Netflix streaming quality - Page 236 - AVS | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 244Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #7051 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 01:20 AM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 28,856
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 665 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott View Post
Okay--so challenges might not come from two of the dozen or so ISPs that Netflix has agreements with. Nothing stops the others. And the FCC is not a business which can be "sued"; it's a Federal regulatory agency whose poorly written rules are subject to challenge. Remember the "Broadcast Flag"?
Yes, but they're two of the Big 3 along with Verizon, who has already tried this before and lost(given what their earlier win has brought about today), and while certainly possible I just don't see the smaller ISPs getting into a fight with the FCC. I also read that this time around the FCC took particular care to make sure that their proposed rulings/regulations were on very solid ground and would be tough to overturn. I guess we'll see, though I'll bet we don't see any pushback from the ISPs, at least not in the manner of getting the rules changed, business is far too good to have to explain to their shareholders why they want to poke the bear again. They'll do a lot of sabre-rattling of course, but nothing that would actually force a change to the rules.
Keenan is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #7052 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 02:14 AM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 8,376
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3479 Post(s)
Liked: 1197
This thread sounds like the stock market.
NorthSky is online now  
post #7053 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 05:24 AM
AVS Special Member
 
metalsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western, Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,786
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 178 Post(s)
Liked: 137
I can guarantee you one thing for sure. You will see a nice new fee/surcharge/tax on you internet bill.

Other than that, everything will get equal priority which means it will be equally slow.
RRS1947 likes this.
metalsaber is online now  
post #7054 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 08:06 AM
Member
 
Carterhawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 10
New season of House of Cards, yay! Bitrate sucks, boo!

I've done some testing and found that my PC, no matter the browser, will only play certain titles at up to 1750kbps, including the test short. Some titles support HD, such as Orange is the New Black or Star Trek TOS, but not House of Cards or Marco Polo, as in literally it does not even show the option to view in HD. My Wii U however, has no problem reaching maximum stream quality, so the issue doesn't seem to be with my ISP. I've pestered netflix directly, but it's being "sent to the engineers", so who knows how long that will take to get an answer on. Has anyone here had this issue with the PC bitrate maxing out at DVD quality?

Screenshot of comparative bitrates: https://i.imgur.com/5qMp2hP.jpg
Win 7, Firefox 35, Latest silverlight.
Carterhawk is offline  
post #7055 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 08:19 AM
AVS Special Member
 
reddice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 2,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 316 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carterhawk View Post
New season of House of Cards, yay! Bitrate sucks, boo!

I've done some testing and found that my PC, no matter the browser, will only play certain titles at up to 1750kbps, including the test short. Some titles support HD, such as Orange is the New Black or Star Trek TOS, but not House of Cards or Marco Polo, as in literally it does not even show the option to view in HD. My Wii U however, has no problem reaching maximum stream quality, so the issue doesn't seem to be with my ISP. I've pestered netflix directly, but it's being "sent to the engineers", so who knows how long that will take to get an answer on. Has anyone here had this issue with the PC bitrate maxing out at DVD quality?

Screenshot of comparative bitrates: https://i.imgur.com/5qMp2hP.jpg
Win 7, Firefox 35, Latest silverlight.
Stupid restrictions that the studio's implement. The biggest offenders are Sony and Fox. Because of this I would not even care if they decide to get rid of PC playback. As I said before don't bother with watching on your PC. Just watch on your TV like using an enabled streaming device like I do.

Earthlink Extreme powered by Time Warner Cable Brooklyn.
ASUS RT-N66W Router 374.43 (Merlin Build) using OpenDNS.
Toshiba 39L2300U (My Bedroom) - BDPS5200, Fire TV, PS4 Wired. ATV3 Wireless.
Toshiba 32RV530U (Living Room) - Fire TV, PS3 Slim Wired
.
Cats are the best pets.
reddice is online now  
post #7056 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 09:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
mailiang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Springsteen Country
Posts: 7,077
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 370 Post(s)
Liked: 390
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott View Post
No, it isn't. Forcing the ISPs to increase their port capacity to accommodate whatever download demand their customers choose to place on it is not the point. Also, you definitely can't force networks passed through by Netflix's traffic to provide any particularly amount of bandwidth to traffic that's not even headed to their customers. Most claimed not to have been throttling Netflix traffic and in cases Netflix supported those claims.

What Netflix needs to make their business work is exactly what they're paying the ISPs for: private lanes which go into private ports so that their traffic is never in contention for transit to or entrance into ISP networks. Any FCC regulation which tries to force ISPs to accommodate that sort of custom arrangement without being paid is doomed to be blown away when its legality is challenged.

