2011, 12:33:37 AM

Quote from: Jag on June 08, 2011, 04:50:42 PM



 nod
50  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: WWDC 2011 - Lion, iOs 5, iCloud on: June 07, 2011, 09:21:41 PM

Quote from: gellar on June 07, 2011, 05:13:03 PM

Quote from: Laner on June 07, 2011, 01:59:32 PM

Quote

Quote from: gellar on June 07, 2011, 03:56:28 AM

The reason to go Mac is that it's a vastly superior OS for getting work done.  The reasons for going Windows on a work machine are pretty much non existent now.  Windows only advantage is gaming.  For everything else, I'd rather have OSX.

Yawn. I keep hearing this. I don't see it. I have a Mac as my every day machine at work and use a PC at home. I get real work done without difficulty on both. I find nothing magical about OSX. It's a great operating system. So is Windows 7. Go with either, they both rock.

Yeah, this is the kind of "Macolyte" nonsense I thought we got away from half a decade ago.  The business world is chugging away just fine on Windows, and Win 7 in particular is an excellent OS.  Both ecosystems have their own strengths and weaknesses.

- Typed on my MacBook Pro

The problem is, lots businesses are still stuck on XP.  Comparing OSX to XP is completely unfair, yet it's totally valid from a use case standpoint.  I think part of why OSX is doing so well in the Enterprise today - IT departments are letting end users choose between a Windows XP, crap hardware laptop or an Apple OSX laptop.  The choice is obvious at that point.

Now personally, I'll admit I am a more techy user than most, but I haven't seen anything on Windows that matches the following functionality on OSX:
1)  A good launcher.  I'm still using Quicksilver and really, really love it.  The built in Win7 bit does a good approximation, but it's not nearly as good.
2)  A good screen cap/annotation/hosting tool.  I've been searching for a Windows Skitch replacement for years and one just flat out doesn't exist.  Skitch alone makes me do any creative work on my Mac rather than my PC.
3)  Omnigraffle destroys what I can do in Visio. 
4)  I know it's cliche, but Keynote >> Powerpoint.
5)  A good instant messaging application.  Adium owns anything on Windows.
6)  Nix terminal software.  I desperately want someone to make one of these for Windows but it just doesn't seem to exist.  On my Windows machine I'm using Putty to connect to a Linux box just for this basic functionality.  That annoys me.
7)  Spaces/Expose/Hot Corners.  I think this is just a comfort thing but I can 'move around' an OSX environment considerably faster than I can a Windows one.  Win7 got some of this right, but it's still not equivalent.

Heh. All I can say in response to this is that you are occupying some rare air with respect to your computing needs, my friend. slywink
51  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: June 07, 2011, 09:05:26 PM
52  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Re: Re: WWDC 2011 - Lion, iOs 5, iCloud on: June 07, 2011, 07:02:27 AM

Quote from: gellar on June 07, 2011, 03:56:28 AM

The reason to go Mac is that it's a vastly superior OS for getting work done.  The reasons for going Windows on a work machine are pretty much non existent now.  Windows only advantage is gaming.  For everything else, I'd rather have OSX.

Yawn. I keep hearing this. I don't see it. I have a Mac as my every day machine at work and use a PC at home. I get real work done without difficulty on both. I find nothing magical about OSX. It's a great operating system. So is Windows 7. Go with either, they both rock.

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk
53  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Re: Re: WWDC 2011 - Lion, iOs 5, iCloud on: June 07, 2011, 06:54:44 AM

Quote from: gellar on June 07, 2011, 12:28:54 AM

Quote from: GuidoTKP on June 06, 2011, 11:55:12 PM

Quote from: gellar on June 06, 2011, 11:24:19 PM

Quote from: GuidoTKP on June 06, 2011, 11:01:45 PM

What's the problem with calendaring if you have it set up to a Google Calendar?

