JDownloader Community - Appwork GmbH
 

Notices

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #81  
Old 08.06.2009, 13:10
rebornsoul
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

im using 0.5.949 and i love it.
  #82  
Old 08.06.2009, 15:25
daflip
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

i loaded, about 40 zshare links and are stuck @ 5.0 kb/s

some errors,
and some with cannot write on harddisk

im not sure if its the link but.. i just restarted over and over until i get all the links to complete...
  #83  
Old 08.06.2009, 16:11
papa47
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I'll say it again, the new version is a nightmare. I tried out the new version and it had tons of problems. I decided to scrap it and go back to the good ole reliable version.

Then, I figured, I outta give the new version one more try. Maybe I had a bad download and it didn't install properly. So, I reinstalled it. It ran just fine when I threw a couple of small downloads at it, a few links here, a few links there. Seemed to work OK. Figured it was up to the task of handling a real job.

I loaded a couple of seasons of some TV shows I've been grabbing, set it to download and went to bed. When I awoke this morning it was even worse than my first experience. It just plain stopped about halfway and wasn't downloading anything at all. Again with the same error messages:

"Aborted, no permissions to write to hard disk"

"Aborted, file already on disk" (which it was not)

"Aborted, incomplete download" (100% is incomplete?)

Several packages downloaded to 100% and did not unrar.

And like I said, it just stopped downloading when it had a lot more packages in the queue to finish.



And to top everything off, the program was consuming over 350MB of RAM and would not shut down. Closing the program would not work, even trying to end the process didn't work. The computer had to be restarted.

This program is garbage, absolute garbage. The older version is more stable and I can not recall having a single problem with it that even comes close to comparing with this newer version.
  #84  
Old 08.06.2009, 16:30
pspzockerscene's Avatar
pspzockerscene pspzockerscene is offline
Community Manager
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Deutschland
Posts: 70,922
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by daflip View Post
i loaded, about 40 zshare links and are stuck @ 5.0 kb/s

some errors,
and some with cannot write on harddisk

im not sure if its the link but.. i just restarted over and over until i get all the links to complete...
That's zshare's limit so the 5 KB/s has nothing to do with JD!
Try to download via browser and use a zshare free account;)
__________________
JD Supporter, Plugin Dev. & Community Manager

Erste Schritte & Tutorials || JDownloader 2 Setup Download
Spoiler:

A users' JD crashes and the first thing to ask is:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiaz View Post
Do you have Nero installed?
  #85  
Old 08.06.2009, 17:55
sagei
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

papa47 no one is listening. They have a superior app for downloading from hosters and they used the superiority to ram their views down our throats.
Any v4 fan knows it is better and has quietly gone back to using it.
Venting is useless but if you experiment with v5 then consider saving and adding the logfiles here. The switch to v5 will soon be inevitable and any bugs you uncover will only help current and future users.
  #86  
Old 08.06.2009, 19:03
papa47
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sagei View Post
papa47 no one is listening. They have a superior app for downloading from hosters and they used the superiority to ram their views down our throats.
Any v4 fan knows it is better and has quietly gone back to using it.
Venting is useless but if you experiment with v5 then consider saving and adding the logfiles here. The switch to v5 will soon be inevitable and any bugs you uncover will only help current and future users.

I will take your advice and "quietly" go back to v4. It shocks me that they are still standing behind v5 like it actually works.
  #87  
Old 08.06.2009, 19:34
jimpanse
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Why shouldn't they stand behind ? You didn't post a log here and there http://board.jdownloader.org/showthr...5772#post15772 but still complaining.

How would you think if you were a developer how to help people without no helpful posts?

