News from the 43S



#80

That's the state of the art regarding its keyboard now:

Still in doubt about swapping 1/x and y^x d:-?

Still looking forward to the HW d:-)


#81

I'd swap USER and [alpha]. The rest is perfect.


#82

Agreed.

#83

Agreed!

#84

Same here.

#85

+1

#86

Agreed with Reth

#87

Agreed!

#88

Not this one again.

The shifted alpha is completely justified. Almost always when you'll want to use alpha, you can just press USER as a shortcut.

Look at your 34S. Shifted alpha. Not a problem and rarely do you need to press the shift.


- Pauli


#89

Quote:
Not this one again...

Look at your 34S. Shifted alpha. Not a problem and rarely do you need to press the shift.

- Pauli


It's a big problem for me. The biggest one.

ps. on my 48 I can't remember the last time I hit "USER". I turn on or off user mode from programs. When out of a program it is off.

[alpha] I use all the time. Because I forget keyboard shortcuts for all the calcs I have.

Edited: 4 July 2013, 6:00 a.m.


#90

This won't be anything like a 48 series machine. We've no plans to implement a command line. We might allow XEQ alpha xxx but in that case you won't need the shift key. The only case I can think of where you will need to use the shift key before alpha is when entering alpha strings onto the stack.


- Pauli


#91

Quote:
The only case I can think of where you will need to use the shift key before alpha is when entering alpha strings onto the stack.

- Pauli


That will be never.
I might misunderstand your conception.
In which case I'll wait until it clears up.

Good luck.

#92

It is a nice neat layout. Here are a couple of comments.

How often does one use %- or %+ ? You could gain a key position by just providing the traditional % and delta% keys.

I'm not sure why there is [a b/c] duplicated in blue and white.

As a statistician working with frequently with logits I would miss e^x and ln being directly accessible rather than through a LOG menu.

Nick


#93

Quote:
I'm not sure why there is [a b/c] duplicated in blue and white.

Please compare your WP 34S.

d:->

#94

Quote:
How often does one use %- or %+ ?
BTW, what is it good for? Usually, the % operator preserves y on HP calcs, thus a subsequent '-' or '+' operator will do the job conveniently.

As Nick wrote, '%' and 'Delta_%' would be _much_ better.


#95

As you see, Delta% is featured - it was never under discussion and will never be.

Some arguments about the other visible % functions on the 43S in random order:

  • Who needs % at all? 8.5% of 123.4 is 123.4 ENTER .285 x which is even one keystroke less than 123.4 ENTER 28.5 f %.
  • %+ and %- save one keystroke each compared with % + and % -, respectively. And they cover two most popular cases.
  • The two f-shifted locations were available :-)
  • Any engineer is able to multiply by 1.19 for adding 19% VAT - so why % at all?
  • Of the menu-based functions, %T is nothing more than a joke. The other ones (%Sigma, %MRR, and the margin functions) look justified to me.
Just my 20m€, as usual.

d:-)


#96

exactly, why % at all ?


#97

That's what I was wondering. I NEVER use a % key for anything. I always do the decimal conversion in my head. Anyone needing to use such a powerful calculator will know what to do.


#98

Quote:
Anyone needing to use such a powerful calculator will know what to do.

Yes, indeed. I never understood why any scientific calculator needs a % key!


#99

+1

In 3 decades of using calculators, I have never used a % key. And I work in finance, not engineering.

Principally, it's not obvious what these keys do, so it's better to multiply and know what you're getting.

Quote:
exactly, why % at all ?

Well, the same argument could be extended to nearly all functions. Who needs anything other than a 4-banger since it can do all other operations?

"%" is handy when doing, say sales tax. 123 [ENTER] 7 [f] % is easier than 123 [ENTER] . 0 7 % and for some people, calculating percentages is common.

The other reason I like '%' on the keyboard might not apply to the 43S because it has more to do with marketing. I think an "advanced" calculator should extend a "simple" calculator, but should not take away any of the simple functionality. You want a shopper to look at it and think "this does everything I need and more" rather than "this has all sorts of junk I don't use and it doesn't have feature X that's on my simple calculator."

Quote:
  • Who needs % at all? 8.5% of 123.4 is 123.4 ENTER .285 x which is even one keystroke less than 123.4 ENTER 28.5 f %.

