How Does Ubuntu 9.04 Measure Up to Mac OS X?

Bypassing Windows altogether, Mark Shuttleworth has stated that OS X is the operating system to beat. With Ubuntu's 9.04 now in wide distribution, we look at how it stacks up with the competition.

Bucking the historical trend of comparing desktop Linux with Windows, Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth recently told journalist Bruce Byfield that he was looking to Mac OS X as the operating system to beat for future Ubuntu releases — particularly in the areas of usability and user experience.  Now that Ubuntu 9.04 is out, how does it compare to Apple’s latest offering?

The “overall usability” of an operating system is hard to assess because it is so nebulous, but by breaking down the subject into a handful of distinct areas, we can measure Ubuntu’s present status in more meaningful terms.

Hardware Support and Configuration

As we all know, Apple has a natural advantage in the area of hardware support and configuration because of its tight control over Macs’ component parts.  But Ubuntu has made great strides forward in simplifying the process of detecting and correctly configuring problematic components like wireless adapters and video cards.  Jaunty Jackalope introduces a new restricted drivers manager that automatically probes the hardware to detect devices that can be used with closed source and binary-only drivers. It is still a hassle to jump through the separate-installation-for-restricted-drivers hoop, especially since certain system options (such as Compiz-based “desktop effects”) silently fail if you use the default open source driver, but it has never been this easy.

Jaunty ships with a new X.Org release that makes manual editing of xorg.conf even more of a rarity.  Multi-monitor configurations can be detected and adjusted from the Display Preferences tool, and input devices like Wacom pressure-sensitive graphics tablets are now hot-pluggable and auto-configured.  Jaunty also makes great strides forward in webcam support, with most USB video cameras now correctly detected and configured automatically — a big strategic win.

There are still weak spots in Ubuntu’s hardware support, including Bluetooth and the PulseAudio sound server.  Both have made improvements, but still require some level of manual intervention to configure hardware for a great many users — as a quick search on the forums will illustrate.  Likewise, support for laptop power management is improved, but still imperfect, with suspend and hibernate varying in stability depending on the exact hardware. This is due in part to Ubuntu’s introduction of closed source drivers.

Considering that Ubuntu needs to be able to run on any computer, with any hardware configuration, it actually has much better hardware support than Apple’s offering. Not only that, but you can buy just about any wireless card, web camera and other peripherals these days and have them seamlessly work. Just try doing that on OS X.

Grade: B, for greatly improved X server and video camera support, but room to grow in Bluetooth, audio, and power management.

Installation

The flip side of Mac OS X’s natural advantage on hardware support is Ubuntu’s battle-tested installation process, which over the years has grown faster, smarter, and simpler.  Those who have never installed, re-installed, or upgraded OS X might be surprised; it is certainly point-and-click, but lacks many of the niceties of modern Linux installers: no live CD/DVD mode for testing, no live installation, multiple discs that require swapping out, and perhaps most troubling, you must take a separate installation path if you want to preserve documents and previously-installed applications.

Ubuntu 9.04, by contrast, is available in a wide variety of formats: live CD, live USB key image, and installation directly through Synaptic, for a variety of hardware architectures.  It is easier to install, particularly when you include important options like disc partitioning that allow you to install Ubuntu alongside existing operating systems without fear of overwriting them.  You can also configure separate partitions for the storing of user data or any other directory on the system. And that doesn’t even begin to address the options you have for the system itself, including the main Ubuntu, the KDE-based Kubuntu, Xubuntu, and all of the other remixes, including a netbook-oriented option.

The 9.04 installer does not introduce any significant changes to the install process, although it does give you the option of setting up your system with encrypted home directories (which OS X also provides), which the security-conscious will praise.  On the whole, the installer has gotten better and better over the years, and leaves very little to be desired.

Grade: A

Base System and Desktop

For day-to-day usage, the desktop, file manager, and system configuration tools contribute most of what we would consider the OS’s usability scenarios.  Ubuntu 9.04 ships with GNOME 2.26 plus an assortment of tweaks and additions from the team at Canonical.  The most widely publicized changes in 9.04 are the new notifications system and the default disabling of the Control-Alt-Backspace keystroke combination, which has historically restarted the X server — neither is a major change in its own right, but both are controversial because they break with precedent. 

