I'm starting to think that the proliferation of the Internet is going to be a huge driving factor of the creation of a One World Government. Sovereign governments right now are at a loss for how to police their own citizens when committing crimes on the Internet, when it crosses borders. Every day I see stories, like this Lifehacker article, showing the struggle to keep the Internet a free, yet policed environment. Which prompted this idea to pop into my head.
Given that the Internet is a global structure, it's difficult for sovereign nations to interact with eachother and police these things well. Take, for instance, The Pirate Bay. This BitTorrent host is by far, the single largest facilitator of piracy in the world. And the FBI and RIAA would love nothing more than to shut them down, and take a peek at their servers to see who's been pirating, then go after them too. The problem is, TPB's servers are (or at least were) located in Sweeden. The RIAA and FBI have zero jurisdiction to physically confiscate them, making copyright infringement very difficult.
Given that our thirst for connectivity via the Internet just continues to grow, and will continue as time moves forward, this is eventually going to become a very big issue. More so than just making sure people get paid for intellectual copyright. It's not too far fetched to see that eventually, most of our interaction will be via the Internet. We will, essentially, live online. I think when it get's to that point, it'll seem like a no brainer to consider a kind of One World Government.
Monday, October 22, 2012
Monday, October 8, 2012
Even Microsoft's Programmers Get Simple Things Wrong
Wednesday, August 15, 2012
The Bourne Legacy: Thoughts from a Longtime Fan
Warning: Spoilers may be present.
As the title might imply, I'm a huge fan of the Bourne Trilogy. I like to think of sagas in their own little universe and I rank them a bit differently than standalone movies. So when one asks me what my favorite movies are, sagas don't really get considered. I believe that to tell a story that involves multiple installments, it's difficult to do it with movie scripts. As a result, sagas which are film adaptations of novels, tend to rank a little higher in my book. The Bourne Trilogy is right up there with Star Wars, The Matrix, and the Lord of the Rings as my favorite movies/sagas of all time.
So naturally, when I saw Jeremy Renner was starring in an expansion of Robert Ludlum's Bourne universe. I was pretty excited. Granted, I went into it expecting less than excellence, which was good in retrospect. Had I gone into it expecting the sheer awesomeness that the Bourne Identity, Supremacy, and Ultimatum gave, I probably would have been quite disappointed. I knew that seeing as how this movie didn't have a novel to take base from and was completely movie script, that I probably wouldn't see the cohesivness and continuity that the trilogy offered. And I was right. I also expected a slightly different camerawork and editing style, since it wasn't directed by Paul Greengrass (although there was nearly no disconnect between the Bourne Identity, and the last two installments in the trilogy despite a change in director). I was right about this as well.
In short, this movie was good. Not excellent, but certainly not bad either. It gives a lot of the awesome action sequences showcasing how much better these Treadstone/Blackbrair/Outcome agents are at all things kick ass than anything else the US government can throw at them. Which is half of what an audience expects when taking in a film with the "Bourne" title on it. Although I was fairly disappointed in the lack of hand-to-hand combat between these agents; something that characterized the trilogy and, in my mind, set it apart from other action movies. For example, I always loved how Jason Bourne would use clever objects as weapons to gain the upper hand on agents who were his equal in hand to hand combat. He used the pen to kill the Treadstone agent from Rome in the Bourne Identity; he used the rolled up magazine to counter the Treadstone agent's knife in the Bourne Supremacy; and he used the cookbook and towel to finally kill the Blackbriar agent, Desh, in the Bourne Ultimatum. Unfortunately there's none of that in this movie. And near the end, I thought they were building up to exactly that, but the scene ends when the opposing agent is taken out in the car chase scene. I don't know if this was intentional to ensure they stayed away from trying to clone the trilogy movies, or what. Either way, I was certainly looking forward to it, and it wasn't there.
The character of Aaron Cross is rather different from that of Jason Bourne. Where Bourne was mostly quiet and reserved with a sort of brewing intensity, Cross is comparably more of a humor spouting, loud mouth. Frankly, I think Renner lend's himself well to the character. And if I understand the story correctly, his superior abilities aren't a combination of inate ability and wiley veteran experience as in the case of Jason Bourne. Rather, they're gained from medicine that he takes (which is the centerpiece of the storyline) that enhances the metabolic abilities of his cells and brain functionality. The only hint that you get that he may be superior to his peers, is at the beginning when he's told he cleared a trial in record time. Again, any concrete proof of his dominance over his peers in the form of actual combat is non existent, and all you see is him besting those less trained than he.