  • That's how I do it, as usually this takes less time than finding the % key in the keyboard. I would multiply by .085 however ;-)


    Gerson,


    It threw me too, but if I'm not mistaken, I believe Walter was trying to show how he would calculate 28.5% of 123.4 (since he typed .285 and 28.5 later in the sentence). It seems his keyboard is missing keystrokes. ;-)


    Yes, I noticed Walter missed the 2. I was just mean :-)


    Sim, sim, eu sei ... ;-)


    Sim, I knew I could count on your sense of humor :-)


    :-) Following Reth's suggestion, I'll change the label of the orthogonal polynom menu to POLYN. Any language objections?

    d:-)


    No, but the current one looks more meaninful to me. Also, it is more compact. I don't see anything wrong about using symbols -- isn't +/- much better than CHS, for instance?

    IIRC, a particular thing about the HP implementation of % is that it leaves the "percentage base" on the Y register, making it simpler to add (or subtract) the calculated percentage to (or from) the base. The "percentage" is preserved on LAST X, and Z and T are preserved.

    A RPN program to do something similar may look as:

    x<>y
    STO Z
    100
    /
    x<>y
    *

    Of course, this example does not preserve the original Z and T contents.

    I agree there is nothing here that a scientific calculator user cannot do by other means; perhaps it only brings a small convenience for people who need to work with percentages.

    I am late to this discussion and might not have fully caught up on all the threads, so apologies if this was covered.

    Some observations:

    1) The delta% and %+ %- operations are far part. It would be nice if they were grouped together (assuming I understand what they do). Maybe swap the delta percent with pi?

    2) Pi is hanging out by itself, far from both the TRIG and constants menu. Had you considered any configuration where it would be next to one of those for logical grouping consistancy?

    3) Using up the keyboard space for FS? and CF would not be my first choice. Compared to other operations, are those two that frequently used that they deserve the real estate? And CF, but no SF?


    @Nick & Marcel,

    Maybe you're really a bit late to this discussion. Earlier threads are found easily searching for '43S' on this forum. The whole thing started last November, so there isn't too much to read.

    d:-)

    Quote:
    1) The delta% and %+ %- operations are far part. It would be nice if they were grouped together (assuming I understand what they do). Maybe swap the delta percent with pi?

    Delta% is next to the FINance menu, while it has no relation to IBASE. %+ and %- are more useful than a plain % label and are related to + and -. The location of pi is following an old suggestion of a forum member - it is related to 3, isn't it?
    Quote:
    2) Pi is hanging out by itself, far from both the TRIG and constants menu. Had you considered any configuration where it would be next to one of those for logical grouping consistancy?

    Please see above. I won't put pi in a CONSTants menu, BTW. TRIG is a better idea, but the space around there is occupied.
    Quote:
    3) Using up the keyboard space for FS? and CF would not be my first choice. Compared to other operations, are those two that frequently used that they deserve the real estate? And CF, but no SF?

    CF is a FLAGS command also used for clearing carry and overflow flags for finite integers. And FS? is a short binary TEST command. Hope this explains the reasons a bit.

    d:-)

    One more thing. I'd stay away from function/command names having irregular letters or symbols as 'alpha' in wp34s for example. It makes a search for them a nightmare in the manual. Make it simple, include prediction in alpha input mode and make alpha key primary if you want to have a winner.

    Thank you for keeping i as a primary key function, with the shifted angle symbol. (I don't recall that there was necessarily any discussion about not doing so, but thanks just the same.)

    Wow, that looks very nice! A few thoughts/questions, for what they’re worth.

    I would definitely NOT swap 1/x with y^x. I use 1/x almost as a data entry key such as +/- or EEX as well as after calculating a significant denominator. Plus, from a symmetry standpoint, y^x belongs next to x^2 rather than “diagonally adjacent” if you see my meaning.

    Are D.MS and H.MS duplicative, or am I misinterpreting? Assuming .d is the reverse of D.MS, the “forward” and “reverse” functions are already nicely arranged at the top, and H.MS can be deleted.

    I agree with some previous comments on the %+ and %- functions not being deserving of keyboard space. If H.MS is eliminated, the typical % could replace it right next to delta%. If %+ and %- give up their spots, Cy,x and Py,x might be good replacements. Anybody for HMS+ and HMS-?