@sagei and papa47 either you stick to old version or give hints to help!
  #88  
Old 08.06.2009, 23:00
sagei
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

papa47 they don't have a choice. They have committed their time and effort to creating this new version and now, they like us are stuck with it. Criticism is unproductive. They do not acknowledge your right to have a say in the matter so you are really only arguing with yourself.
Their 'help' is restricted solely to technical issues with the new version and they are not interested in any problems you might have suffered in having a perfectly working older version nuked.
They do heed bug reports, so it is safe to say that it will get better. As to how much better only time will tell.
They have clearly shown their intent to kill the old version so don't expect a turnaround. While long time users were begging for a return of old navigational/control/ui functionality, polls were held for email add ons, so don't hold your breath.
Besides, many users have accepted the new version so public opinion isn't exactly unanimous.
If you encounter any bugs in v5 post them, for the good of the community. Your dissent will not register and will only result in needless arguments with people who lack your politeness.
Besides if jd has been good to you, then perhaps it's time to repay the favour and ignore the snags it seems to have hit. Hard as it may be.
  #89  
Old 09.06.2009, 00:39
baysal
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

sorry but I deleted the new version and find an old one from web (actually it is 0.4.495), and I'm trying to correct my list,reconnect script (which was not working on new version) etc.

I think rapidshare or some other company bribed the developers to kill this good program...

The new version sucks....:outch:
  #90  
Old 09.06.2009, 01:10
ubauba20
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

this new version is absolutely awesome
thanks from Poland
  #91  
Old 09.06.2009, 05:20
Nikwuz
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

well unrar doesnt always work properly. sometimes it doesnt create subfolders and just dumps all the files in the parent folder but i manually unrar instead...

apart from that everything seems to be working fine! after getting used to it i like this v5 more than v4. keep up the good work!
  #92  
Old 09.06.2009, 12:06
noodleonline
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Exclamation

put back toolbar like this on new version, more precisely to have stop after the download and up and down buttons and all happy, you and users!!

  #93  
Old 09.06.2009, 12:43
Botzi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The move buttons will come back and some other things.
Most of the reported bugs are fixed. We're currently do some speed improvements, to lower the CPU and RAM usage.
  #94  
Old 09.06.2009, 14:03
Fo4RaX
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default This version DOES work?!! I had problems as well...

Hi,

First off, I want to start by giving a big thanks to the developers and everyone who has contributed to Jdownloader!

I have been using this prog for a couple of months and was very happy with it. It's the best prog for downloading from filehosters I ever used.

A while back I received the update (auto-update) and when the program started again I was like: WOW! What happened here?!
Honestly I think the new interface looks neat and well.
My first impression about the buttons and menus isn't too good. Adding links needs 2 clicks and the drop down menus are a bit annoying though once you are used to them it is very good!

But then the problems started... the program managed to start up but I just couldn't download anything. It said "Disconnected?" with every link and at the bottom everything said "Failed" , "Update Failed", etc. etc. so I was like "What the ...!"

I started to get angry but then came here and read about update problems due to high bandwith.
Ok, no problem I thought I'll wait some time.

Waited a day, tried updating, same problem as yesterday.
Waited another day, ... still nothing.
.....

Then one day it did kinda updated but still it did not work properly.

Ok, today I started JD again (had not used it in days as I thought: What's the use? It doesn't work anymore!)
But today I re-downloaded the new version and started the thingy.
Then it said "Updating..." and it hanged
I thought maybe it was updating in the background and it needed some time so I waited... and waited...

I checked my firewall and deleted all Java lines in the "trusted zone" just so my firewall would ask again to allow or deny those connections. Don't think this was the problem but I did it just to make sure.

Opened task manager and shut down Java app.
Restarted JD, same problem...
Ok, once more, restarted JD...AHA! It updated.

Hmm still didn't work properly.
Closed JD, restarted again!
Now it updated correctly and my files are finally getting checked and at the time of writing my JD is downloading again! :D

Happy, happy, happy!!

Long story short... I tried a sh*tload of things to get it to work and I can only tell people who are still experiencing problems to do this:
- Be patient!
- Check your firewall settings (delete the lines and add them again in trusted zone)
- Close JD and restart it several times!