Another strength of the Bourne movies was that their plots were never too far fetched that one would shrug it off as if there's no way it could happen. You always got the sense that this stuff was well within the realm of possibility. And that is definitely here in this movie. The plot focuses on a medication regiment the agents take that uses viruses to deliver the payload to the cells, and this becomes Cross' sole focus throughout the movie.
So all in all, The Bourne Legacy is a good movie, worth a theater trip for sure. However it just doesn't lend itself to the excellence I've come to know from the other movies bearing the "Bourne" branding. The story ties in well enough to be considered with the other three, while still being it's own self sustaining piece and not a simple recycle of the trilogy. No amnesia and revenge here. There were just some elements that I was really expecting there to be that just weren't there. Again, I don't know if these are script faux pas or conscientious attempts at avoiding copying the trilogy. Either way, I felt they held the movie back a bit.
As the title might imply, I'm a huge fan of the Bourne Trilogy. I like to think of sagas in their own little universe and I rank them a bit differently than standalone movies. So when one asks me what my favorite movies are, sagas don't really get considered. I believe that to tell a story that involves multiple installments, it's difficult to do it with movie scripts. As a result, sagas which are film adaptations of novels, tend to rank a little higher in my book. The Bourne Trilogy is right up there with Star Wars, The Matrix, and the Lord of the Rings as my favorite movies/sagas of all time.So naturally, when I saw Jeremy Renner was starring in an expansion of Robert Ludlum's Bourne universe. I was pretty excited. Granted, I went into it expecting less than excellence, which was good in retrospect. Had I gone into it expecting the sheer awesomeness that the Bourne Identity, Supremacy, and Ultimatum gave, I probably would have been quite disappointed. I knew that seeing as how this movie didn't have a novel to take base from and was completely movie script, that I probably wouldn't see the cohesivness and continuity that the trilogy offered. And I was right. I also expected a slightly different camerawork and editing style, since it wasn't directed by Paul Greengrass (although there was nearly no disconnect between the Bourne Identity, and the last two installments in the trilogy despite a change in director). I was right about this as well.
In short, this movie was good. Not excellent, but certainly not bad either. It gives a lot of the awesome action sequences showcasing how much better these Treadstone/Blackbrair/Outcome agents are at all things kick ass than anything else the US government can throw at them. Which is half of what an audience expects when taking in a film with the "Bourne" title on it. Although I was fairly disappointed in the lack of hand-to-hand combat between these agents; something that characterized the trilogy and, in my mind, set it apart from other action movies. For example, I always loved how Jason Bourne would use clever objects as weapons to gain the upper hand on agents who were his equal in hand to hand combat. He used the pen to kill the Treadstone agent from Rome in the Bourne Identity; he used the rolled up magazine to counter the Treadstone agent's knife in the Bourne Supremacy; and he used the cookbook and towel to finally kill the Blackbriar agent, Desh, in the Bourne Ultimatum. Unfortunately there's none of that in this movie. And near the end, I thought they were building up to exactly that, but the scene ends when the opposing agent is taken out in the car chase scene. I don't know if this was intentional to ensure they stayed away from trying to clone the trilogy movies, or what. Either way, I was certainly looking forward to it, and it wasn't there.The character of Aaron Cross is rather different from that of Jason Bourne. Where Bourne was mostly quiet and reserved with a sort of brewing intensity, Cross is comparably more of a humor spouting, loud mouth. Frankly, I think Renner lend's himself well to the character. And if I understand the story correctly, his superior abilities aren't a combination of inate ability and wiley veteran experience as in the case of Jason Bourne. Rather, they're gained from medicine that he takes (which is the centerpiece of the storyline) that enhances the metabolic abilities of his cells and brain functionality. The only hint that you get that he may be superior to his peers, is at the beginning when he's told he cleared a trial in record time. Again, any concrete proof of his dominance over his peers in the form of actual combat is non existent, and all you see is him besting those less trained than he.
Another strength of the Bourne movies was that their plots were never too far fetched that one would shrug it off as if there's no way it could happen. You always got the sense that this stuff was well within the realm of possibility. And that is definitely here in this movie. The plot focuses on a medication regiment the agents take that uses viruses to deliver the payload to the cells, and this becomes Cross' sole focus throughout the movie.