    I also agree that pi seems kind of lonely, but I can’t offer anything better without giving something else up. My only thought is putting pi where the x-to-location swap is (the yellow function on the J key). There isn’t another logical location for this x-swap, so such a move would probably relegate it to off-keyboard status. I use x<>y a lot but only swap to other locations in programs. Losing keyboard access to it wouldn’t be a big deal to me, but others might not see it as a good trade to fix (at most) a minor nitpick.

    Is the door fully closed on leaving the function keys blank? The F1 … F6 labels aren’t really mnemonic of anything, and blank keys could give a cleaner look.

    The constellation of i, sigma+, and R/S draws my eye from a usability standpoint. Two thoughts are that sigma+ might be nice on the other end of the row or swapped with R/S. At the right end of the top row (basically rolling this row) it’s next to i. Both are keys that when used at all are likely used in repetitive succession. Swapped with R/S, sigma+ would be next to the + key. That way the short, easy reach is for the key that might be used repetitively in succession (sigma+) and the longer reach is for the key that might lead to a final result (R/S).

    Also looking forward to the hardware-- even without fixed keys for logs and trigs ;-)
    -Bill

    I'll admit up front all of these are only for my benefit :-D

    Move X.Fcn next to P.Fcn; I/O can be anywhere

    [%+] and [%-] are redundant if you have a [%] function since you can [%][+] and [%][-] as two strokes

    ASSIGN can move to a menu. I never used it on the 28 or 48, and not all that much on the 41 outside of a program

    SAVE and LOAD can move to a menu with other memory-based items

    I'm not sure what's in the DISPL menu, but it might work to mix it in with the MODES menu

    A lot of the [f] functions look like something that should be included in the [g]menu on the same key. Either that's redundant or that's a flexibility opportunity to ASSIGN those items to what ever your favorite item from that menu is (i.e. instead of [f][DSP] being like FIX. you can make it like ENG.)

    With soft key menus, you can have submenus hierarchically. I'll admit sometimes that drives me nuts, especially at first.

    Can I [XEQ][alpha]SOMETHING[alpha] ?

    I loved what you did with the 34s, and I hope we can come up with a nice physical plant for this one too!

    Wow, this looks nice. I want one!
    Some thoughts, while we can place wishes:

    • I too would swap alpha and User
    • I miss LastX. I can't imagine life without it, as I need it constantly. You could move FS? and CF into the Flags menu to make room for it, they're much less used.
    • HMS+ and HMS- would make more sense than %+ and %-. The latter are easily replaced by <%> <+> or <%> <->, the former would be <HR> <x<>y> <HR> <x<>y> <-> <H.MS> (adding could omit one x<>y, of course).
    • I for one am not fond of having secondary functions printed below the keys. The 67 was the only model which did that, all others have secondary functions above the keys. I find that more logical.
    • Would it be possible to move the letters onto the keys? The 35s has that (and the 50g, of course), an I find it easier to use than the off-key letters of the 48.
    Regards, Victor

    Just three short answers:

    1) LASTx is replaced by RCL L as in the WP 34S.

    2) HMS+ and HMS- are not needed since we'll feature a time data type, so we can use just + and -.

    3) H.MS and D.MS are *not* redundant - the first is for times and the latter for angles. There will be 11 different data types on the 43S.

    d:-)


    Quote:
    3) H.MS and D.MS are *not* redundant - the first is for times and the latter for angles. There will be 11 different data types on the 43S.

    I like this, this should clear up some regular agony. Will I be able to convert/combine a D.MS angle of longitude with an H.MS measure of Right Ascension? (speaking of agony...)

    You are free to implement whatever you want in your programs :-)


    - Pauli

    Quote:
    H.MS and D.MS are *not* redundant

    Will they be displayed differently?

    BTW, if there will be diffrent data types, the angular type needs d.m (degrees, minutes and decimal fractions of minutes) subtype compatible with d.ms. The almanac data and altitude corrections are in this format. Also charts of appropriate scale are graduated like that. In practice, only one digit after decimal point is used, so if h.ms is available then people just do the mental conversion 0.1'=6"


    Quote:
    Will they be displayed differently?