Well, 1) I don't.  I have it set up with my Exchange calendar and there are some real odd random times where it's not 100% synced and that is damn inexcusable.  Some appointments just aren't on my phone and I can't sort out a rhyme or reason why.  Having to look at my Exchange calendar just to be SURE I'm not missing some important meeting is inexcusable.

2) The calendar itself is just crappy and doesn't function the way it should.  I can't dial a BB formatted phone #/conference bridge, which is a universal standard in my world.  I can't reply to a calendar item.  I can't snooze a calendar reminder.

Not related to calendar, but I also can't change or activate an Out of Office notice from the iPhone either, which is also horrifically annoying.

So yeah, I'm going back to BB more than likely.

If Exchange support rules your universe, have you considered WP7? I don't think I would go the BB route again without first checking out the available WP7 offerings. I'm assuming that WP7's Exchange support is pretty robust.

Not a supported product by my corporate overlords.  BB or iPhone only.

Bummer. Perhaps a Torch is in your future....

Sent from my ADR6350 using Tapatalk
54  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: WWDC 2011 - Lion, iOs 5, iCloud on: June 07, 2011, 12:18:48 AM

Quote from: Biyobi on June 07, 2011, 12:12:19 AM

Quote from: GuidoTKP on June 06, 2011, 11:52:21 PM

Quote from: rittchard on June 06, 2011, 11:16:54 PM

Quote from: GuidoTKP on June 06, 2011, 10:39:08 PM

I'm not sure what your point is about people who haven't loaded their music onto their computers yet. They still have to subject themselves to that chore in order to take advantage of Apple's match service. I mean, if your're just talking about the advantages of Cloud storage, in general, no question its useful and desirable. But there are other competent solutions out there.

This is how I'm imagining it will work.  If I put an old CD in, iTunes comes up and asks me if I want to rip the files in - I hit yes and a few minutes later they are in digital format.  After that's done, it asks me if I want to iMatch them, and I say yes - assuming it was something in their database, essentially I'm done.  If not, I have to upload the files.  Either way it's then a part of my iTunes/iCloud and I can choose to (or not) bring them into any of my other Apple devices. 

I have no doubt there are other useful/competent solutions available, but if you are like me and have a random mixture of iTunes purchases, CDs already ripped, and CDs not ripped, this sounds like the easiest way to get digital access to all of it in one place.  It's the combination of the match service + the cloud service that appeals to me because of how I've largely not managed my digital "collection".  They claim they have 18 million songs or whatever, so chances are they'll have the majority of my CDs already in their database and I won't have to bother with the whole upload process.  Am I being lazy?  Sure, but to me that's the whole thing with the Apple products/ecosystem, finding the path of least resistance. 

But that's exactly what will happen with my music right now using Google Music. The Google uploader runs in the background and is pointed to my Music folder, the same place that iTunes is going to rip my music to. So I do what you imagine doing: 1) I grab a CD that hasn't been uploaded yet. 2) I rip it into iTunes and now have it available in the same manner I've always had iTunes music made available to my iDevices. 3) Google Music uploads the tracks into the cloud automagically, without consulting me in any fashion and without me needing to do a single thing. 4) Viola ... shortly after I rip the tracks (I'm guessing 10 minutes tops) my new CD is available in the cloud, ready to be streamed to any computer or my phone. Also, with a touch of a button, I can tell my phone to download any tracks I choose to my SD card, so that they are available for offline storage on my phone. Apple's solution is elegant and awesome. It will also cost me $25/year. Google's solution does the exact same thing (currently for free), and it is just as elegant and awesome. Of course, the ultimate question will be what Google ultimately charges for all of that storage. I don't think you can have a real comparison until we know that, but if the G solution stays free, I will never be tempted to pay for Apple's match service.

Interesting, but what does a viola have to do with it? icon_wink

Pffft. Like I care if I spell French words wrong ....
55  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: WWDC 2011 - Lion, iOs 5, iCloud on: June 06, 2011, 11:55:12 PM

Quote from: gellar on June 06, 2011, 11:24:19 PM

Quote from: GuidoTKP on June 06, 2011, 11:01:45 PM

What's the problem with calendaring if you have it set up to a Google Calendar?