Right now the public hasn't been told what the "Net Neutrality" regulations say and its almost certain that they're written poorly in terms which can be construed in too many ways. As you say it will certainly be challenged and probably rewritten multiple times before they come up with a document which is at all meaningful and enforceable, but it probably won't change Netflix's arrangements or what they pay for them because what Netflix needs and is getting from the ISPs for their money is special treatment which they should have to pay for.
This is about transparency, not just about who pays what. The DC ruling provided an option for the FCC to re-classify ISP's as telecoms. This means that they fall under the same form of legal principals as utility companies, (I happen to work in the utility business as an energy consultant) and can continue to operate as monopolies as long as they continue to invest in their infrastructure and meet consumer demand. How they meet that demand, which includes cost increases, is dependent on specific guide lines that have been approved by a regulatory agency (ie: public utilities board). When an ISP charges Netflix a fee, whether it's defined as paid priority or not, under the new ruling, it has to be scrutinized by the FCC and can not be taxed on as a hidden cost, which eventually comes back to the consumer through Netflix. If they can not tax on that hidden fee, then we will know exactly what broad band service actually costs. The reason why broadband is so much cheaper in other developed countries, is that there is more competitive pricing, and IMO, the reason why there is more competitive pricing, is because these type of regulatory principles exist .


Quote:
Originally Posted by Keenan View Post
Yes, but they're two of the Big 3 along with Verizon, who has already tried this before and lost(given what their earlier win has brought about today), and while certainly possible I just don't see the smaller ISPs getting into a fight with the FCC. I also read that this time around the FCC took particular care to make sure that their proposed rulings/regulations were on very solid ground and would be tough to overturn. I guess we'll see, though I'll bet we don't see any pushback from the ISPs, at least not in the manner of getting the rules changed, business is far too good to have to explain to their shareholders why they want to poke the bear again. They'll do a lot of sabre-rattling of course, but nothing that would actually force a change to the rules.

That sabre-rattling may or may not be a lost cause, but they will probably appeal, which means delays in applying the rules, as it gets tied up in the courts.



Ian
fredxr2d2 likes this.

The best way to succeed in life is to act on the advice you give to others


Last edited by mailiang; 02-27-2015 at 10:27 AM.
mailiang is offline  
post #7057 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 09:54 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mgkdragn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Illinois, East of St Louis
Posts: 11,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 491 Post(s)
Liked: 785
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott View Post
No, it isn't. Forcing the ISPs to increase their port capacity to accommodate whatever download demand their customers choose to place on it is not the point. Also, you definitely can't force networks passed through by Netflix's traffic to provide any particularly amount of bandwidth to traffic that's not even headed to their customers. Most claimed not to have been throttling Netflix traffic and in cases Netflix supported those claims.

What Netflix needs to make their business work is exactly what they're paying the ISPs for: private lanes which go into private ports so that their traffic is never in contention for transit to or entrance into ISP networks. Any FCC regulation which tries to force ISPs to accommodate that sort of custom arrangement without being paid is doomed to be blown away when its legality is challenged.

Right now the public hasn't been told what the "Net Neutrality" regulations say and its almost certain that they're written poorly in terms which can be construed in too many ways. As you say it will certainly be challenged and probably rewritten multiple times before they come up with a document which is at all meaningful and enforceable, but it probably won't change Netflix's arrangements or what they pay for them because what Netflix needs and is getting from the ISPs for their money is special treatment which they should have to pay for.
Yes .. pretty much a great preliminary assessment ...


I watched with great amusement the chest thumping by FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, who is nothing more than a thinly disguised shill, former venture capitalist and lobbyist for the cable and wireless industry ..

Uncle Willie


Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
mgkdragn is online now  
post #7058 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 09:59 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mgkdragn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Illinois, East of St Louis
Posts: 11,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 491 Post(s)
Liked: 785
And, I'll add, the door appears to be opening for metered bandwidth delivery, a la Utility .. I would not be surprised or shocked to see more cap enforcement and even a gradual progression to tiered Bandwidth use plans .. it's what the ISP's have wanted anyway, IMO .. I predicted that here on AVS several years ago and was fried to a crisp at the time ..

Uncle Willie


Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
mgkdragn is online now  
post #7059 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 12:48 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Conrad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Martinez, CA, USA
Posts: 4,471
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by reddice View Post
Stupid restrictions that the studio's implement. The biggest offenders are Sony and Fox. Because of this I would not even care if they decide to get rid of PC playback. As I said before don't bother with watching on your PC. Just watch on your TV like using an enabled streaming device like I do.
I know people who only have a laptop to watch Netflix.
Brian Conrad is online now  
post #7060 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 12:51 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Conrad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Martinez, CA, USA
Posts: 4,471
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keenan View Post
It may be challenged, but I don't think it will come from an ISP. Both AT&T and Comcast need the FCC in their corner to push through mergers so they're not likely to piss them off by suing the agency.
I want to the see the rules. I think there might be a rule that they have to release them on paper the same time they are released online as a PDF. So that adds a delay until the government printing office eats up some trees.

