111 replies to this topic

[dinosaur]

pocketmego, on Sun Sep 24, 2006 11:58 PM, said:

Rik, on Sat Sep 23, 2006 11:51 PM, said:

Jack Tramiel?is he still alive?man,he was up there in age back then!cant seem to find info on what hes doing today.Saint or Sinner?,id say he was in it mainly for the money,like most execs and those in high places,EXXON ANYONE?,ANYWAY,like his son SAM'S company, FROGGO,those are probably the WORST games ever!probably was planning to make his millions or a handsome amount so he could retire comfortably,or to buy his cocaine,as far as JACK goes,he made pretty bad mistakes,which obviously didnt help,id say hes both SAINT AND SINNER,cant blame Jack for everything,CORRUPTION and GREED,the ever so famous traits of humans is more to blame,but its us the fans that suffer the most by their F#$%^K UPS

I know, I was pretty shocked when I found out he was still alive too.

-Ray

Did you know that Jack Tramiel is a survivor of a Nazi concentration camp?

[roadrunner]

Is Jack Tramiel still alive?

[carmel_andrews]

I'm not voting

I will just say though, it's interesting that just after tramiel left commodore, commodore started going downhill (especially after they got the amiga), yet when tramiel bought out Atari, whilst i accept that atari was already loosing some market share, tramiel did nothing to staunch it or stop losing market share

Perhaps if tramiel didn't try and get idea's above his station while at commodore, commodore might have been more of a competitor to the PC then Apple...or there again, commodore might have gone under a lot quicker then they did

In reference to James D comments on the motorola 68k familly and motorola's continuation in that market, he'd obviosuly forgot the 88k family which were basically a RISC version(s) of the 68k family and ofcourse the PPC (designed in partnership with IBM and Intel) can also trace it's design roots back to the 68k family

Edited by carmel_andrews, Mon Dec 22, 2008 8:12 AM.

[DracIsBack]

roadrunner, on Sun Dec 21, 2008 11:52 PM, said:

Is Jack Tramiel still alive?

Yes. Check this out

http://blogs.pcworld...ves/006047.html

[chrisbid]

Warner should be viewed as the true sinner

[Atarifever]

Did one of you guys write this comment on the article Drac linked to? I couldn't agree more.

comment on the article said:

I am not only an Atari enthusiast, but had been an Atari dealer for over two decades. Much of that time would not have been possible without Jack Tramiel. In fact, Tramiel's Atari survived longer than Bushnell's and Warner?s combined. Tramiel took a company that was driven near bankruptcy under Warner Communication's mismanagement and totally reinvented it. Atari?s turnaround from bleeding red ink to a Fortune 100 Company once again was said to be impossible, but Tramiel did it. Without Jack the Atari logo would never had been displayed on a array of great products; including the ST, TT, Falcon, Portfolio, Lynx, and even the ill-fated Jaguar. In the end there were plenty of mistakes made. But the simple truth is that only Apple survived the onslaught of the PC clone market. At lease Jack gave us Atari fans another interesting decade or more, and I for one appreciate his efforts.

[roadrunner]

DracIsBack, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:20 AM, said:

roadrunner, on Sun Dec 21, 2008 11:52 PM, said:

Is Jack Tramiel still alive?

Yes. Check this out

http://blogs.pcworld...ves/006047.html

Thanks for the info.

[Gorf]

Sinner.


The way the 7800 and the Jaguar was handled is enough for me.

The guy was a pretentious jack ass. You stay a computer company
if that is your heart.....his heart was never into video games.

Anyone who says 'yuk,yuk,yuk!' when asked about mutiplayer
networked games, at a time when they were really starting to
appeal to people, has NO business running the once greatest
name in video game history, or any video company for that
matter.

It was all about the money with Jack and no heart for what he
was doing otherwsie.

Edited by Gorf, Mon Dec 22, 2008 12:55 PM.

[guyjin]

sinner. definitely. he took a company that was known for one thing and tried to make it into another - kinda like trying to make Ford into a furniture company.

He made Atari into a technology company that didn't actually make technology other than the chintzy ST line. Everything they touched was chintzy, save the lynx. they would have died off in '92 or so, if it weren't for the lynx.

Almost anyone who had a bunch of money in 1984 would have made a better ceo for Atari than Jack.

[Atarifever]

guyjin, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:16 PM, said:

sinner. definitely. he took a company that was known for one thing and tried to make it into another - kinda like trying to make Ford into a furniture company.

He made Atari into a technology company that didn't actually make technology other than the chintzy ST line. Everything they touched was chintzy, save the lynx. they would have died off in '92 or so, if it weren't for the lynx.

Almost anyone who had a bunch of money in 1984 would have made a better ceo for Atari than Jack.

From what I've seen (someone correct me if the figures are off) before he came in Atari lost half a billion dollars in one year. Within two years he was producing a pretty decent profit. He did that by focusing on the strong market (computers), cutting unnecessary costs (mostly in the "dead" console market) and selling old stock. What would other people have done? Followed Coleco into bankruptcy?

As for "changing the focus" Atari was producing computers before he got there. Also, the "big" idea in the industry was that consoles were in trouble somewhat due to the rise in use of computers for playing games. Thus, not only was he chasing the bigger market, he was also chasing the bigger gaming market. Thus, it wasn't like Ford making furniture. It's like Microsoft releasing a handheld. They're in the market, they make videogames, they make handheld devices, it'd be a logical extension, not a crazy break.

[Gorf]

That fact is Jack's heart was not into the video games. The buy who suggested
releaseing the 7800 was fired the next day. Jack is a Jack ass. HE made some
of the dumbest decisons in vidoe gaming market history.

[Retro Rogue]

Jack wanted Atari's video game back stock and such to keep the *new* company (Atari Corp.) afloat while computer development continued. He was not interested in Atari's legacy for anything else. The Tramiel's always more strongly identified with Commodore and their legacy there for obvious reasons. That's also obvious from Jack's recent appearance (posted above), and my talks with Leonard.

As far as the 7800, his hardball tactics were just that - hardball tactics. He was not interested in paying the amount Atari Inc. had agreed to, and continued in on again/off again negotiations for the next 2 years until finally reaching settlement in '86. It was not that he didn't want a thing to do with video games anymore, that was posturing. And it was also not dusted off because of the NES because of that reason as well. The timing just happened to work out that way. Leonard was very clear to me on all those respects.

Edited by wgungfu, Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:56 PM.

[atarian63]

chrisbid, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:56 AM, said:

Warner should be viewed as the true sinner

No kidding, not only did they gut the company of the best programmers in the industry but when the going got tough, they ran. They certainly had the muscle to beat a Apple but not the Brains. I guess I always viewed the Atari as on par and more of a competitor to Apple, a boutique computer if you will, instead it became a Kmart computer, Tramiel made it worse with his lowball commodore ideas. Though some credit has to be given for Great things like lynx,ST,Jag etc, though just think what great things warner/atari ha planned and if they had not been such idiots and shared with the programmers and engineers..who know what great things would have and should have been done!

[Gorf]

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

Jack wanted Atari's video game back stock and such to keep the *new* company (Atari Corp.) afloat while computer development continued. He was not interested in Atari's legacy for anything else.

As I was saying......this is his sin. USING the Atari name for
a profit ONLY.

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

Jack wanted Atari's video game back stock and such to keep The Tramiel's always more strongly identified with Commodore and their legacy there for obvious reasons. That's also obvious from Jack's recent appearance (posted above), and my talks with Leonard.

Not buying it....sorry...it fine to love profit but you need to have a true love
for what you are doing or the result is clear.

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

As far as the 7800, his hardball tactics were just that - hardball tactics. He was not interested in paying the amount Atari Inc. had agreed to, and continued in on again/off again negotiations for the next 2 years until finally reaching settlement in '86.

Yes...the other sin. You spelled it out quite clearly. In fact youd be a great
witness AGAINST the Tramiels. HIs idiotic Hardball tactics were what gave
Nintendo an open door to take what was once Atari's and run with it.

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

It was not that he didn't want a thing to do with video games anymore, that was posturing. And it was also not dusted off because of the NES because of that reason as well. The timing just happened to work out that way. Leonard was very clear to me on all those respects.

The NES was the exact reason Atari should have released the 7800. In fact, If I were
Atari, Tramiel or otherwise, I would have turned it down too and then the net minute
release the 7800.

Nintendo would not have had enough of a chance to take over the VG world.


IF you are speaking in defense of the Tramiels, I hate to tell you....you just
handed this jurour even more reason to render a guilty verdict.

Tramiel destroyed Atari. They never had any love for the history of 'Atari'
unless there was something in it for him. They were the worst owners becasue
they did not even beleive in what they were trying to do....

"yuk, yuk, yuk..."

Edited by Gorf, Tue Dec 23, 2008 7:34 AM.

[Atarifever]

Gorf, on Tue Dec 23, 2008 10:02 AM, said:

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

Jack wanted Atari's video game back stock and such to keep the *new* company (Atari Corp.) afloat while computer development continued. He was not interested in Atari's legacy for anything else.

As I was saying......this is his sin. USING the Atari name for
a profit ONLY.

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

Jack wanted Atari's video game back stock and such to keep The Tramiel's always more strongly identified with Commodore and their legacy there for obvious reasons. That's also obvious from Jack's recent appearance (posted above), and my talks with Leonard.

Not buying it....sorry...it fine to love profit but you need to have a true love
for what you are doing or the result is clear.

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

As far as the 7800, his hardball tactics were just that - hardball tactics. He was not interested in paying the amount Atari Inc. had agreed to, and continued in on again/off again negotiations for the next 2 years until finally reaching settlement in '86.

Yes...the other sin. You spelled it out quite clearly. In fact youd be a great
witness AGAINST the Tramiels. HIs idiotic Hardball tactics were what gave
Nintendo an open door to take what was once Atari's and run with it.

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

It was not that he didn't want a thing to do with video games anymore, that was posturing. And it was also not dusted off because of the NES because of that reason as well. The timing just happened to work out that way. Leonard was very clear to me on all those respects.

The NES was the exact reason Atari should have released the 7800. In fact, If I were
Atari, Tramiel or otherwise, I would have turned it down too and then the net minute
release the 7800.

Nintendo would not have had enough of a chance to take over the VG world.


IF you are speaking in defense of the Tramiels, I hate to tell you....you just
handed this jurour even more reason to render a guilty verdict.

Tramiel destroyed Atari. They never had any love for the history of 'Atari'
unless there was something in it for him. They were the worst owners becasue
they did not even beleive in what they were trying to do....

"yuk, yuk, yuk..."

All of your reasons for your "guilty" verdict are terrible ones then. He had to "love" the company? Warner didn't love videogames or understand them. However, they managed to make the Atari name huge. Then their business model failed them and they lost a half billion dollars. None of those things had to do with their love, or lack of love, for videogames or the Atari name.

Tramiel did really like the computer industry, and thought he could do something big there. He did just that, and made Atari a contender for much longer than they would likely have remained so under Warner.

If you had run Atari and released the 7800 right after turning down the NES, it's doubtful you'd have accomplished much. You'd have taken resources the company couldn't afford because it was broke away from the computer division (that ended up turning the company around again) and put it into consoles that weren't really going to experience a come back until 1987 or so. Thus, you'd have thrown away Tramiel's first two or three profits on the hope that the 7800 would have been more competitive (which it may have been), but with it still finishing second place at best due to Super Mario Bros. That would possibly have meant Atari never even making it to the Jaguar and Lynx, given how close they were to dying until Tramiel turned them around. You'd have bled money until 1987, only to face Super Mario Bros. What do you think that would have accomplished?

A company needs money to function. Atari had none. Tramiel got them lots. As a result we also got the 7800, Lynx, Jaguar, XEGS, and some parts of the computer line we;d likely never have had without him.

Everyone wants to be an armchair CEO, but they don't want to deal with the hard parts of that job. So if you want to play CEO, here are the rules you have to live with in this case when making your plans.
1) Your company is bankrupt.
2) The entire industry for their main revenue source just went into the toilet
3) Investors hate the videogame industry, as it just burned many of them
4) All the stores on earth still have your stock and don't need or want anymore

Getting out of that jam might require more than love and happy thoughts.

[Gorf]

Atarifever, on Tue Dec 23, 2008 9:41 AM, said:

Gorf, on Tue Dec 23, 2008 10:02 AM, said:

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

Jack wanted Atari's video game back stock and such to keep the *new* company (Atari Corp.) afloat while computer development continued. He was not interested in Atari's legacy for anything else.

As I was saying......this is his sin. USING the Atari name for
a profit ONLY.

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

Jack wanted Atari's video game back stock and such to keep The Tramiel's always more strongly identified with Commodore and their legacy there for obvious reasons. That's also obvious from Jack's recent appearance (posted above), and my talks with Leonard.

Not buying it....sorry...it fine to love profit but you need to have a true love
for what you are doing or the result is clear.

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

As far as the 7800, his hardball tactics were just that - hardball tactics. He was not interested in paying the amount Atari Inc. had agreed to, and continued in on again/off again negotiations for the next 2 years until finally reaching settlement in '86.

Yes...the other sin. You spelled it out quite clearly. In fact youd be a great
witness AGAINST the Tramiels. HIs idiotic Hardball tactics were what gave
Nintendo an open door to take what was once Atari's and run with it.

wgungfu, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 PM, said:

It was not that he didn't want a thing to do with video games anymore, that was posturing. And it was also not dusted off because of the NES because of that reason as well. The timing just happened to work out that way. Leonard was very clear to me on all those respects.

The NES was the exact reason Atari should have released the 7800. In fact, If I were
Atari, Tramiel or otherwise, I would have turned it down too and then the net minute
release the 7800.

Nintendo would not have had enough of a chance to take over the VG world.


IF you are speaking in defense of the Tramiels, I hate to tell you....you just
handed this jurour even more reason to render a guilty verdict.

Tramiel destroyed Atari. They never had any love for the history of 'Atari'
unless there was something in it for him. They were the worst owners becasue
they did not even beleive in what they were trying to do....

"yuk, yuk, yuk..."

All of your reasons for your "guilty" verdict are terrible ones then. He had to "love" the company? Warner didn't love videogames or understand them. However, they managed to make the Atari name huge. Then their business model failed them and they lost a half billion dollars. None of those things had to do with their love, or lack of love, for videogames or the Atari name.

Tramiel did really like the computer industry, and thought he could do something big there. He did just that, and made Atari a contender for much longer than they would likely have remained so under Warner.

If you had run Atari and released the 7800 right after turning down the NES, it's doubtful you'd have accomplished much. You'd have taken resources the company couldn't afford because it was broke away from the computer division (that ended up turning the company around again) and put it into consoles that weren't really going to experience a come back until 1987 or so. Thus, you'd have thrown away Tramiel's first two or three profits on the hope that the 7800 would have been more competitive (which it may have been), but with it still finishing second place at best due to Super Mario Bros. That would possibly have meant Atari never even making it to the Jaguar and Lynx, given how close they were to dying until Tramiel turned them around. You'd have bled money until 1987, only to face Super Mario Bros. What do you think that would have accomplished?

A company needs money to function. Atari had none. Tramiel got them lots. As a result we also got the 7800, Lynx, Jaguar, XEGS, and some parts of the computer line we;d likely never have had without him.

Everyone wants to be an armchair CEO, but they don't want to deal with the hard parts of that job. So if you want to play CEO, here are the rules you have to live with in this case when making your plans.


Getting out of that jam might require more than love and happy thoughts.

Of course it will but it wont happen when you own fan base see's your heart is not in it.

Ok so Warner had some success and still had not love and still went in the toilet.
That's a Love or at least a genuine concern for what the fans think matter. Et Phone Home?
That's not my idea of caring.


I've never seen anything work well after the love is gone, have you? Money and the bottom
line and caring too much for those things instead of the things that mattered...your fan base.

The verdict still stands. Guilty.

[snakes3425]

Many of Atari's woes can be traced to Jack tramiel's terrible buisness decisions

[Gorf]

snakes3425, on Tue Dec 23, 2008 3:30 PM, said:

Many of Atari's woes can be traced to Jack tramiel's terrible buisness decisions

I understand those that might defend Jack becasue they think the ST was
a good move. At first it was. However....the STE and the Falcon030,
as cool as they were, were still too little too late. The Falcon030? Why tout
the 030 part if only to cat its balls off int he actual design? They might have
well saved even more money and stuck with a 68k. I understand the com-
patibility issue, but I think it is an overated reason to underpower anything.

These were numbskullian decisions. The JAg should have been an 020 for the
host. It might have stood a chance. The Lynx? I saw two maybe three commercials
for it ever.....how do you expect to sell something that know one knows about?

The word of mouth? Looks like the teeth in that mouth came back to bite Jack on
his ass...real hard.

[Gorf]

Look folks....I guess Im being a bit harsh with the Tramiels but there are just so many times
that seem the decisions were all to often based on 'cost'. I understand. However, part of risk
is cost and risk is part of business. There were some cost cuts that I feel turned out to be the
cuts across Atari's own throat. I understand the lack of money but I think better decisions,
even risky, yet bold ones, would have probably brough back some investors. Investors are
not ignorant of the products the invest in.

They tend to understand a lot more about what they sink their money into then most realize.
It's their money we are talking here...this is not to say there are'nt morons out there....just not
typically. I think they saw that mainly with the STE line, that even though it surpased the ST,
it was less than what was already out there in may respects. It also had no chance against the
surging Soundblaster/VGA features of ever cheaper and cheaper PC's. Had the Falcon030 been
the STE, that would have been a major improvment. A savior? Maybe not.

The Falcon should have been a TT compatible, showing the business world at very least they
were still interested in those folks as well. As a musician, the Falcon is a great machine. As a
coder and technician, I 'm appualed at some of the design choices of both these 'next gen'
Atari computers.

Are the Tramiels evil? From a fan's point of view perhaps...but from a human point of view, how
I really feel is poor old Jack feels worse about what went down that all of us. The truth is, I wish
and hope him well.

Edited by Gorf, Tue Dec 23, 2008 11:13 PM.

[AEX]

carmel_andrews, on Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:11 AM, said:

I'm not voting

I will just say though, it's interesting that just after tramiel left commodore, commodore started going downhill (especially after they got the amiga), yet when tramiel bought out Atari, whilst i accept that atari was already loosing some market share, tramiel did nothing to staunch it or stop losing market share

Perhaps if tramiel didn't try and get idea's above his station while at commodore, commodore might have been more of a competitor to the PC then Apple...or there again, commodore might have gone under a lot quicker then they did

In reference to James D comments on the motorola 68k familly and motorola's continuation in that market, he'd obviosuly forgot the 88k family which were basically a RISC version(s) of the 68k family and ofcourse the PPC (designed in partnership with IBM and Intel) can also trace it's design roots back to the 68k family

I've made my position on this topic many times before :-)

Many of you may be a little hazy on the history of Atari... But without going into all the details, Warner made as many, if not more, bad decisions as the Tramiel family did.

Nobody runs a company perfectly and yes, profit is king. There isn't much love in business, but there is always dedication and hard work involved.

Looking back at things at Atari after they have happened and making uneducated or even disrespectful comments on events just muddies the history.

I'll just say this... The Tramiels ran Atari longer than Bushnell or Warner and no matter what your feelings towards any of the key decision makers are today, we have a great legacy of systems to remember and to enjoy to this day. Sure, we could fix all the problems at Atari if we had a crystal ball :-)

BTW, I don't think Intel had anything to do with the PPC

Merry Christmas one and all... and don't pay Casio another cent for those Lynx LCD's... there too bloody expensive Sam! (Yes Jack).

Karl

[AEX]

(Doh! Sorry this double post, Mods please delete if required).

(Example of how easy it is to make dumb mistakes :-) )

Edited by AEX, Wed Dec 24, 2008 4:10 AM.

[Gorf]

AEX, on Wed Dec 24, 2008 5:05 AM, said:

BTW, I don't think Intel had anything to do with the PPC

But you know something....they are not only still around, they are still the giant
they have always been.