    Yes, they will.
    Quote:
    BTW, if there will be diffrent data types, the angular type needs d.m (degrees, minutes and decimal fractions of minutes) subtype compatible with d.ms. The almanac data and altitude corrections are in this format. Also charts of appropriate scale are graduated like that. In practice, only one digit after decimal point is used, so if h.ms is available then people just do the mental conversion 0.1'=6"

    So far, I was planning for dddd°mm'ss.hh" down to hundredth of angular seconds. And that shall be the fixed format for this kind of angular data.

    d:-)


    Just saying. dddd°mm.hh' is also a valid and widely used mode. Yes, angular units is a mess and if you can figure out how to deal with them gracefully, that will be quite an achievement. None of the existing calculators do it right imo (and I do not know what "right" should be at this point).

    At some point I tried to implement it similar to HP-35s [eng->]/[<-eng] pair where you add/remove a sexagecimal level. But in this case there are only 3 meaningful possibilities:

    ddd,mm,ss,ddd -- degrees (decimal), minutes (60-base), seconds (60-base), fraction of seconds (decimal again)

    ddd,mm,ddd -- degrees, minutes, fractions of minutes

    ddd,ddd -- degress, fractions of degrees

    so it seems like a waste of keyboard real estate.

    I agree I much prefer the shifted functions above the keys (so much so, my WP34s has an above the keys overlay).

    I'd also prefer an alternative to the underline for menus - it makes for a more crowded appearance, while still being somewhat hard to pick out - I prefer a light reversed text block, or some type of shaded background like the 42S (though not its blacker on black shading).


    Quote:
    I agree I much prefer the shifted functions above the keys (so much so, my WP34s has an above the keys overlay).

    Thus we introduce a compromise with the 43S: shifted functions above the unshifted on the screen, shifted functions below the unshifted on plastic ;-)

    Seriously: we sit in front of the keyboard; the slanted lower faces of the keys carry shifted functions; thus the shifted function labels are below of the unshifted horizontal keytops. So, why shall a second shifted function label be positioned on the opposite side of the keytop?? §1 of good design rules: form follows function!

    Alternative: revert the keys to have slanted upper faces. Now you can print the second shifted function labels above the keys. But then you have to bear that prints on the slanted upper faces are less visible for a user sitting in front of the keyboard. No progress IMHO.

    Quote:
    I'd also prefer an alternative to the underline for menus - it makes for a more crowded appearance, while still being somewhat hard to pick out - I prefer a light reversed text block, or some type of shaded background like the 42S (though not its blacker on black shading).

    My two HP-42S calcs show a very poor difference between the menu background and the normal keyplate colour. Actually, the difference becomes visible only under certain lighting conditions. Thus the HP-42S is a bad example in this matter IMHO.

    Furthermore, I don't see how adding another colour change shall reduce "crowded appearance" in any way. Please enlighten me.

    d:-/


    Quote:
    Seriously: we sit in front of the keyboard; the slanted lower faces of the keys carry shifted functions; thus the shifted function labels are below of the unshifted horizontal keytops. So, why shall a second shifted function label be positioned on the opposite side of the keytop?? §1 of good design rules: form follows function!

    From a purely logical standpoint, your argument makes sense but I too find that I often make mistakes, especially when moving quickly and think I would prefer the second shifted label to be above the key.

    When I think about the reason why, I think it has to do with the proximity of the label to the horizontal keytop. The "button" as far as my brain is concerned is really just the flat surface with the big writing. That's where my fingertip heads, and when moving quickly, my brain automatically wants to associate surrounding labels with the "button" that is closest. When the second row is below the button, it may be logically following the precedent set by the slanted surface, but in reality it is actually closer to the primary surface of the button below it.

    The 15c has the labels on either side of the key and I find it much more natural than the 34s. Even though I have been using the 34s for a while now, I'm still making mistakes related to this issue and find myself having to pause and think about it.

    SLV, integral, sum and product do not deserve a keyboard location. The amount of preparation needed to use them (writing program, filling the stack with just the right stuff) seems to be so high, that having the commands on the menu, rather than on keyboard, does not seem to add significantly to the burden. The space could be used, for example, for % commands or other "convenience" commands intended for manual invocation.

    Also I would rather see SF instead of FS? In manual operations checking flag value is free -- you just look at it (in browser).

    Also: pi? Shouldn't be tau instead?


    There is a user mode !
    You can assign what you want to keyboard.