The new notification behavior strongly resembles the Growl system for OS X.  Growl is BSD-licensed and not developed by Apple, but it is widely popular with independent application developers and users.  The Control-Alt-Backspace keystroke combination has no direct parallel in OS X; it is possible to force a restart using the power key, but that is not likely to happen accidentally.

A few desktop and system configuration elements have been renamed since the last release, notably the session manager which now goes by the far more descriptive “Startup Applications.”  The System Tools submenu has been removed from the Applications menu, which is an improvement, and the shutdown screen has been redesigned to better present the available options to the user.  Regrettably, the menu system is still saddled with the vaguely-named (and inaccurate) “Places” menu, so there is still work to be done. Overall, the changes represent a move in the right direction, but they aren’t fully cooked yet.

I doubt whether there is any way to succinctly explain the distinction between “suspend” and “hibernate” without delving into the technical details, but the explanatory text in the shutdown tool does a good job without getting in the way.  A new utility called Computer Janitor debuts in 9.04, offering to locate and optionally remove accumulated but unnecessary material like old Debian packages, simplifying a task all Ubuntu users have had to perform manually in the past or ignore completely.

Assessing Ubuntu’s desktop usability against OS X’s is tricky indeed.  Apple still uses confusing unlabeled red, yellow, and green buttons for its window decorations; a choice it should have abandoned long ago.  Ubuntu’s default Human theme is visually easier to understand while still looking nice.  For some common tasks, the Finder (OS X’s file manager) is easier to use than Ubuntu’s Nautilus, but Finder is not without its faults.  Finding available network shares is harder than it should be, and Apple’s attempt to mask the Unix filesystem is pleasant as long as you don’t need the filesystem, but aggravating when you need to locate a particular component. 

Nautilus still treats removable media in a confusing way, with multiple paths to navigate to same location, perplexing quasi-URL-like schemes in the location bar (e.g., computer:/// ), and vulnerability to failure caused by other applications (try cding to a mounted CDROM, then attempt to eject the CD in Nautilus — Nautilus can’t tell you what the problem is). On the other hand, manually umount removable media under OS X and watch the operating system get itself in a twist. At least Ubuntu is still maintaining the underlying power of the command line, which is part of the power of Linux.

Ultimately, OS X is still ahead of Ubuntu on desktop usability because Ubuntu’s flaws are more likely to interrupt or prevent the user from completing a task.  To cite a few unrelated examples: you may prefer the GNOME taskbar to OS X’s Dock for keeping track of open applications, but it is much more difficult to figure out why your printer suddenly stopped processing jobs in Ubuntu.  You might like the individual entries in Ubuntu’s System -> Administration menu better than OS X’s all-in-one System Preferences panel, but it is much harder to correctly configure Ubuntu’s Firestarter than OS X’s built-in firewall.

Finally, OS X’s built-in help system trumps Ubuntu’s in at least two respects.  First, it is written as a guide to troubleshooting the current problem, while Ubuntu’s leans more towards documenting the contents of particular windows, and second, OS X’s Help system can actually open the appropriate windows and assist, which Ubuntu’s cannot.  Attempt to get help configuring a Bluetooth headset in both systems for an example.  OS X guides you through the process step by step; Ubuntu returns a list of man pages.

Grade: B-, in spite of big steps forward, the problems that remain tend to be task-blockers.  Many are the fault of underlying components (HAL, CUPS, etc.) rather than the desktop, but the end result is the same.

Next: Apps Apps Apps

Comments on "How Does Ubuntu 9.04 Measure Up to Mac OS X?"

cryophallion

Seeing as you recently had an article on how powerful Kdenlive was becoming, I\’m surprised it wasn\’t mentioned as an alternative to IMovie or Final Cut.

Reply
hhemken

The main issue today keeping people out of GNU/Linux and in Windows, desperate though they may be to get out, is the difficulty and most often impossibility of getting commercial Windows apps to work under Wine. This is the greatest issue facing Linux today, the issues in this article are all secondary to it. I think this article shows that the issues it touches are being dealt with effectively, often with enormous success.

When apps can be installed and made to run at all under Wine, one still needs to keep them running over the long term. Installing DirectX, .NET, Visual C++ libraries, or even other apps can render some or all apps under Wine mysteriously inoperable. I have used it constantly for three or four years, and to say it has been rough sailing is an understatement. Wine has had a magnificent history, and has had great success. When it works, it can work very well. However, all too often it can stop working at the drop of a hat. I don\’t see this as a long term solution.

It is urgent that software publishers be helped out of the closed-platform mindset. Commercial software apps need to stop being written in you-know-what IDE and written with tools and frameworks that are reliably cross-platform, like QT4 and wxWindows (any other suggestions out there?). For GNU/Linux to really hit the mainstream, people need to have true choice of platform, and that must include commercial native Linux apps. When you buy an app at Amazon, Fry\’s, or WalMart, it needs to run natively under Windows, MacOS, and GNU/Linux out of the box. No hassle, no Wine, no further actions required.

Every time I suggest to people that their penitence will end once they switch to Ubuntu, it\’s \”Will CS4 work?\”, \”Will [insert random commercial Windows game here] work?\”

It is no exaggeration to characterize this as nothing short of the single greatest emergency facing GNU/Linux today on its path towards mainstream acceptance.

Reply
gladmax

@ hhemken:
I disagree with your insistence that Linux must honor Microsoft-based products. One effective point of the article is that, in a number of categories, there are products that are nearly equal to, and some superior to, similar to Apple products. And since many of the Apple products mentioned are SUPERIOR to similar Microsoft-based products, I think Linux, and especially Ubuntu, is becoming recognized as a major operating system on par to Mac OS X and Windows, in part for the large number of programs that accomplish the same goals as Windows-bssed programs. I think more and more people and business will be willing to abandon Windows and its problems for Linux, in part because of the ever-growing list of Linux-based apps as well as better security and lack of commercial crapware.
And I think Shuttleworth is right: the target for Ubuntu is Mac OS X, not Windows. Windows is already in decline — just note the reluctance of business users to upgrade from XP to 7, let alone Vista — and that will become more apparent as time goes by.
(If developers like Adobe, for example, truly wanted to make their products cross-platform, couldn\’t they develop Java-based versions?)
One of the points of the article I think it hints at but doesn\’t make clearly is that Ubuntu is still too much like Linux, in that it\’s still too geeky. Most people who switch from Windows to Mac OS X appreciate how well-designed and intuitive the GUI is, how they can get more done in X than they could ever do in Windows. The OS X GUI is easier to figure out for most people than Windows or most forms of Linux. Ubuntu has gone the furthest in bringing a relatively simple, intuitive, well-designed GUI to Linux.
If anything, the Ubuntu community needs to change those aspects of Ubuntu that is hard to non-geeks to figure out. For example, why not give the Update Manager as simple an interface as Software Update in OS X, so that a user can just authorize the updates that are ready for download and installation, without confronting them with cryptic package names? An expert mode could be chosen if the user wants to see the details of what they are downloading and installing. Also, Ubuntu should give more prominence to the Add/Remove Programs feature, by making it something like the App Store for the iPhone, including better descriptions of what all those Linux programs do, and the chance for readers to rate and comment on them.
The simpler and more intuitive, and less Linuxy, Ubuntu becomes, will help it become accepted as a viable operating system, raising its popularity above both Windows and Mac OS X. But that depends much more on growing the number of quality programs that will run in Ubuntu and improving Ubuntu\’s reliability and ease of use, not enslaving it to a declining platform.

Reply
hhemken

@gladmax

I agree with your remarks, but they don\’t address what I believe to be the emergency. Users want their commercial apps to work now as a precondition to moving to GNU/Linux. They are not geeks such as ourselves, who have been willing to wait years and years for apps to appear and mature. I didn\’t mean to restrict myself to Windows, although that is the larger market by quite a stretch, and MacOS users will be less likely to switch than Windows users because Mac users don\’t seem to be particularly unhappy. If anything, as far as Windows is concerned, they are even more of a smug and snickering lot than Linux users. 8-)

My point is that commercial apps in general need to run natively under Linux as a pre-condition to large-scale popular use. I don\’t see Java as a solution. I use jEdit and OpenOffice all the time, and there are minor annoying issues that tend not to be present in compiled C/C++ apps. Their memory footprint is still larger as well.

Reply
joecrowe

Thank you for this write-up. I would like to take issue with a few points.

Installation: Linux may be easier to install for the cognoscenti. It\’s not as intuitive for a novice. (Someone who thinks that they\’ll gain more RAM by uninstalling programs and deleting old pictures.) I\’m not advocating disc-based installs, just that they are easier for one to understand.