Good luck to all and thx again to the JD team.
  #95  
Old 10.06.2009, 01:18
Fo4RaX
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hmm I do seem to experience some problems
I'll report them tomorrow.
  #96  
Old 10.06.2009, 16:16
Tyop
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Botzi View Post
Most of the reported bugs are fixed. We're currently do some speed improvements, to lower the CPU and RAM usage.
It would be nice if you now release version without *critical* reconnection error (for people with static ip), which makes jdownloader useless, then work with speed.
  #97  
Old 10.06.2009, 16:37
Jiaz's Avatar
Jiaz Jiaz is offline
JD Manager
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 79,286
Default

what *critical* reconnection error do you mean?
__________________
JD-Dev & Server-Admin
  #98  
Old 10.06.2009, 16:50
Tyop
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

http://board.jdownloader.org/showthread.php?t=3366
  #99  
Old 02.07.2009, 19:46
tongks
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

This is my 1st login and the 1st post.

Mine (jDownloader) is working fine, started from version 0.4.936 and updated to current version 0.6.193. The new version seems stable now, and reconnect works fine.

Before I found this program, I use Firefox with multiple GreaseMonkey scripts. JDownloader is my favorite now, although it took me some time to configure it to work.

IMHO, this is one of the best download manager I have ever used, it is a fantastic program.

THANK YOU for all the good work of JD team.
  #100  
Old 06.07.2009, 20:40
dulume
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

This is just the worst evolution ever... I'm finally used to the new interface but realize that I still hate this new version... even a little more every time I use it. I read that the move button was to be back... good thing, btw why don't you bring back the hole thing and we'll all agree just to forget about this one. Honestly, I'm ready to start a new topic engaging everyone to just pretend it never happened.

After using it for a while I can say with no doubts that there is no improvement whatsoever with this new release, absolutely nothing apart from an esthetic point of view... I'm sure the code is different (I'm not a programmer and will not pretend to be one), but honestly I don't care! I just want to download stuff in the most convenient way... that's it. From that point of view this version is like going from the light bulb to the candle.

So stop this denial state:

- this version eats much more ressource than the other one for no efficient reason

- this version has toooooons of bugs

- this version reduces my bandwith, or appears to, anyway downloads take more time and global speed is reduced (even though by moments speed is ok, the overall time is still much longer)

- link grabber is absolute crap... I mean reaaaaaaaaally crappy

.... I mean guys... just read the hundreds of people heading in the same direction... time to accept this is bad.
  #101  
Old 06.07.2009, 22:40
Slaninica
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiaz View Post
the new jd needs less cpu, less ram and...
WTF?

These new versions eat CPU like shit... and not only that, I could regulary achieve 10MB/s with previous versions, but now only for moments. Everything slows down, moving to next download takes ages, and this GUI works like cock devastated cunt!
  #102  
Old 07.07.2009, 07:16
sunnytimes
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Slaninica read this ..

http://board.jdownloader.org/showthread.php?t=3759

new version runs great for me :]
  #103  
Old 07.07.2009, 11:10
cday
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Makes no difference whether or not it's minimized. Disabling all that stuff helped with memory consumption but cpu usage hovers around 20 - 40%. That's a lot considering it's doing that to an E8500 C2D. Unnecessary wear on expensive hardware and wasteful power consumption for a mere download manager. I don't get it.:unsure:
  #104  
Old 07.07.2009, 11:24
remi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Cool

How many links do you have in your downloads queue? How many files are downloaded simultaneously when you have these peaks?

I've 2300 links (99% of them are still disabled) and 2 simultaneous downloads.

My jD is consuming between 20 and 95 MB. 95 MB is more than Azureus' (14 files up/down) or my browser's (18 tabs) consumption.

When I minimise the jD window the memory consumption declines considerably, to between 20 and 40 MB.
  #105  
Old 07.07.2009, 17:56
dulume
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sunnytime, shut the like up. Great for you that it runs well, but you obviously don't understand what's at stake here. You don't understand that we have a lesser efficient tool with no improvement whatsoever (name me one, don't you dare bring up the link grabber!!) and tons of bugs (if u haven't experienced them, then your either a non user friend of the team, an idiot or a liar. Your choice).