Well, 1) I don't.  I have it set up with my Exchange calendar and there are some real odd random times where it's not 100% synced and that is damn inexcusable.  Some appointments just aren't on my phone and I can't sort out a rhyme or reason why.  Having to look at my Exchange calendar just to be SURE I'm not missing some important meeting is inexcusable.

2) The calendar itself is just crappy and doesn't function the way it should.  I can't dial a BB formatted phone #/conference bridge, which is a universal standard in my world.  I can't reply to a calendar item.  I can't snooze a calendar reminder.

Not related to calendar, but I also can't change or activate an Out of Office notice from the iPhone either, which is also horrifically annoying.

So yeah, I'm going back to BB more than likely.

If Exchange support rules your universe, have you considered WP7? I don't think I would go the BB route again without first checking out the available WP7 offerings. I'm assuming that WP7's Exchange support is pretty robust.
56  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: WWDC 2011 - Lion, iOs 5, iCloud on: June 06, 2011, 11:52:21 PM

Quote from: rittchard on June 06, 2011, 11:16:54 PM

Quote from: GuidoTKP on June 06, 2011, 10:39:08 PM

I'm not sure what your point is about people who haven't loaded their music onto their computers yet. They still have to subject themselves to that chore in order to take advantage of Apple's match service. I mean, if your're just talking about the advantages of Cloud storage, in general, no question its useful and desirable. But there are other competent solutions out there.

This is how I'm imagining it will work.  If I put an old CD in, iTunes comes up and asks me if I want to rip the files in - I hit yes and a few minutes later they are in digital format.  After that's done, it asks me if I want to iMatch them, and I say yes - assuming it was something in their database, essentially I'm done.  If not, I have to upload the files.  Either way it's then a part of my iTunes/iCloud and I can choose to (or not) bring them into any of my other Apple devices. 

I have no doubt there are other useful/competent solutions available, but if you are like me and have a random mixture of iTunes purchases, CDs already ripped, and CDs not ripped, this sounds like the easiest way to get digital access to all of it in one place.  It's the combination of the match service + the cloud service that appeals to me because of how I've largely not managed my digital "collection".  They claim they have 18 million songs or whatever, so chances are they'll have the majority of my CDs already in their database and I won't have to bother with the whole upload process.  Am I being lazy?  Sure, but to me that's the whole thing with the Apple products/ecosystem, finding the path of least resistance. 

But that's exactly what will happen with my music right now using Google Music. The Google uploader runs in the background and is pointed to my Music folder, the same place that iTunes is going to rip my music to. So I do what you imagine doing: 1) I grab a CD that hasn't been uploaded yet. 2) I rip it into iTunes and now have it available in the same manner I've always had iTunes music made available to my iDevices. 3) Google Music uploads the tracks into the cloud automagically, without consulting me in any fashion and without me needing to do a single thing. 4) Viola ... shortly after I rip the tracks (I'm guessing 10 minutes tops) my new CD is available in the cloud, ready to be streamed to any computer or my phone. Also, with a touch of a button, I can tell my phone to download any tracks I choose to my SD card, so that they are available for offline storage on my phone. Apple's solution is elegant and awesome. It will also cost me $25/year. Google's solution does the exact same thing (currently for free), and it is just as elegant and awesome. Of course, the ultimate question will be what Google ultimately charges for all of that storage. I don't think you can have a real comparison until we know that, but if the G solution stays free, I will never be tempted to pay for Apple's match service.
57  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: WWDC 2011 - Lion, iOs 5, iCloud on: June 06, 2011, 11:01:45 PM
What's the problem with calendaring if you have it set up to a Google Calendar?
58  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: WWDC 2011 - Lion, iOs 5, iCloud on: June 06, 2011, 10:39:08 PM

Quote from: rittchard on June 06, 2011, 10:06:08 PM

Quote from: GuidoTKP on June 06, 2011, 09:18:27 PM

Quote from: rittchard on June 06, 2011, 08:00:57 PM

Quote from: gellar on June 06, 2011, 07:56:36 PM

Quote from: Exodor on June 06, 2011, 07:35:29 PM

Weeks?  Really?  Maybe if you're using dial-up to upload your collection.   retard


EDIT - and the $50 a year for Amazon actually gets you 50 GB or 10,000 songs.   