Apps Apps Apps
Since the mac does not ship with Final Cut and since the cost is significant, it\’s unfair towards Ubuntu to get graded on this. For the average user (one that will not use extensions) Safari = Firefox. iChat is better than pidgin for ease of use. Mail is a much nicer program than Evolution. Looks better and is faster. Mail talks to everything. Evolution, like Thunderbird, is good at pop and IMAP. Exchange support is weak. I realize this really only affects SMBs.

For office productivity, one should really choose to compare Microsoft\’s Office for Mac, since that\’s the real choice for business. To expand on what hhemken says, familiarity is what drives the herd.

As far as Wine:
There\’s no incentive for publishers to potentially lower their profit margins by spending dev time achieving cross platform nirvana. The cheapest folks on the planet (we *nix users) are not going to be thrilled to spend $1400 on an Adobe product, no matter what platform it\’s on. Publishers would spend more and earn less.

The brilliant folks in the OSS community that are developing competing free products are paving the path to mainstream acceptance. Wine is a stopgap…a bandaid…albeit a comforting one.

Reply
aspa

I used to be a happy camper with my Mac OS X laptop in my previous job. Since switching jobs I haven\’t had the luxury of using Apple\’s machines so I\’ve had to go with the company standard and use a \”PC\” laptop. For the last three years I\’ve been trying out Windows XP, Vista and different Linux distributions (mainly Ubuntu and Fedora) on my laptops with unsatisfactory results. The anti-Windows sentiment has worn off during that time but the instability and performance problems of the Windows platform is extremely frustrating.
For me the main problems with Linux and Ubuntu have been hardware support and compatibility with company software infrastructure.
Since the laptop are the new desktop power management and suspend to ram/disk are extremely important. On many occasions this has been a show-stopper for my migration to Linux.
Our company uses MS Exchange email server which doesn\’t work properly with Linux based client software. We have the Outlook web access but the usability is pretty poor with browsers other than MS IE. The company VPN is another thing that doesn\’t work with Linux.
Other than these, unfortunately, Ubuntu just doesn\’t have the \”wow\” factor Macs have but right now I\’d just settle with a platform that allows me to be productive with my work.

Reply
jgabler

Yeah. I appreciate articles like this, keeping the dream alive. But, I\’ve been banging away at Linux (and for many years somewhere in there, FreeBSD) since 0.9. I did the laptop dance for a long time and even wrote one of those beloved writeups for how to get a now bygone version of FC5 to work perfectly on a particular, aging Dell laptop.

I\’m 40 now. I have kids. I just don\’t have time to screw around to get my OS to work when I have to do computing that is integral to my personal life and work. I just want stuff to work. No amount of comparison with MacOS or Windows will tempt me away from those OSes if the analogous important apps don\’t work flawlessly on a Linux distro (be it with VMware, Wine, etc., or natively)

So my laptop (which is also my desktop) is duel boot, Ubuntu 9 and Win Xp. As a Fedora user I felt dirty and weak moving to Ubuntu… but you know… it just works. That\’s what I need, so that\’s what I have…. even if I much prefer yum over apt-get.

I\’m a geek and I\’m succumbing to this. Linux is just not ready for real-world demands.

Reply
voidmain

Here\’s a post I have on Linux and other operating systems:

http://brian.pontarelli.com/2008/05/27/open-source-operating-system-quest/

In addition to my points in the blog post, I\’ll say this: Linux only stands a chance when someone realizes the complete mess that open source is and starts supporting commercial software and demands that open source licenses be voided or universally compatible to install on the OS. The issues with license conflicts and closed source software are not the concern of the users. We don\’t care! We just want stuff to work and be able to install software, regardless of whether or not it costs money. I don\’t care if some ASLv2 library can\’t be used with some GPL application. I just want them to work.

Plus, most Apple users spend money on software as long as it works. The number of people that actually buy CS4 is large. The number of people that buy iWork and other third-party non-free software is even larger. So, why spend money on software when there is a free alternative on Linux? Because OS X just works all the time and I never have to worry about licenses or figuring out why some little thing isn\’t working correctly. Plus, it looks a LOT nicer than Linux does. Unless you spend hundreds of hours getting Compiz perfectly installed and configured, Linux won\’t look nearly as good. Since time is money, OS X is actually cheaper if you do the math.

Reply
voidmain

One other thing I forgot to mention is that all of Apple\’s applications integrate really nicely with each other and they work beautifully with my iPhone. Safari, Mail, iCal, Address Book, and integrate seamlessly. I can pull information from Safari into Mail, Mail into Address Book or iCal. That type of integration is possible on Linux, just much more difficult since most of the applications are written by different entities. Plus, I wouldn\’t even want to try and get my iPhone to sync up with Linux.