So only bad things, which is absolutely ridiculous.

I use to download stuff from my eee pc, absolutely fine work, no problemo. Now it's unusable. U could argue that the machine is not powerful enough or that there's not enough ram.... but it did before. Now for just problems and bugs it doesn't.

Again, this is a download manager: all that we want to do is download with it.

Gosh I'm gutted
  #106  
Old 08.07.2009, 12:28
remi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Cool

dulume,

I suppose you're using the latest update of the program. You said it worked before. Why don't you revert your updates until a point where it still worked?

Don't forget this is still a 0.x release. Micro$oft with its thousands of programmers never succeeded in making any robust programs, except for the old Excel versions.

By now, many jD customers have learned to stuck to older versions of the program, including me. I'm using v.0.4 for RS and v.0.5. for MF.

Although with v.0.5. 1 out of 2 MF links have to be resumed or reset because of bugs (null pointer and out of locals errors - clearly code programmed by someone who has worked at Micro$oft or someone who just started programming), it's still more or less working.

At the time MF doesn't work anymore at all, I'll have to upgrade my v.0.5 and pray that it works.

Some people have new PCs or don't run other batch processes that need a lot of CPU cycles and memory. These people should test the newest versions.
  #107  
Old 08.07.2009, 15:15
dulume
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Remi,

actually I was talking about the old version 0.4... that was working fine. Let's make things clear: I have great respect and am grateful to the JD team for bringing up this software. I realize they are not a huge company and therefore not expecting everything to work right away. But that's where I get dizzy... They had something working perfectly, actually better then what you could expect from a huge company and they shot it in the head. They did that to replace it with this version that, as stated before, doesn't bring anything really new, apart from poor system reliability, bugs... it lacks what made the previous version so good, it's heavy, it's confusing, it's bugged.

I wouldn't be so mad with this if I wasn't so happy with the previous version, which, in a funny paradox, makes me complain to the guys I actually want to kiss!!! I really love the previous version and told everyone around that this was the best download manager out there... it was.

kinda stupid waist...

Imagine that your beautiful wife comes home one day with her head shaved and a big nail in her nose: you'll still love her, but be reeeeeally mad of what she did with her face (reverse story regarding your preferences )
  #108  
Old 08.07.2009, 16:09
remi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Cool

I like your metaphor about the big nail.

Many people have had the same reaction as you have. For some reason (developer gone, architectural fight, etc.) the jD developers decided to go another route.

I wish they had communicated more clearly why they changed their route. All these discussions and guessing would have been avoided. The biggest mistake they made was that they forced the beta upon us. If there would have been a 'democratic' vote, I very much doubt that v.0.5 would have been elected.

The fact is that we can't go back as long as v.0.4 hasn't been forked. Until now, nobody has taken the risk to invest in v.0.4. any further. It was indeed a beauty of design and usability and I'm still using it for some hosts.

Let's wait, pray and dream that all the usability that was so characteristic for v.0.4 will ever come back...

Last edited by remi; 08.07.2009 at 16:25.
  #109  
Old 08.07.2009, 19:44
deinemudder
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by remi View Post
...
Let's wait, pray and dream that all the usability that was so characteristic for v.0.4 will ever come back...
with you on that one...
  #110  
Old 09.07.2009, 08:28
dulume
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

right on

amen.
  #111  
Old 08.08.2009, 10:12
papa47
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dulume View Post
This is just the worst evolution ever... I'm finally used to the new interface but realize that I still hate this new version... even a little more every time I use it. I read that the move button was to be back... good thing, btw why don't you bring back the hole thing and we'll all agree just to forget about this one. Honestly, I'm ready to start a new topic engaging everyone to just pretend it never happened.