So all in all, The Bourne Legacy is a good movie, worth a theater trip for sure. However it just doesn't lend itself to the excellence I've come to know from the other movies bearing the "Bourne" branding. The story ties in well enough to be considered with the other three, while still being it's own self sustaining piece and not a simple recycle of the trilogy. No amnesia and revenge here. There were just some elements that I was really expecting there to be that just weren't there. Again, I don't know if these are script faux pas or conscientious attempts at avoiding copying the trilogy. Either way, I felt they held the movie back a bit.
Thursday, July 12, 2012
The Unintended Consequence of DLC
In the past, oh say, 5 years, the gaming industry has seen a massive shift in the way games are cared for throughout their lifespan. It used to be that you ponied up a decent chunk of change for a new game and you played it for a while. Then, if it was a popular enough game, along would come an expansion pack for about half the price of the original game, and it would extend the life of the game for a year or so and have a considerable amount of content in it to do so. These used to be things that you bought, in a store, on disc.
However, in the last 10 years, internet speeds have increased dramatically and made the distribution of expansion content fast, easy, and convenient. This has particularly had a profound impact on the console market, where expansion content was nearly non-existent in previous generations. Now that everyone can download expansion content on nearly a whim, it's resulted in smaller and smaller content releases. A game developer no longer has to wait an entire two or so years to compile enough content to justify printing thousands of copies and sending them to Best Buy stores and Gamestop stores. They can produce a couple maps, a few new quests, and release it to the masses quickly and efficiently and without the cost of printing it onto physical storage media. Sounds great, right? Wrong.
The problem with this, is that the ever shrinking size of content, and increasing frequency of releases makes the content itself more expensive in the end. And the ease of distributing content makes game developers and publishers update a game's content far too frequently, all for the sake of making money. I'll give you a by-the-numbers example:
Take one of my favorite games: Battlefield 3. I talk about it all the time, and my friends are sick of me talking about it all the damn time. I just simply love it. Or at least, I did. Unfortunately, my old friend and I are somewhat disenchanted from one another as of late. See, recently, DICE and EA announced a whole slew of new expansion DLC packs for the popular FPS. Four. That's right, four. Which brings the total up to 5, by the time they'll stop making content. All of which are themed to showcase all the crazy variety and awesomeness of Battlefield. Back to Karkand, Close Quarters, Armored Kill, Aftermath, and End Game. Each of these will be $15 a-la-carte. Or you can opt for the "Premium" option. For a one time fee of $50 you can get all 5 of them, plus a bunch of fancy extras, some of which are actually pretty cool. So if one were to buy the expansions a-la-carte, you will have spent $135 to play Battlefield. If you opt for Battlefield Premium, you will have spent $110 all told. And the fans, such as myself, will be playing for years, despite the entire time of development for the game's extra content being just more than one year, by the time End Game hits. Now that's all fine and dandy if you've got the change. But what about those that don't? Such as myself. Right now, millions of gamers are enjoying Close Quarters and I'm not. I simply can't afford to buy it right now, even a-la-carte. And I don't want to play, unless I'm playing with all the "big kids". And anybody whose a "big kid" playing BF3, is up to date and enjoying the latest, let me assure you.
All this leads me to feel alienated from the game I love so much. I just don't want to pick up my controller to play if I can't be mixing it up with the good players in the latest maps, enjoying new weapons to upgrade and unlockables to be had. I just plain feel left out. And so I got to thinking about this whole thing, and I had the epiphany: "What the hell is the point of all of this content?" Why does DICE need to release a few new maps and guns and assignments every couple of months? What the hell was wrong with Battlefield 3 that it needed to be updated. Just think about how much content there'll be in a short time when there's 5 expansions floating around. On average, each pack has about 4 or 5 new maps, about 10 new weapons, a few new vehichles, and other assorted additions. And if my memory serves, the game shipped with 8 maps, and around 30 weapons. So by the time all of this junk is all out there, you're looking at like 30ish maps and 80ish weapons, give or take. What. The. Fuck. DICE? Or rather, should I point the finger at EA? The massive beast of a publisher that bought them.