Reply
gerlos

I think too that integration between applications is one of the more important goals for gnu/linux desktop systems, mostly if you compare to Mac Os X.
Being a KDE fan, I see that\’s there\’s a lot of things that can be better in my favourite desktop, but we are going in the right direction.

Reply
a.sicofante

This is a very biased article. Name someone who has removed Mac OS X from their computers and installed any version of Linux, including Ubuntu. It simply doesn\’t make sense to do that.

Linux needs critics, not fanboys.

Reply
wozyjob

@hhemken:
Very well said. I\’m glad someone else also sees what could very possibly be the most urgent problem.

(Keep in mind though, that CrossOver Linux can be very helpful in this situation. It even runs Microsoft Office flawlessly. I suggest taking a look.)

@a.sicofante
No one loves Mac OS X more than me. That said, my perfectly-functioning Mac laptop has been sleeping in a bag on the floor ever since I installed Ubuntu 9.04 on a $400 el-cheapo laptop. I am just truly impressed with how far Linux has come. Everything I want is there, and nothing that I don\’t want is. And unlike Apple, it\’s not like the guys at Ubuntu had any *idea* what type of machine I would want to run it on, yet everything simply works right out of the box. Amazing!

Reply
fbroce

I am using both OS X and Ubuntu 9.04. Ubuntu is much faster (although I have it on much faster hardware than my imac 2.66), cut and paste works far superior to OS X, opensource applications work great. I think it is a real competitor. Running the livecd version Ubuntu detects everything including airport correctly and looks great on the 24\” screen however, I do not have a dual boot machine at this point. I am waiting for snow leopard to make a final judgment.

Apple\’s strength at this point is the hardware and commercial software. The display is superb, the hardware is high quality, the os is very stable.

Reply
icetnet

There are a lot of issues that both sides can used to fight this battle. Looking at the code, there are a lot of things that can be said both positive and negative. From the code perspective, Apple has it made… They are not trying to figure out what hardware you have in order to make the system work.

From a hardware perspective…
Many of the \”fanboys\” are using equivalent hardware (e.g. they have dedicated graphics chips without a shared memory architecture, they use 7200rpm drives with large caches, and leading edge or better network cards that support industry standards [or prestandards]). This means that Linux \”just installs\”. They have the benefits of the OS properly configuring compiz and all of the \”WOW factor\” items off the bat…
Many of the \”naysayers\” are using corporate hardware (especially laptops) or the cheapest system they can find, with shared memory graphics in which the OS team has determined that it is too hard to auto configure compiz because of the variables and settled for the \”good enough\” bare configuration. This setup does not give the \”WOW\” environment that the others are talking about so these semi-techie users head for the blogs only to get too frustrated at points to have a good opinion of Linux.

This is the equivalent of running Vista on a netbook. YES, it does run on a netbook, but horribly slow and with no \”AERO\” interface. It does not have the \”WOW\” factor either and if we were allowed to tinker with the code and configurations more, I\’m sure we could come up with ways to make AERO work on a netbook but it would be for those willing to do lots of work.

MY POINT… My wife\’s Vista works awesome on her 4GB RAM ASUS laptop. My Ubuntu 9.04 works awesome on my 4GB RAM Dell laptop. My sister-in-laws OS X works awesome on her 4GB Apple laptop. Apple is the only vendor which you don\’t have to be selective on the hardware with. They tailor their systems explicitly for their software and vice-versa. But if you are more selective of the hardware in your system (whether laptop or desktop), you can have a great experience out of the box with either Windows or Linux.

The answer is: There is a choice. The question then becomes: What will you choose?

Reply
lore17

@a.sicofante I actually run only Ubuntu on my macbook pro, I have removed os x. I dual booted for a while but just wasn\’t using os x and didn\’t want it anymore. Now I wish I had bought a cheaper pc with similiar hardware specs for 1/4 the price.