After using it for a while I can say with no doubts that there is no improvement whatsoever with this new release, absolutely nothing apart from an esthetic point of view... I'm sure the code is different (I'm not a programmer and will not pretend to be one), but honestly I don't care! I just want to download stuff in the most convenient way... that's it. From that point of view this version is like going from the light bulb to the candle.

So stop this denial state:

- this version eats much more ressource than the other one for no efficient reason

- this version has toooooons of bugs

- this version reduces my bandwith, or appears to, anyway downloads take more time and global speed is reduced (even though by moments speed is ok, the overall time is still much longer)

- link grabber is absolute crap... I mean reaaaaaaaaally crappy

.... I mean guys... just read the hundreds of people heading in the same direction... time to accept this is bad.


I enthusiastically agree with absolutely everything you said.

I've been using version 0.4 with the exception of .dlc files. It just won't load the containers. So, I have to use the new crap version to load a .dlc file.

Garbage!

Still get "Connection Lost" and "Aborted: No permissions to write to hard disk" errors and have to manually restart the downloads.

Here's another interesting tidbit..

I've posted several seasons of a TV show on a forum. RS kept deleting the files so I used a .dlc file so I wouldn't have to post links. I post the .dlc file on the forum with a very detailed and user friendly tutorial on how to use jdownloader.

Now a get a lot of responses in my threads and even more PMs complaining about how awful the program is, it doesn't work, I can't get it to download anything, and so on and so on with a whole laundry list of complaints.

So, that being said, its not just the people in this topic trying to rain on anyone's parade and cause anyone grief. A random group of people independent of this board and without any interference from me hates the program and can't stop complaining to me about how the program doesn't work.

This version is riddled with bugs and needs to be scrapped!

Last edited by papa47; 08.08.2009 at 10:44.
  #112  
Old 08.08.2009, 11:27
remi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Cool

That's exactly why I use jD v.0.4.936 for all the hosts that haven't changed since I started using it and this includes RS. I use v.0.5.917 for some other hosts that haven't changed and for opening dlc files.

v.0.5.917 works pretty well as long as you can avoid interacting with its human machine interface by planning your work.
  #113  
Old 08.08.2009, 21:26
papa47
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by remi View Post
That's exactly why I use jD v.0.4.936 for all the hosts that haven't changed since I started using it and this includes RS. I use v.0.5.917 for some other hosts that haven't changed and for opening dlc files.

v.0.5.917 works pretty well as long as you can avoid interacting with its human machine interface by planning your work.
Does 0.5.917 have any issues with loading .dlc files?
  #114  
Old 09.08.2009, 10:18
remi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Cool

At this moment I get the following error with
(1) a dlc file that I created myself as well as
(2) a dlc file that was created by someone on this forum :-

"Container Error: Server claims: http://service.jdownloader.org/dlcript/service.phpDLC: Key Error."

I'll continue testing, because there might be a temporary problem with the server.
  #115  
Old 09.08.2009, 14:05
Jiaz's Avatar
Jiaz Jiaz is offline
JD Manager
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 79,286
Default

05917 cannot open container files....
__________________
JD-Dev & Server-Admin
  #116  
Old 11.08.2009, 00:41
johnny121
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default New version, where art thou?

About two months ago, when I discovered jD, it was amazing! It downloaded anything from anywhere- if you were willing to wait for the sites' timers to let it do its thing, it was relentless. I was seriously impressed. The program's seemingly 'modular' setup implied that plugins could be updated for the various download sites on-demand. Knowing how sites love to 'break' this sort of program, I had confidence that jD would dodge their efforts by issuing small timely updates to the plugins.

But...

When Rapidshare decided to lose its mind & choke everyone's downloads to nothing, jD wasn't there for those of us who would jump-ship. It felt like you picked that exact moment to rewrite the entire program. I've watched over the past two months as one host after another stopped working. I can still download from Rapidshare, but you can forget the other big names. I see numerous requests for 'when will xxxx host work' on here. The response is always the same; 'it already works in the version we don't distribute' 'the next version will be amazing'

Guys, we're not yelling for version 2.0. jD's attraction for us isn't that it's pretty or has lots of bells and whistles. jD's claim to fame is that it downloads from ANYwhere. If it doesn't do that, I don't care how it looks, how fast it runs, how small it is, how customizable it is, or how well it integrates into Firefox.