EDIT EDIT - and 20,000 songs is $100 a year on Amazon, not $200.  You know, Apple, this stuff is pretty easy to check out.   Roll Eyes

Well of course, this is creative marketing and all YMMV stuff.  Personally, I have about 25GB in music and a pretty good upload speed of 2,500 Kbps.  It'd take me a day or so to upload, presuming the web server I'm uploading two can max out my connection and I'm not doing anything else at the time.  I don't really find 'weeks' to be far fetched.

On your second point, yeah that's awfully creative math there.  I guess Apple figures an average song to be 10MB in size?  I can't say I've looked at my music collection in terms of individual song size lately, but that strikes me as an  overestimation. 

I think you guys are forgetting that not everyone has the same upload speeds you do, you're probably in the minority.  So if even uberDirk did it in 2-3 days, weeks is not necessarily a bad estimate for those with more average connections.

Also, the songs I've downloaded lately are usually around 8MB for a 4 minute song, so 10MB is not a bad estimate.

I think the number of people who have *mammoth* digital music collections and utter crap internet connections must be pretty small. Weeks is pretty much bullshit and everyone with a large music collection knows it, but whatever. Minutes is pretty nice. Until Google starts charging me for hosting 12,000 songs for free, however, I can't say I'm remotely tempted by Apple's match service (particularly since it will not work with my Android phone).

I think it's intended more for people who don't already have something in place, or are even starting from scratch.  I'm also guessing people who still have a ton of CDs sitting in their garage (like me) will benefit if/when they eventually decided they wanted to have centralized access to all their music.  And as for upload speeds, I don't know what's considered typical, but I do know I pay for the absolute fastest on Uverse and it's still 3Mbps MAX, and probably nowhere near that in reality.  The base plan is 1Mbps.  I had DSL at my last place and it was "up to 384Kbps".

I think between 1 and 2 Mbps is pretty typical for people with a solid broadband connection. I uploaded around 10,000 songs in around 3 days to Google Music; well over 20 gigs of data. My music collection is now available for streaming wherever I have an internet connection. Streaming over my phones 3G data connection works fine (although, I still prefer using a dedicated iPod to handle music and podcasts in my car; any streaming service is going to hiccup, particularly when you are driving). Google Instant Mixes, for whatever reason, seem to do a much better job than the genius mixes available on iTunes (I'm very surprised by this; I really expected Apple's service to be better). I'm having a lot of fun listening to the mixes that Google makes for me.

I keep hearing that people won't upload or that uploading is a complete turn off to the average consumer. While a system like Apple's match service is better for the consumer, I literally did nothing more than point Google Music to the Music folder on my computer and then let it work in the background. Over a three day period, the service steadily populated and updated the Google Music experience. Now all of my music is in the Cloud. I'm kind of lost as to what is difficult about that. Adding additional music will almost be instantaneous. Since I buy almost all my digital music from Amazon, I have all of my more recent purchases available from Amazon's Cloud locker as well. Google and Amazon's offerings are going to work with more devices. So ... this is going to be an interesting little battle.