There's no need for all this nonsensical content! Battlefield 3 is a great game. It simply doesn't need a bajillion things in it. Star Craft had one normally sized expansion and a campaign editor, and people still play it religiously, despite it being more than 14 fucking years old! Blizzard didn't waste their time adding senseless crap onto it. They spent their time more wisely devoting their time to making sequels that took them years to perfect.
But now that expansions are so quick and easy to distribute, it makes it more worth the time and investment by publishers, like, oh I don't know, EA, to tell their minion game developers to pump time and effort into just throwing as much crap at a game as they can. Now, you've got gamers ponying up far more money than they would have (even accounting for inflation) 5 or 6 years ago for new content. Now, we expect new maps to play around in every few months from our developers. And you have people like me, relatively poor people, who have to make a decent investment just to buy the game outright, and then suffer while they watch all the cool kids go on to the new shiny toys while we're left in the corner playing with last year's crappy model. Which just makes you want to not play at all. And it's all unnecessary. You don't need to cloud a game's real genius with arbitrary bullshit. Let it be what it is. Don't milk your fan base for all their worth. You'll end up making enemies of them.
DLC was supposed to bring ease and convenience to gaming. It's done that most definitely. But inadvertently, I think, it's caused publishers and developers to get dollar signs in their eyes when they realize how easy it is to distribute any content they want to make. And it's caused some of us to become outsiders looking in, as friends play in sandboxes we just can't afford to. I'm now in staunch protest of quick, easy expansions for games.
However, in the last 10 years, internet speeds have increased dramatically and made the distribution of expansion content fast, easy, and convenient. This has particularly had a profound impact on the console market, where expansion content was nearly non-existent in previous generations. Now that everyone can download expansion content on nearly a whim, it's resulted in smaller and smaller content releases. A game developer no longer has to wait an entire two or so years to compile enough content to justify printing thousands of copies and sending them to Best Buy stores and Gamestop stores. They can produce a couple maps, a few new quests, and release it to the masses quickly and efficiently and without the cost of printing it onto physical storage media. Sounds great, right? Wrong.The problem with this, is that the ever shrinking size of content, and increasing frequency of releases makes the content itself more expensive in the end. And the ease of distributing content makes game developers and publishers update a game's content far too frequently, all for the sake of making money. I'll give you a by-the-numbers example:
Take one of my favorite games: Battlefield 3. I talk about it all the time, and my friends are sick of me talking about it all the damn time. I just simply love it. Or at least, I did. Unfortunately, my old friend and I are somewhat disenchanted from one another as of late. See, recently, DICE and EA announced a whole slew of new expansion DLC packs for the popular FPS. Four. That's right, four. Which brings the total up to 5, by the time they'll stop making content. All of which are themed to showcase all the crazy variety and awesomeness of Battlefield. Back to Karkand, Close Quarters, Armored Kill, Aftermath, and End Game. Each of these will be $15 a-la-carte. Or you can opt for the "Premium" option. For a one time fee of $50 you can get all 5 of them, plus a bunch of fancy extras, some of which are actually pretty cool. So if one were to buy the expansions a-la-carte, you will have spent $135 to play Battlefield. If you opt for Battlefield Premium, you will have spent $110 all told. And the fans, such as myself, will be playing for years, despite the entire time of development for the game's extra content being just more than one year, by the time End Game hits. Now that's all fine and dandy if you've got the change. But what about those that don't? Such as myself. Right now, millions of gamers are enjoying Close Quarters and I'm not. I simply can't afford to buy it right now, even a-la-carte. And I don't want to play, unless I'm playing with all the "big kids". And anybody whose a "big kid" playing BF3, is up to date and enjoying the latest, let me assure you.
All this leads me to feel alienated from the game I love so much. I just don't want to pick up my controller to play if I can't be mixing it up with the good players in the latest maps, enjoying new weapons to upgrade and unlockables to be had. I just plain feel left out. And so I got to thinking about this whole thing, and I had the epiphany: "What the hell is the point of all of this content?" Why does DICE need to release a few new maps and guns and assignments every couple of months? What the hell was wrong with Battlefield 3 that it needed to be updated. Just think about how much content there'll be in a short time when there's 5 expansions floating around. On average, each pack has about 4 or 5 new maps, about 10 new weapons, a few new vehichles, and other assorted additions. And if my memory serves, the game shipped with 8 maps, and around 30 weapons. So by the time all of this junk is all out there, you're looking at like 30ish maps and 80ish weapons, give or take. What. The. Fuck. DICE? Or rather, should I point the finger at EA? The massive beast of a publisher that bought them.