In the meantime AT&T raised my broadband fee... $1.
Brian Conrad is online now  
post #7061 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 01:07 PM
AVS Special Member
 
metalsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western, Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,786
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 178 Post(s)
Liked: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Conrad View Post
I know people who only have a laptop to watch Netflix.
They don't have a TV? If so, can't they afford a $35 Amazon FireTV stick? Just saying.
reddice likes this.
metalsaber is online now  
post #7062 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 02:37 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 18,631
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1490 Post(s)
Liked: 918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keenan View Post
It may be challenged, but I don't think it will come from an ISP. Both AT&T and Comcast need the FCC in their corner to push through mergers so they're not likely to piss them off by suing the agency.

"Comcast blasts FCC's net neutrality ruling" .

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #7063 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 02:59 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 18,631
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1490 Post(s)
Liked: 918
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgkdragn View Post
I would not be surprised or shocked to see more cap enforcement and even a gradual progression to tiered Bandwidth use plans ..

My provider, Cox Communications, has had tiered bandwidth usage for a few years now. You get a higher cap with each step to the next speed tier. They are not very tightly enforcing the caps and state that they won't unless a customers bandwidth utilization becomes abusive without defining abusive. They don't want to harass customers into terminating service if they have a choice of something equally fast. I've exceeded my 400 GB cap by as much as 100 GB (during the broadcast television series summer hiatus) and gotten nothing more than an e-mail notice.

I wouldn't mind paying for usage which exceeds my cap; I pay $60/month for 100 Mbps service with a 400 GB cap so charge me $1 for every 10 GB I go over with. Perhaps there could be some large absolute cap on home service to keep a business from using home service because it's cheaper; maybe 1TB or something.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #7064 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 03:14 PM
AVS Special Member
 
NorthSky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Canada - West Island: Vancouver, South Direction: Go East
Posts: 8,376
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3479 Post(s)
Liked: 1197
Quote:
Originally Posted by metalsaber View Post
I can guarantee you one thing for sure. You will see a nice new fee/surcharge/tax on you internet bill.

Other than that, everything will get equal priority which means it will be equally slow.
Nothing new here; Internet rates keep going up all the time (twice a year on average is not uncommon here where I live).
And the quality keeps degrading, just like usual.

I got rabbit antennae for the days of liberation, and snow, and tons of Blus.
And I ain't moving to New York city, or Montreal, or Boston, or Toronto, or Las Vegas, or Houston, or Miami, or San Francisco, or Los Angeles, or San Diego, or Seattle, or Vancouver city. ...I'm an Islander, a Canadian from the West coast. ...Happy with the killer whales and all.
...Things are well documented right in front of my own very eyes every single day. ...What I like most? ...My freedom.
NorthSky is online now  
post #7065 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 03:23 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
mgkdragn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Illinois, East of St Louis
Posts: 11,155
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 491 Post(s)
Liked: 785
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott View Post
My provider, Cox Communications, has had tiered bandwidth usage for a few years now. You get a higher cap with each step to the next speed tier. They are not very tightly enforcing the caps and state that they won't unless a customers bandwidth utilization becomes abusive without defining abusive. They don't want to harass customers into terminating service if they have a choice of something equally fast. I've exceeded my 400 GB cap by as much as 100 GB (during the broadcast television series summer hiatus) and gotten nothing more than an e-mail notice.

I wouldn't mind paying for usage which exceeds my cap; I pay $60/month for 100 Mbps service with a 400 GB cap so charge me $1 for every 10 GB I go over with. Perhaps there could be some large absolute cap on home service to keep a business from using home service because it's cheaper; maybe 1TB or something.

My ISP (Charter) has a stated cap of 250 GB last time I looked .. I've never gotten any notice (yet) and we've had some fairly heavy months of use, and I've never looked into whatever the "penalty" may be .. all I'm really saying is the definition of "utility" gives a broader range as it relates to metered use .. and that could be a good thing for many low bandwidth users .. however, I believe the ISP's have always had a bone to pick with the really heavy, multi user household with kids and what not as well as the Torrent folks .. the low bandwidth user, in essence, does help subsidize the high bandwidth user ..

Uncle Willie


Oddball: Why don't you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don't you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don't you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
mgkdragn is online now  
post #7066 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 03:28 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 18,631
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1490 Post(s)
Liked: 918
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthSky View Post
Nothing new here; Internet rates keep going up all the time (twice a year on average is not uncommon here where I live).