I'm not sure what your point is about people who haven't loaded their music onto their computers yet. They still have to subject themselves to that chore in order to take advantage of Apple's match service. I mean, if your're just talking about the advantages of Cloud storage, in general, no question its useful and desirable. But there are other competent solutions out there.

iOS 5 is an exciting announcement for the Apple ecosystem. The stuff they've added will make their portable devices much, much better. Their notifications revamp is a killer improvement (it's a catch-up move that makes the device much stronger over all; the user base won't believe they were able to live without it after it is implemented). I can't wait to play with this stuff on my iPad.
59  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: WWDC 2011 - Lion, iOs 5, iCloud on: June 06, 2011, 09:21:24 PM

Quote from: leo8877 on June 06, 2011, 09:18:06 PM

So iMessage is built into the Messages app...is this like BBM for iOS then?  Sounds like free txt and mms over wifi or 3g.

http://www.apple.com/ios/ios5/features.html#imessage

Yep. Total BBM killer from what I've heard (or, at least there is no longer a reason to stay in the Blackberry ecosystem just for the functionality offered by BBM). Hell, iMessage will work with iPod Touches and WiFi only iPads. It's an extremely attractive offering.
60  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: WWDC 2011 - Lion, iOs 5, iCloud on: June 06, 2011, 09:18:27 PM

Quote from: rittchard on June 06, 2011, 08:00:57 PM

Quote from: gellar on June 06, 2011, 07:56:36 PM

Quote from: Exodor on June 06, 2011, 07:35:29 PM

Weeks?  Really?  Maybe if you're using dial-up to upload your collection.   retard


EDIT - and the $50 a year for Amazon actually gets you 50 GB or 10,000 songs.   

EDIT EDIT - and 20,000 songs is $100 a year on Amazon, not $200.  You know, Apple, this stuff is pretty easy to check out.   Roll Eyes

Well of course, this is creative marketing and all YMMV stuff.  Personally, I have about 25GB in music and a pretty good upload speed of 2,500 Kbps.  It'd take me a day or so to upload, presuming the web server I'm uploading two can max out my connection and I'm not doing anything else at the time.  I don't really find 'weeks' to be far fetched.

On your second point, yeah that's awfully creative math there.  I guess Apple figures an average song to be 10MB in size?  I can't say I've looked at my music collection in terms of individual song size lately, but that strikes me as an  overestimation. 

I think you guys are forgetting that not everyone has the same upload speeds you do, you're probably in the minority.  So if even uberDirk did it in 2-3 days, weeks is not necessarily a bad estimate for those with more average connections.

Also, the songs I've downloaded lately are usually around 8MB for a 4 minute song, so 10MB is not a bad estimate.

I think the number of people who have *mammoth* digital music collections and utter crap internet connections must be pretty small. Weeks is pretty much bullshit and everyone with a large music collection knows it, but whatever. Minutes is pretty nice. Until Google starts charging me for hosting 12,000 songs for free, however, I can't say I'm remotely tempted by Apple's match service (particularly since it will not work with my Android phone).
61  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Google Music on: May 26, 2011, 07:40:48 PM
So far, so awesome. I received my Music Beta invite a couple of days ago. As of this writing, my computer has uploaded 4732 songs, which is a little more than a third of my collection. Will be pretty stoked if its all uploaded by Monday. The browser client is awesome. Speedy, useful, well thought out, I'm pretty excited to have web access to my music collection. I'm able to carry all of it on my iPod classic, but its so much easier to work with my music collection through Music Beta while I'm at my desk. So far my experimentation with the "Instant Mix" option returns mixes that are better the Genius mixes I'm able to generate with iTunes. It's anecdotal based on a small sample so far, but the Google mixes seem to be more intelligent than the iTunes mixes (or, at the very least, better suited to my tastes).