Reply
pollix

I ran Windoze Xpee Pro and Ubuntu (Hardy) on the same old IBM Thinkpad T40 but I\’ve upgraded the memory to 2G and the disk to 120G and replaced the CD/DVD with a later IBM model. For a long while I ran both in parallel. During that time Windoze has had 3 different Firewalls (none very good) and I\’ve bought 2 different anti-virus, and lots of utilities over the last 3 year. The result – a PC that can run well but not for long. Each update could kill it dead and often did as PnP screwed the hardware drivers and installed nothing I own. I also know it WILL get virus attacked – again.
Ubuntu Hardy installed with ease once I gparted the hard disk. No hardware issues apart from configuring ppp for the stupid cellphone modem. I\’ve upgraded to 9.04 and have nearly abandoned Windoze . Ubuntu has been a solid performer for me – a few ease of use issues but nothing major (Hey I started back in the dark days of pre-DOS CPM). Ubuntu just works and I appreciate that.

Reply
r0k

You guys are on crack. You compare a no maintenance *nix distro like OS X to Ubuntu? And you give Ubuntu updates an A+?

First of all, How did you (Ubuntu geeks) manage to munge Firefox? It\’s the default browser that ships with Ubuntu and it isn\’t up to date in even the latest distro, (8.10 and now 9.04). So let\’s say an end user hears about the latest FF and tries to update it on their Ubuntu machine. This is no big deal on windoze or OSX, they simply click \”check for updates\” right in the browser and it\’s done. On Ubuntu, that menu item is GREYED OUT. GREYED OUT? On Ubuntu, why are end users expected to wait f-o-r-e-v-e-r for browser updates or deal with a python script back door workaround to do something as fundamental as updating the default browser? Give me a break. Then there\’s the idea that they\’ve gotta deselect Firefox updates or they\’re forcefed an older version by Ubuntu\’s automatic updates. This is beyond a joke. It is a huge turnoff.

Either make a different browser your default or get out of the sed|awk|grep|csh dark ages and make updates transparent automagic for end users. Don\’t get me wrong. I\’m a fan of Linux from way back. But the last few days I\’ve spent my considerable time downloading OS86 kalyway torrents so I can strip Ubuntu off my Acer Aspire One and use an OS that is not so high maintenance.

I\’m delighted to see the Linux community finally focusing on the correct target to compare itself to: OS X. But I think you guys need to spend a little less time assuming everyone is a *nix sysadmin and spend some time using your distro a few days to perform common tasks like updating the web browser before you release it. Whatever you do, don\’t give yourself an A+ for a C- end user experience or you\’ll be asking why Linux adoption is so low 100 years from now.

Reply
basilf

Linux is a very similar to OS-X and visa versa. Apple took a open source OS BSD it grows because of Open source and both OS-X and Linux benifit. Windows has no such process. OS-X and Linux are part of a common Os family when one progresses so does the other.

Apple was smart to use Open source but putting its own twist just look at all the themes out for both Windows and Linux to emulate its look, but what is underneath OS-X is closer to Linux than Windows will ever be. So its comparing oranges with oranges.

For general use Linux works fine, OS-X just looks better and besides that there is a Apple following that is almost a religion, Linux I dought will ever get there. Windows will never get there.

I use all three OS\’s and I find they all can do what the user wants, but like many people I really just want to read my e-mail I care little whats under the hood.

Reply

Excellent items from you, man. I have bear in mind your stuff prior to and you are just too great. I really like what you have acquired here, certainly like what you’re stating and the best way during which you assert it. You are making it entertaining and you still care for to keep it sensible. I can’t wait to learn far more from you. That is actually a wonderful web site.

Reply

Ahaa, its pleasant discussion on the topic of this paragraph here at this webpage, I have read all that, so at this time me also commenting at
this place.

Reply

A motivating discussion is definitely worth comment.
I think that you need to publish more about this issue, it might not be a taboo matter but generally folks don’t talk about these topics. To the next! Many thanks!!

Reply

Every weekend i used to visit this website, as
i want enjoyment, for the reason that this this website conations truly pleasant funny
data too.

Reply

I’ve been browsing online more than three hours today, yet I never found any interesting article like yours.
It’s pretty worth enough for me. In my opinion, if all web owners and bloggers made good content as you did, the
net will be much more useful than ever before.

Reply

Go?dd information. L??ky me I rran across your website by chance (stumbleup?n).
I’ve bookmarkoed it for later!

Alsoo visit my blog livejasmin credits hack v4.0.exe

Reply

This post will assist the internet viewers for creating new weblog or even a weblog from start to end.

Reply

I just want to mention I am just beginner to blogging and absolutely enjoyed you’re web blog. Probably I’m planning to bookmark your website . You actually come with wonderful article content. Cheers for revealing your website page.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>