[AEX]

Gorf, on Wed Dec 24, 2008 6:47 AM, said:

AEX, on Wed Dec 24, 2008 5:05 AM, said:

BTW, I don't think Intel had anything to do with the PPC

But you know something....they are not only still around, they are still the giant
they have always been.

They controlled their market correctly and have always stuck to their roadmaps and weathered the storm. A few lessons Atari could have taken onboard was looking at how Intel manage their business model. Anybody here who has worked closely with them know how professional they can be.

And... Apple eventually made the switch too...

Karl

[doctorclu]

NovaXpress, on Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 PM, said:

I just want to know what he did with the damn sword.

Talking about the Earthworld/Fireworld/etc... sword?

Well, after reading all this, and an interesting read that it was, I vote "Sinner". Mind you I am VERY glad we still had Atari history after Warner (the 7800,Lynx, ST line, Jaguar...) honestly the Atari I loved was before Tremiel's time though. That said, the EXCITEMENT of Atari existed before Tremiel. All the Atari jingles I still sing, all the times when friends would bring over their Ataris and we exchanged Atari floppy disks of games at school... that was before Tremiel's time. That was when Atari was EVERYWHERE.

As for Tremiel, well, his business handlings were crappy. (Amiga, numerous unpaid developer stories, the 7800, etc).

Tremiel cannot be faulted for having activities going on for the Atari computer line AND console line. That was happening before. What Tremiel should have done is...

1) Quit milking the 8-bit line for so long and ended support in 1987 rather than 1992. (ST was released in 1985)
2) Quit milking the 2600 line and cancelled that by more like 1985-1986 (rather than 1990). Dropped the 5200 entirely, not introduced the XEGS at all, and focused all console support on the 7800. I believe the 7800 SHOULD have actually placed a bit behind Nintendo, a little before Sega.
3) If the Lynx could have had a TV adaptor I think that would have been Atari's awesome 16 bit gaming system between the 7800 and Jaguar. As it was, it didn't go half bad. Having played Lynx emulation on larger screens, I think the Lynx's only short falling is that it was a handheld system. There are some awesome games there with a surprisingly big library of games.
4) Considering Tremiel business practices, the Jaguar had an amazing number of companies developing for the system in my opinion. Like Gorf said the Jaguar should have had a 68020, but even without was a amazing system.
5) All that said, having been an ST user, I think Atari had a LOYAL following of ST users, and really, Atari under Tremiel really kinda did them wrong to drop in them all in 1993 and release the Jaguar. A lot of people had staked careers on the Atari ST platform. And based on how Atari just DROPPED the ST line, who would want to pick up a Jaguar?

Then there is the issue of Nintendo wanting to market their game system under Atari. Well, another missed opporunity.

Think of what Atari would have been like with an Amiga 16 bit computer line, and Nintendo subcontracted as the game system.

But then that wiser Atari would have had a knack for better advertising and business sense.

Thank you Tremiel for more Atari gadgets to play with, and the Jaguar, but yeh, sinner, no buts about it.

[Atarifever]

It appears to me all the "sinner" votes are based on the belief that somehow Tramiel was supposed to be able to steer a nearly sunken ship forever through rough seas without ever making a mistake. Of the original companies (Coleco, Mattel, Atari, etc) making North American systems, only Atari was left after 1990, and it lasted another half decade. Of all the "original" computer companies only something like two made it. Of all the PS1 era consoles, only three companies made it through, while all the others saw their systems fail (and one other would die the next generation). Of all handheld makers, no one has been able to overcome Nintendo, and even Sony (with it's brand recognition and deep pockets) can't take the market.

He took a bankrupt company that existed in one market that already collapsed, and another market that, in the end, would have only two victors out of many. I don't think Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, the Google and Yahoo guys, and Richard Branson working together could have done much better in that situation. Do you see a lot of Commodore product today? A lot of Coleco? Sinclair Spectrum computers? Acorn computers? Mattel consoles? Panasonic consoles? Philips consoles? Sega handhelds?

I mean, in order for him to get a "saint" vote, I guess all he had to do is beat Sega, Nintendo, Sony, Apple, and IBM with a half dead company. Easy, right?

Edited by Atarifever, Wed Dec 24, 2008 8:53 AM.