The Android player has been a little inconsistent for me. Usually, everything works as advertised, and I cloud access in my pocket. Yesterday morning I wanted to test streaming over 3G in my car, but it didn't seem to be talking to Google's servers at that time (seems like it was an app or Google problem, since switching to wifi didn't solve the problem). Today, 3G service seems to be working fine, but I still want to test it in a moving car. I found that Amazon's cloud locker doesn't seem to work very well on the go, and I'm curious to see if Google does a better job of it (or if it's just a problem of inconsistent 3G access on the streets of LA).
62  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Barnes & Noble Nook on: May 26, 2011, 01:01:03 AM
Hmmm. I don't think I want my e-ink reader to have a touch screen. The physical page turning buttons work great on my Kindle, and no touch screen = no finger prints on my screen. I think the form factor is improved without the keyboard, but I'd rather not have to touch the screen to turn pages. Maybe just a touch screen for typing, since I almost never do that on my Kindle any way. Not that it really matters; I have way too many books from the Kindle store to move away from that ecosystem. smile
63  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: The Hunger Games on: May 20, 2011, 01:59:29 AM
I just finished reading the trilogy. I really liked it. Reads fast, well written, good characters, good plot. I thought the series end was a little weak (felt like the author ran out of steam), but overall a good experience. I'm actually a little mystified as to how they are going to end this as a movie trilogy. The third book is pretty dark, and the end (while very true to the characters and the story) is kind of a bummer. Its kind of a brave ending, given the target audience. Hollywood tends not to have brave endings, so I'm curious how they are planning to dumb this down.

In terms of Woody Harrelson being cast as Haymitch, I think that's perfect. Of the other options thrown around, I think I like him for that part over Robert Downey (RD is the far better actor, but there is almost something too pretty or larger than life about RD to make him a great Haymitch), Hugh Laurie (I don't see that one, myself), or Oliver Platt (a little too refined for my taste). Tim Roth would have made an awesome Haymitch, but I'm pleased with Woody. He can do self-destructive in his sleep, and he can come off as an asshole supreme on film, which are both requirements for Haymitch. Also, I think he can act "dangerous" pretty well, which the actor playing Haymitch has to be able to project underneath all of the mess.
64  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: May 19, 2011, 06:36:01 PM


65  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: May 14, 2011, 12:44:57 AM
66  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: May 11, 2011, 06:12:40 PM

Quote from: TK-421 on May 11, 2011, 03:49:47 PM



 icon_lol

Edit: Probably didn't hurt that bad. If you look, she face planted into her open book, which probably provided some cushioning. That look of pure, unvarnished startlement on her face, however, is priceless.
67  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: May 10, 2011, 05:18:12 PM
68  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: May 10, 2011, 06:12:57 AM

Quote from: Harkonis on May 09, 2011, 07:11:15 PM

I like how they just drop him in afterwards.

btw, there is another of those where the dude hits his head on the side, it's not quite as laughable imo.

It's really pretty brutal. Only Osama deserved treatment that bad!
69  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: May 10, 2011, 06:11:31 AM
Holy crap that picture is random. Is that a Kree military helmet on the second guy from the right, back row?
70  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: May 09, 2011, 06:31:25 PM
71  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: May 06, 2011, 12:44:53 AM
72  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Android App/Game Recommendations Thread on: April 27, 2011, 09:59:34 PM
Hit the Amazon App Store today. Pick up the ordinarily $5 Business Calendar App for free. It is worth owning.
73  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: April 27, 2011, 05:02:49 PM

Quote from: Gryndyl on April 27, 2011, 03:38:18 PM


I'm in love.
74  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: April 25, 2011, 11:27:12 PM
The more I look at that, the more I realize that I don't have the slightest clue what the fool was trying to do. What was that supposed to look like if he did it right? Was he trying to jump off the top edge of the bench? If so, how did that nimrod manage to miss the edge with both feet? Even worse, why did he scissor his legs open? It's like it was an experiment in self-castration.
75  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: April 25, 2011, 06:41:50 PM

Quote from: CeeKay on April 24, 2011, 04:45:23 PM



Epic.

icon_lol
76  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: April 15, 2011, 12:22:51 AM
77  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: March 30, 2011, 06:11:30 PM
78  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: March 30, 2011, 12:07:11 AM


Depth perception for the win!!!!
79  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Grill suggestions on: March 24, 2011, 09:13:53 PM
Can't go wrong with a Weber Genesis, if you're going gas.
80  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: This Is Fun Pt 3: This Time It's Personal! (possibly NSFW) on: March 23, 2011, 06:43:18 PM
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 12
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.201 seconds with 20 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.072s, 1q)