Maybe where you are--it's effectively dropping where I live. Several months ago my provider doubled my service speed from 50 Mbps to 100 Mbps without increasing the price (the 100 Mbps customers only got a 50% increase); they do this every couple of years. I could have dropped down a tier to 50 GB at a lower price if I'd chosen to but I like the speed and my bandwidth cap would have been lower.

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
post #7067 of 7075 Old 02-27-2015, 05:11 PM
AVS Club Gold
 
Keenan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 28,856
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 665 Post(s)
Liked: 561
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaeltscott View Post
Yup, sabre-rattling, it's what lobbyists do, meanwhile Wall St barely batted an eye.

Comcast will make a lot of noise but they already have certain restrictions placed on them that came about when they were caught red-handed throttling and others that came about with the NBC/Uni merger.

Also, if Verizon and AT&T really thought this was going to be the end of the world why did they just purchase nearly $30 billion worth of wireless spectrum? If they were so certain Title II was going to destroy their business they wouldn't be making moves like that.

In the end I think this is going to be a whole lot of noise about practically nothing.

Internet Provider Sonic's CEO: Title II Is Only A Regulatory Burden If You're Doing Something Bad

Last edited by Keenan; 02-27-2015 at 05:15 PM.
Keenan is online now  
post #7068 of 7075 Old Yesterday, 08:37 AM
rlb
AVS Special Member
 
rlb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: North Royalton, OH
Posts: 3,678
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 508 Post(s)
Liked: 258
New season of "House of Cards", 4K version, was excellent quality video. Watched 4 episodes yesterday without any "hiccups".
rlb is offline  
post #7069 of 7075 Old Yesterday, 01:43 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Conrad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Martinez, CA, USA
Posts: 4,471
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by metalsaber View Post
They don't have a TV? If so, can't they afford a $35 Amazon FireTV stick? Just saying.
Uh, what good would a FireTV stick do them if they don't have a TV? They can still watch Amazon on their laptop without it.
Brian Conrad is online now  
post #7070 of 7075 Old Yesterday, 06:04 PM
AVS Special Member
 
metalsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western, Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,786
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 178 Post(s)
Liked: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Conrad View Post
Uh, what good would a FireTV stick do them if they don't have a TV? They can still watch Amazon on their laptop without it.
I said IF they have a tv why not spend 35 on a fire tv stick. That way you can watch in HD instead of the limits placed on using a browser.
Gary J, mdavej and reddice like this.

Last edited by metalsaber; Yesterday at 06:31 PM.
metalsaber is online now  
post #7071 of 7075 Old Today, 02:00 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Brian Conrad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Martinez, CA, USA
Posts: 4,471
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 363 Post(s)
Liked: 204
Quote:
Originally Posted by metalsaber View Post
I said IF they have a tv why not spend 35 on a fire tv stick. That way you can watch in HD instead of the limits placed on using a browser.
That's not what you said.
Quote:
They don't have a TV? If so, can't they afford a $35 Amazon FireTV stick? Just saying.
"If so" would address that they don't have a TV not that they have one. I know, English is a bitch!
Brian Conrad is online now  
post #7072 of 7075 Old Today, 03:21 PM
AVS Special Member
 
metalsaber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western, Pennsylvania
Posts: 3,786
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 178 Post(s)
Liked: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Conrad View Post
That's not what you said.

"If so" would address that they don't have a TV not that they have one. I know, English is a bitch!
You're trying too hard.
Gary J likes this.
metalsaber is online now  
post #7073 of 7075 Old Today, 04:11 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Westly-C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Techno World
Posts: 3,120
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 107 Post(s)
Liked: 85
^^ Off topic but...your avatar, what/where is that character from?

Dazed and confused over high tech.

Sigh...Concrap. The Internet Overlord Cometh
They're not com-tastic!
Westly-C is online now  
post #7074 of 7075 Old Today, 04:33 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Gary J's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: 4000' or sea level
Posts: 7,764
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked: 113
Search Google for this Image knows.
Gary J is online now  
post #7075 of 7075 Old Today, 06:19 PM
AVS Addicted Member
 
michaeltscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Posts: 18,631
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1490 Post(s)
Liked: 918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary J View Post
Search Google for this Image knows.

Only relevant if you're using Chrome. (In Chrome, mouse over an image on a page, right-click and select "Search Google for this image" to do a Google image search. For that image the results might be a this link).

Mike Scott (XBL: MikeHellion, PSN: MarcHellion)

"Think of the cable company as a group of terrorist (sic)." -- hookbill
michaeltscott is online now  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply Video Download Services & Hardware



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off