    Though only if you are able to find and read the old threads ;-)


    I keep seeing these smug comments about "old threads". Google finds threads that are obviously about 34s, but misspelled and one thread where potential hardware and its cost is discussed.

    Care to post a direct link to a thread where operating system is discussed?


    It all started with this and that post. Everything else is found in archive 21 as well - you don't have to google (they just want your data). The newer threads are labeled with [43S] like this one..

    d:-)

    Looks awesome. For what little it is worth

    1) I think you have the 1/x vs y^x correct, dont swap them
    2) As long as XEQ alpha XXX does not require pressing the shift key, this is ingenious. If however you do need to press XEQ shift alpha XXX, USER and ALPHA would have to swap (show stopper for me. I use XEQ Alpha all the time)
    3) Sorely missing ln and e^x and 10^x. Cant think of any use for %+/- but can see that others might want to use it. Even the 12C doesnt have those on the main keyboard though and they are basically surgically attached to all financial people. So I think that is an interesting trade-off - having %+ on the keyboard but not ln.

    great stuff - when can we buy one?

    Cheers

    Peter


    Quote:
    1) I think you have the 1/x vs y^x correct, dont swap them

    I would prefer these as primary keys and next to each other, 1/x at left of y^x. This looks impossible at this stage, though.

    Gerson.


    Quote:


    I would prefer these as primary keys and next to each other, 1/x at left of y^x. This looks impossible at this stage, though.


    Me too. Yes.

    d:-)

    The 34S doesn't require XEQ shift alpha, just XEQ ENTER to get to alpha label entry. I think the 43S will be the same: XEQ USER to enter alpha label input. This really leaves entering alpha strings as the only time you need to press the shift before alpha. I consider this liveable. I expect that pressing the shift before alpha will be support for people who like pressing more keys than necessary -- just like it is on the 34S.

    Both ln and ex are two key presses: LOG then the appropriate soft key. This is no more effort than a shift key followed by the function key. It also saves a lot of keyboard positions which are the rarest resource on the device. This will also apply to 10x, log10 and a couple of other related functions. To my mind, it is a better trade off to have one LOG key and one TRIG key than dedicate ten or more shifted positions for this purpose. Not only isn't the key stroke count increased for most functions, you gain a swag more functions available for the cost of a shift before the hot key.


    - Pauli

    If CPLEX refers to functions for complex numbers, can I suggest CMPLX as an alternative with the same number of characters. Alternatively, in case there is room, the HP-28S managed to squeeze in a 6 character COMPLX on its keyboard.

    CPLEX as I understand it clashes with the name of an optimization package, eg., for solving a linear programming problems.

    Nick


    Edited: 5 July 2013, 4:11 p.m.

    1. Many people want an easy access to Alpha. This, however, is implemented already in analogy to the WP 34S: as soon as any command like XEQ allows for alpha entry, Alpha will be a primary function on the virtual keyboard.
    2. Most people can go without %+ and %- on a scientific calc. So I dropped those two labels.
    3. Some complain about clutter. So I rethought the keyboard and dropped the f-shifted numeric labels again. You can reach the corresponding functions almost as fast calling the respective menus. And remember you can reassign (almost) each and every position of the keyboard in user mode - so you can refine my crappy layout ;-)
    Together with some minor location shifts, the lower part of the keyboard now looks like this:

    The upper part didn't change significantly.

    d:-)

    Edited: 7 July 2013, 7:36 a.m.


    Looks a lot better.


    1 +

    This is nice and uncluttered.

    Nick


    Quote:
    This is nice and uncluttered.

    Well, then maybe you should try this one: ;-)

    Franz


    Nick, never tease an Austrian!

    d;-)

    Better than the one that looks like a Christmas tree with bells and whistles all over.

    Why didn't you post here the HP-41? It is a lot better example of simplicity and style.

    The analogy that came to my mind when considering the "Christmas tree " version was with the visual overload of a Breitling Navitimer slide rule watch.

    Nick

    Edited: 9 July 2013, 2:42 a.m.

    Quote:
    So I rethought the keyboard and dropped the f-shifted numeric labels again.

    Very bad decision! :-(

    We had 3 shifted functions on the WP34s, and now even 2 are too much for a few members here???

    And I thought we already had many polls about the keyboard layout in the past, so why now change everything just because a few(!) complain again?

    Franz

    Edited: 7 July 2013, 8:06 a.m.