There's no need for all this nonsensical content! Battlefield 3 is a great game. It simply doesn't need a bajillion things in it. Star Craft had one normally sized expansion and a campaign editor, and people still play it religiously, despite it being more than 14 fucking years old! Blizzard didn't waste their time adding senseless crap onto it. They spent their time more wisely devoting their time to making sequels that took them years to perfect.
But now that expansions are so quick and easy to distribute, it makes it more worth the time and investment by publishers, like, oh I don't know, EA, to tell their minion game developers to pump time and effort into just throwing as much crap at a game as they can. Now, you've got gamers ponying up far more money than they would have (even accounting for inflation) 5 or 6 years ago for new content. Now, we expect new maps to play around in every few months from our developers. And you have people like me, relatively poor people, who have to make a decent investment just to buy the game outright, and then suffer while they watch all the cool kids go on to the new shiny toys while we're left in the corner playing with last year's crappy model. Which just makes you want to not play at all. And it's all unnecessary. You don't need to cloud a game's real genius with arbitrary bullshit. Let it be what it is. Don't milk your fan base for all their worth. You'll end up making enemies of them.
DLC was supposed to bring ease and convenience to gaming. It's done that most definitely. But inadvertently, I think, it's caused publishers and developers to get dollar signs in their eyes when they realize how easy it is to distribute any content they want to make. And it's caused some of us to become outsiders looking in, as friends play in sandboxes we just can't afford to. I'm now in staunch protest of quick, easy expansions for games.
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
Starting Up The Election Research
I started writing a post, and instead thought, "Hey this would be a hell of a lot easier to just ramble about." So I made a quick video with my webcam and just rambled a bit. The big point I'm trying to make, and I take a while to get around to it, is that your right to vote is important to exercise. I often think of the hundreds of thousands of people who've died so that you can do so.
Independence Day, Not the 4th of July
Ask any one of my personal friends and they'll tell you that at some point, I've given them shit for using the term "4th of July" to refer to Independence Day. It's one of my biggest pet peeves. Now, I know it's not a federal crime if one uses this common place vernacular to refer to the holiday. I mean it when I give my friends shit, but it's always in a playful tone. I get that it's not the biggest of deals, but it's important to me to call the day what it is.
I've always been very happy to be American (although I avoid pride) and I love the country I live in immensely. I take Independence Day to be a significant holiday for the country and as such, I mean to call the day what it is: A day that we celebrate the formal separation of the 13 colonies that would become the United States of America from the Kingdom of England; not simply a date of the calendar. Holidays have names for a reason, and that is they are days where we specially recognize something. Christmas, as we all know, is a holiday where the birth of Jesus Christ is celebrated (whether or not it's the day of the year it happened), which just happens to be the 25th of December. Nobody, however, would call it such. Nobody calls Thanksgiving "The Last Thursday in November". Christmas, Thanksgiving, Memorial Day, Labor Day, Easter, and countless other holidays all have meanings and they all have their own meaningful name. Each 4th of July I don't celebrate a date on a calendar, or the position of the earth in it's annual orbit about the Sun. I celebrate the founding of the place that I live, which I love dearly. The funny thing is, the only holiday which we actually do celebrate a date on the calendar is New Year's Day, and even that has it's own special name. Nobody ever refers to it as "The 1st of January", yet everybody commonly calls the most significant civic holiday we in America have, "The 4th of July" and it drives me absolutely bonkers. Please, my fellow Americans, start saying "Independence Day".
I've always been very happy to be American (although I avoid pride) and I love the country I live in immensely. I take Independence Day to be a significant holiday for the country and as such, I mean to call the day what it is: A day that we celebrate the formal separation of the 13 colonies that would become the United States of America from the Kingdom of England; not simply a date of the calendar. Holidays have names for a reason, and that is they are days where we specially recognize something. Christmas, as we all know, is a holiday where the birth of Jesus Christ is celebrated (whether or not it's the day of the year it happened), which just happens to be the 25th of December. Nobody, however, would call it such. Nobody calls Thanksgiving "The Last Thursday in November". Christmas, Thanksgiving, Memorial Day, Labor Day, Easter, and countless other holidays all have meanings and they all have their own meaningful name. Each 4th of July I don't celebrate a date on a calendar, or the position of the earth in it's annual orbit about the Sun. I celebrate the founding of the place that I live, which I love dearly. The funny thing is, the only holiday which we actually do celebrate a date on the calendar is New Year's Day, and even that has it's own special name. Nobody ever refers to it as "The 1st of January", yet everybody commonly calls the most significant civic holiday we in America have, "The 4th of July" and it drives me absolutely bonkers. Please, my fellow Americans, start saying "Independence Day".
Saturday, June 16, 2012
Android 4.0 ICS On My HTC Incredible
Rooting my Android phone was probably the best thing I've ever done to it, besides taking the little guy home with me, of course. I love the control it gives me over the software I decide to load onto my device, which has amazing impact. For starters, the operating systems available give me great battery life, and are a much lighter package than any OEM system with all of their "bloatware". And of course, I've been able to upgrade my phone to 2.3 Gingerbread before HTC released their update for it. To be honest, I'm still not sure if they've released their build for the Incredible yet.
Mostly, I've used CyanogenMod 7 throughout the life of my phone. I've dabbled in OMGB and MIUI and both are really good. Although I was dissapointed to hear that the Incredible will probably not be getting CyanogenMod 9, which is the new ICS version of CyanogenMod. I was pretty dissapointed at the notion that my device, a mere year and a half old, was too much of an antique to get any kind of support in the modding community. But then, I found AOPK. I'd heard of them, but they didn't have a build for the Incredible, until recently. I first attempted to install 39, and ran into issues with my display. Seemed like a kernel issue, considering that it seemed like it was having issues displaying info on my screen correctly. However, the RootzWiki thread on AOKP for the Incredible informed me that builds 38 and 39 aren't working for this device, and 37 is the most current working build.
So far, I'm quite impressed at how well ICS works on my Incredible. I was worried that since it really only meets minimum specs for ICS, that it'd be akin to running 1.6 Donut back in Android's prime. But honestly, while I do notice that it's not as snappy as it could be, I don't notice any significant lags or delays that would cause me to worry about using it as my daily driver. Which is exactly what I'm gonna do for the foreseeable future; enjoying Chrome Beta and other features and software that until now I was unable to use.
UPDATE: After a day or so running this as my primary driver, I decided to go back to CyanogenMod. The less than snappy response time does take a toll as the day goes on. The memory usage is almost always up near maximum and it caused a couple of crash reboots, a bit too frequently for my taste of a daily driver. I do have a clockworkmod backup of it in case I want to revisit it, but the recent update to CM 7.2.0 is super snappy and quick and just works better with my hardware as a daily driver.
Mostly, I've used CyanogenMod 7 throughout the life of my phone. I've dabbled in OMGB and MIUI and both are really good. Although I was dissapointed to hear that the Incredible will probably not be getting CyanogenMod 9, which is the new ICS version of CyanogenMod. I was pretty dissapointed at the notion that my device, a mere year and a half old, was too much of an antique to get any kind of support in the modding community. But then, I found AOPK. I'd heard of them, but they didn't have a build for the Incredible, until recently. I first attempted to install 39, and ran into issues with my display. Seemed like a kernel issue, considering that it seemed like it was having issues displaying info on my screen correctly. However, the RootzWiki thread on AOKP for the Incredible informed me that builds 38 and 39 aren't working for this device, and 37 is the most current working build.
So far, I'm quite impressed at how well ICS works on my Incredible. I was worried that since it really only meets minimum specs for ICS, that it'd be akin to running 1.6 Donut back in Android's prime. But honestly, while I do notice that it's not as snappy as it could be, I don't notice any significant lags or delays that would cause me to worry about using it as my daily driver. Which is exactly what I'm gonna do for the foreseeable future; enjoying Chrome Beta and other features and software that until now I was unable to use.
UPDATE: After a day or so running this as my primary driver, I decided to go back to CyanogenMod. The less than snappy response time does take a toll as the day goes on. The memory usage is almost always up near maximum and it caused a couple of crash reboots, a bit too frequently for my taste of a daily driver. I do have a clockworkmod backup of it in case I want to revisit it, but the recent update to CM 7.2.0 is super snappy and quick and just works better with my hardware as a daily driver.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)