It's been about two months now. If the major download sites decide to revamp their interface a week after the next version of jD appears, will it be two more months? I'll admit that I know nothing of programming and of the internal design of the program. Maybe it isn't as modular as I think? I [do] know that if the program is to survive, it needs to be nimble in adapting to changes in the download sites. Holding functionality hostage while debugging new 'features' will only leave you with a pretty program that no one uses. FUNCTION: First FEATURES: Next

Honestly, the only thing that keeps jD on my machine at the moment- is the huge collection of links- that I can't seem to export into a text file so that I could feed them into my previous program. It handled Rapidshare. And links to the other sites' files- guess what; I've either downloaded them manually OR lost the opportunity to download them due to deletion or inactivity.

I can honestly say I'm very frustrated. Add mine to the growing chorus of those asking "Alright.....When?"
  #117  
Old 11.08.2009, 10:47
Valensia
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default new jd version

Hello johnny121,

I must say that i agree with some of your points concerning the functionality of this new jd version, however, we must always keep in mind that we are talking for a free software and these guys seems to be struggling to provide us with something better...
I am not trying to defend the jd developers but take a look with other similar software (CRL), i've tried to use it especially for the hotfile plugin but after 2-3 donwloads it stops working... netload plugin it's not working at all...
This is the reason why i am saying that you are not fair with developers because at least with jd you can still download at least from 3 major hosters like rapidshare, megaupload and netload... i guess you mean that you are downloading manually from some other hosters like hotfile, storage etc.
Anyway, i believe that frustration is reasonable at this moment but it would be better to stay optimistic...
  #118  
Old 11.08.2009, 10:47
remi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Cool

The developers say they are students. It explains a lot. They are young and creative, but inexperienced.

They are learning from their mistakes as is any young student. Instead of lying on the beach, they are developing software for free, for the rest of the world. It's fabulous!

They are giving us a fantastic product that certainly has its flaws, and we - the customers - sometimes need to be very patient as they are (again) recovering from a wrong decision.

They're learning the business of new product development and product life cycle management. Their lack of management and architecture skills is compensated by their motivation, their enthusiasm and creativity of finding solutions for new programming challenges.
  #119  
Old 12.08.2009, 02:44
johnny121
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Megaupload/Netload

Quote:
Originally Posted by Valensia View Post
at least with jd you can still download at least from 3 major hosters like rapidshare, megaupload and netload...
Actually, neither megaupload nor netload have worked for me in quite some time. (And yes, my java is up-to-date) I wasn't exaggerating when I commented that rapidshare was all I have left. I LOVE megaupload. I'd like nothing better than to see a mass exodus from rapidshare to such a service. I believe I'm being completely fair in my post. "Free" doesn't mean I have no reason to expect a working program. My frustration is because I 'had' a working program. My frustration is because I know that the major websites won't wait 6 months before changing their interface; effectively 'breaking' jD again. And right now, I'm wondering if jD will take another 3 months to adapt. If the program is destined to work for only one month out of each year, the program had better BE a labor-of-love, because no one will pay for it.

I've (we've) waited patiently for two months. I've even loaned my login information to the devs so they could look into adding another host. But no one will love a program for what it's 'going to do'. Vista, anyone?

I'm just reiterating the point that even those of us who are patient and who are willing to admit that we aren't qualified to judge the difficulties of maintaining such a program ARE becoming frustrated.
  #120  
Old 12.08.2009, 11:23
remi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Cool

I'm currently using XP and jD 0.5.917 and MU works well at a speed of 250 KB/s.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 20:52.
Provided By AppWork GmbH | Privacy | Imprint
Parts of the Design are used from Kirsch designed by Andrew & Austin
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.