    Just for the record, the keyboard published before this thread didn't feature f-shifted numeric labels as well.

    d;-)


    Quote:
    Just for the record, the keyboard published before this thread didn't feature f-shifted numeric labels as well.

    Do you expect me to respond to any intermediate posting of you?

    I was referring to your last 'main' posting here:

    http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/forum.cgi?read=245932#245932

    Franz


    Quote:
    Do you expect me to respond to any intermediate posting of you?

    I was referring to your last 'main' posting here:

    http://www.hpmuseum.org/cgi-sys/cgiwrap/hpmuseum/forum.cgi?read=245932#245932


    Come on, I was referring to the one and only complete layout published before in this matter. Must be found in Austria, too.

    d#-/

    Quote:
    dropped the f-shifted numeric labels again.

    Say it ain't so, pls. That's a step backwards in my book.

    Edited: 7 July 2013, 8:43 a.m.


    OK, now it's 2 pro vs. 2 con. Still counting.

    d:-)

    +1

    Prefer to keep the functions on the shifted keys.

    People that think it looks too cluttered can stick some black electrical tape over the offending legends.


    Same here!

    Quote:
    Prefer to keep the functions on the shifted keys.

    People that think it looks too cluttered can stick some black electrical tape over the offending legends.


    I can live with the legends on the shifted numeric keys, but actually it looks much better without them.

    I'd rather suggest using stickers like those for the HP-41, so users can mark their assigned keys as they like.

    When I was young, I went to stores looking for a scientific calc. Those which had the most functions printed on the surface caught my attention first, but finally I bought - an HP-41 which has a very nice and uncluttered keyboard.


    Quote:
    I can live with the legends on the shifted numeric keys, but actually it looks much better without them.

    When I was young, I went to stores looking for a scientific calc. Those which had the most functions printed on the surface caught my attention first, but finally I bought - an HP-41 which has a very nice and uncluttered keyboard.


    Exactly my experience too! The keyboard paradigm of the HP-41 is one of the reasons I still consider it "yet to be leveled" calculators. It's a matter of personal taste too. The latest keyboard shown here looks more conservative and stylish than the previous one by far.

    I prefer to keep the functions on the shifted keys, too.


    Quote:
    I prefer to keep the functions on the shifted keys, too.

    Which ones out of the hundreds available?
    I bet if we had a choice to buy one of the two options disclosed in this thread 99% would get the second one.
    ***

    Which gives me the idea - why don't you guys start offering two versions - one with and one without the legend in question? Then we'll see which one is the winner. Pre-orders would be a good indicator too. I'm in for 2 of the sophisticated ones :)


    Edited: 8 July 2013, 8:54 a.m.

    Just on the numeric keys, right? I like it.

    Bill

    Very nice! As I can assign pi to any key anytime, I would prefer this layout, it looks a lot better!


    Possibly Related Threads...
    Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
      Trivial news of the 43S (no Prime) Walter B 117 7,974 11-22-2013, 03:26 AM
    Last Post: Raymond Del Tondo
      What exactly is the WP 43S Harold A Climer 5 809 11-16-2013, 03:58 PM
    Last Post: Jonathan Cameron
      Another wishlist for 43s Andrew Nikitin 3 580 07-14-2013, 09:25 PM
    Last Post: Andrew Nikitin
      Some random wish list items for the 43s Marcel Samek 18 1,772 07-11-2013, 05:35 PM
    Last Post: Paul Dale
      Great news - Vicinno's HP 15C Scientific Calculator iPhone app is FREE now John 21 2,167 06-07-2013, 05:49 AM
    Last Post: Mike (Stgt)
      [43S] Display and top row, refined Walter B 20 1,750 04-24-2013, 01:36 AM
    Last Post: Walter B
      [43S] Display Walter B 67 3,884 03-17-2013, 09:22 AM
    Last Post: Walter B
      [43s] : How the solver will be implemented Miguel Toro 3 605 03-14-2013, 06:09 PM
    Last Post: Walter B
      Good news for HP-emulator fans! :-) fhub 44 3,669 02-19-2013, 04:11 PM
    Last Post: Marcus von Cube, Germany
      Some news for old HP emulator fans! ;-) Olivier De Smet 3 580 02-10-2013, 08:47 PM
    Last Post: Earl Kubaskie

    Forum Jump: