469,568 Members | 1,467 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 469,568 developers. It's quick & easy.

Should I use frames?

Hi,

Is using frames in a website as big an issue nowadays as it was maybe 5 or
so years ago? I can remember that you used to have to have a frame site, as
well as a non frame site for browsers that didn't support the framed
version. I wonder whether newer browsers have fixed that problem, and I can
now use frames without fear?

Regards,
Murray R. Van Luyn.
Dec 23 '06 #1
27 3635
"Murray R. Van Luyn" <va******@NOSPAM.iinet.net.auwrote:
>Is using frames in a website as big an issue nowadays as it was maybe 5 or
so years ago? I can remember that you used to have to have a frame site, as
well as a non frame site for browsers that didn't support the framed
version. I wonder whether newer browsers have fixed that problem, and I can
now use frames without fear?
http://allmyfaqs.net/faq.pl?Problems_with_using_frames

--
Spartanicus
Dec 23 '06 #2
"Spartanicus" <in*****@invalid.invalidwrote in message
news:ts********************************@4ax.com...
"Murray R. Van Luyn" <va******@NOSPAM.iinet.net.auwrote:
>>Is using frames in a website as big an issue nowadays as it was maybe 5 or
so years ago? I can remember that you used to have to have a frame site,
as
well as a non frame site for browsers that didn't support the framed
version. I wonder whether newer browsers have fixed that problem, and I
can
now use frames without fear?

http://allmyfaqs.net/faq.pl?Problems_with_using_frames

--
Spartanicus
Thanks Spartanicus.

I was hoping to use a menu bar with frames to avoid having to repeat the
menu code for each page. It seems that I may be able to include common menu
bar code on each page using PHP's 'include' directive. That's easy!

That's set me in the right direction.

Regards,
Murray R. Van Luyn.
Dec 23 '06 #3
In article <ts********************************@4ax.com>,
in*****@invalid.invalid says...
"Murray R. Van Luyn" <va******@NOSPAM.iinet.net.auwrote:
Is using frames in a website as big an issue nowadays as it was maybe 5 or
so years ago? I can remember that you used to have to have a frame site, as
well as a non frame site for browsers that didn't support the framed
version. I wonder whether newer browsers have fixed that problem, and I can
now use frames without fear?

http://allmyfaqs.net/faq.pl?Problems_with_using_frames
Useful page. What it does not say however is that if you _really_ need
to include whole other pages (the main attraction of frames) you can
easily use the tags OBJECT or IFRAME (for IE) to do the include job
nicely without a horrific nest of frameset pages.

My simple reason for not usig frames:
Most visitors come in through a search engine which will point
them at the page with the words, NOT your high-level frame page.

AJ
Dec 23 '06 #4
In article <458cffc6$0$11713$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-
01.iinet.net.au>, va******@NOSPAM.iinet.net.au says...
"Spartanicus" <in*****@invalid.invalidwrote in message
news:ts********************************@4ax.com...
"Murray R. Van Luyn" <va******@NOSPAM.iinet.net.auwrote:
>Is using frames in a website as big an issue nowadays as it was maybe 5 or
so years ago? I can remember that you used to have to have a frame site,
as
well as a non frame site for browsers that didn't support the framed
version. I wonder whether newer browsers have fixed that problem, and I
can
now use frames without fear?
http://allmyfaqs.net/faq.pl?Problems_with_using_frames

--
Spartanicus

Thanks Spartanicus.

I was hoping to use a menu bar with frames to avoid having to repeat the
menu code for each page. It seems that I may be able to include common menu
bar code on each page using PHP's 'include' directive. That's easy!

That's set me in the right direction.

Regards,
Murray R. Van Luyn.
Hmm, if its just for the menu. I would make the menu a php page and use
an OBJECT/IFRAME tag to include it. PHP pages are not usually cachable
by proxy servers or spider bots.

AJ
Dec 23 '06 #5
TreeNet Webmaster <we*******@treenet.co.nzwrote:
>I was hoping to use a menu bar with frames to avoid having to repeat the
menu code for each page. It seems that I may be able to include common menu
bar code on each page using PHP's 'include' directive. That's easy!

That's set me in the right direction.

Hmm, if its just for the menu. I would make the menu a php page and use
an OBJECT/IFRAME tag to include it.
Whilst using either element if you _really_ need to embed a whole other
page might be ok (I'd question if there is ever a good reason to want
that, and another solution should be considered first), using either to
include a non complete page is very much the wrong thing to do.

When using an <objectelement you have no way to get the links to open
in the "parent" window. Using <iframemeans that you lose some
validation features due to the fact that <iframeis only permitted in
Transitional, plus <iframehas client support issues and its also not
uncommon for them to be switched off in the browser by a user or
filtered out by ad stripping utilities.
>PHP pages are not usually cachable
by proxy servers or spider bots.
Cacheability should indeed not simply be sacrificed, but PHP generated
pages can be made cacheable if the author has control over the web
server configuration.

--
Spartanicus
Dec 23 '06 #6
Murray R. Van Luyn wrote:
I was hoping to use a menu bar with frames to avoid having to repeat the
menu code for each page. It seems that I may be able to include common menu
bar code on each page using PHP's 'include' directive. That's easy!

That's set me in the right direction.
I think that is the best way to do it.

Personally I just just a text editor with good multi-file searching and
GREP find/replace. So, if I want to change the "menus" which are
repeated on every page I just do it with a find/replace across all the
files.

However I am doing this in a situation which may be very different from
yours of course :)

--
Patrick
Brighton, UK

<http://www.patrickjames.me.uk>

Dec 23 '06 #7
Spartanicus wrote:
>>PHP pages are not usually cachable
by proxy servers or spider bots.

Cacheability should indeed not simply be sacrificed, but PHP generated
pages can be made cacheable if the author has control over the web
server configuration.
Or even if they don't. PHP lets authors specify whatever HTTP headers they
like, so cache control can be handled that way.

--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ <http://dorward.me.uk/>
Home is where the ~/.bashrc is
Dec 23 '06 #8
On Sat, 23 Dec 2006 17:56:48 -0800, "Murray R. Van Luyn"
<va******@NOSPAM.iinet.net.auwrote:
>Hi,

Is using frames in a website as big an issue nowadays as it was maybe 5 or
so years ago? I can remember that you used to have to have a frame site, as
well as a non frame site for browsers that didn't support the framed
version. I wonder whether newer browsers have fixed that problem, and I can
now use frames without fear?
Pretty well the oposite, really. It's even more important to stay away
from frames today. You can do anything you could do with them by
different methods. They are generally considered a bad idea and using
them a bad practice.

Dec 23 '06 #9
Murray R. Van Luyn wrote:
Hi,

Is using frames in a website as big an issue nowadays as it was maybe 5 or
so years ago? I can remember that you used to have to have a frame site, as
well as a non frame site for browsers that didn't support the framed
version. I wonder whether newer browsers have fixed that problem, and I can
now use frames without fear?
You should evaluate the use of frames from a design standpoint. Most
pages with frames merely demonstrate how clever (and annoying) the Web
author is. Those pages exhibit no good reason for the use of frames.
On the other hand, some pages are well designed because they use frames.
See for example, <http://cad.chp.ca.gov/>.

--

David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

Concerned about someone (e.g., Pres. Bush) snooping
into your E-mail? Use PGP.
See my <http://www.rossde.com/PGP/>
Dec 23 '06 #10
David E. Ross <no****@nowhere.notwrote:
On the other hand, some pages are well designed because they use frames.
See for example, <http://cad.chp.ca.gov/>.
I click on a link and in the bottom frame I get:

Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a01a8'

Object required: 'rsD'

/iiqr.asp, line 57

The same thing happens when I shift-click on a link to open it in a new
window.

I don't think I'll use that as an example of a well-designed site.
--
Darin McGrew, mc****@stanfordalumni.org, http://www.rahul.net/mcgrew/
Web Design Group, da***@htmlhelp.com, http://www.HTMLHelp.com/

"Never ask a barber whether you need a haircut."
Dec 23 '06 #11
Darin McGrew wrote:
David E. Ross <no****@nowhere.notwrote:
>On the other hand, some pages are well designed because they use frames.
See for example, <http://cad.chp.ca.gov/>.

I click on a link and in the bottom frame I get:

Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a01a8'

I don't think I'll use that as an example of a well-designed site.
Seems cookies are required. :-\

--
Berg
Dec 23 '06 #12
Bergamot wrote:
Darin McGrew wrote:
>David E. Ross <no****@nowhere.notwrote:
>>On the other hand, some pages are well designed because they use
frames. See for example, <http://cad.chp.ca.gov/>.

I click on a link and in the bottom frame I get:

Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a01a8'

I don't think I'll use that as an example of a well-designed site.

Seems cookies are required. :-\
...and probably IE. Works for me in IE6 but not in Firefox or Opera.
(for some value of "works" <g>)

--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
Dec 23 '06 #13

"patrick j" <pa*****@jamesnews.orangehome.co.ukwrote in message
news:00*****************************@News.Individu al.Net...
>
Personally I just just a text editor with good multi-file searching and
GREP find/replace. So, if I want to change the "menus" which are
repeated on every page I just do it with a find/replace across all the
files.
Hmm...got any suggestions for a good freebie multi-file search and replace
tool for a Windows user? I just changed the copyright date etc. on 199 files
individually!

Regards,
Murray R. Van Luyn.
Dec 24 '06 #14
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
Bergamot wrote:
>Darin McGrew wrote:
>>David E. Ross <no****@nowhere.notwrote:
On the other hand, some pages are well designed because they use
frames. See for example, <http://cad.chp.ca.gov/>.
I click on a link and in the bottom frame I get:

Microsoft VBScript runtime error '800a01a8'

I don't think I'll use that as an example of a well-designed site.
Seems cookies are required. :-\

..and probably IE. Works for me in IE6 but not in Firefox or Opera.
(for some value of "works" <g>)
Works fine for me with SeaMonkey 1.0.7, so it should work okay with
Firefox.

I have cookies enabled only for the domain that I've requested. On top
of that, all cookies are temporary because I've set my cookies.txt file
read-only. If I delete the two cookies set by this Web page and clear
my cache, it still loads okay. If I shut down SeaMonkey (thereby
deleting all cookies since I started) and then restart SeaMonkey, the
page loads okay.

The page works fine with IE7, too.

--

David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

Concerned about someone (e.g., Pres. Bush) snooping
into your E-mail? Use PGP.
See my <http://www.rossde.com/PGP/>
Dec 24 '06 #15
Welcome to MAX web Solution's Website, a full service affordable
offshore web site design, Search Engine marketing and web development
company based in Kathmandu. We focus on e business solutions at low
prices serving the needs of small to medium businesses all over the
world. We offer a wide range of custom web site design development and
seo services at affordable prices starting from small presentation
sites to complex multifunctional web portals and advanced custom
e-commerce business solutions.
Service is everything - your satisfaction is guaranteed
That is why we would gladly accept the responsibility of taking care of
your site. We want to save your time, so that you could devote yourself
to the most important thing - your business. Allow us to maintain and
support your web site.
Money back guarantee
A 30 Day money back guarantee for the first monthly fee.
You can also response to this message.

Fillup the below information for further inquarry.
Contact Name :
Organization Name:
E-mail Address :
Phone no:
Call us for Demostration
Call : 2390177 / 9841206820
Check it out for more information
http://www.max-online.biz/idevaffili...ate.php?id=749

Dec 24 '06 #16
Murray R. Van Luyn wrote:
>
"patrick j" <pa*****@jamesnews.orangehome.co.ukwrote in message
news:00*****************************@News.Individu al.Net...
>>
Personally I just just a text editor with good multi-file searching and
GREP find/replace. So, if I want to change the "menus" which are
repeated on every page I just do it with a find/replace across all the
files.

Hmm...got any suggestions for a good freebie multi-file search and replace
tool for a Windows user? I just changed the copyright date etc. on 199 files
individually!

Regards,
Murray R. Van Luyn.
Unfortunately I don't know about freebie multi-file search and replace
for Windows because I use a Mac. However I've no doubt that soon some
of the many Windows users will come along with very good suggestions.

For web-site building these days it is absolutely essential IMHO
because there are often so many files. I used to do web-sites years ago
and then I used a word processor for writing HTML but I wouldn't do
that today because for some reason it always seems to be the case that
there are loads of files.

On my Mac I use the BBEdit text editor which I find to be extremely
good indeed for disc search and replace through many files but for
Windows I don't know what are good text editors.

--
Patrick
Brighton, UK

<http://www.patrickjames.me.uk>

Dec 24 '06 #17
ma**************@gmail.com wrote:
Welcome to MAX web Solution's Website, a full service affordable
offshore web site design, Search Engine marketing and web development
company based in Kathmandu. We focus on e business solutions at low
prices serving the needs of small to medium businesses all over the
world. We offer a wide range of custom web site design development and
seo services at affordable prices starting from small presentation
sites to complex multifunctional web portals and advanced custom
e-commerce business solutions.
Service is everything - your satisfaction is guaranteed
That is why we would gladly accept the responsibility of taking care of
your site. We want to save your time, so that you could devote yourself
to the most important thing - your business. Allow us to maintain and
support your web site.
Money back guarantee
A 30 Day money back guarantee for the first monthly fee.
You can also response to this message.

Fillup the below information for further inquarry.
Contact Name :
Organization Name:
E-mail Address :
Phone no:
Call us for Demostration
Call : 2390177 / 9841206820
Check it out for more information
http://www.max-online.biz/idevaffili...ate.php?id=749
The cited Web page has 63 HTML errors.

--

David E. Ross
<http://www.rossde.com/>

Concerned about someone (e.g., Pres. Bush) snooping
into your E-mail? Use PGP.
See my <http://www.rossde.com/PGP/>
Dec 24 '06 #18
David E. Ross wrote:
ma**************@gmail.com wrote:
>Welcome to MAX web Solution's Spamsite,

The cited Web page has 63 HTML errors.
The cited spam post had 186 words and an affiliate link, all of which
you quoted.

Merry Christmas, David... ;-)

--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
Dec 24 '06 #19
"patrick j" <pa*****@jamesnews.orangehome.co.ukwrote in message
news:00*****************************@News.Individu al.Net...
Unfortunately I don't know about freebie multi-file search and replace
for Windows because I use a Mac. However I've no doubt that soon some
of the many Windows users will come along with very good suggestions.

For web-site building these days it is absolutely essential IMHO
because there are often so many files. I used to do web-sites years ago
and then I used a word processor for writing HTML but I wouldn't do
that today because for some reason it always seems to be the case that
there are loads of files.

On my Mac I use the BBEdit text editor which I find to be extremely
good indeed for disc search and replace through many files but for
Windows I don't know what are good text editors.

--
Patrick
Brighton, UK

<http://www.patrickjames.me.uk>
Thanks Patrick. I just found a good multi-file text editor with search and
replace facilities. It's the one I've been sitting in front of for the last
2 weeks. Dreamweaver! Though not free, It works great.

Regards,
Murray R. Van Luyn.
Dec 25 '06 #20
"Murray R. Van Luyn" <va******@NOSPAM.iinet.net.auwrote:
>I just found a good multi-file text editor with search and
replace facilities. It's the one I've been sitting in front of for the last
2 weeks. Dreamweaver! Though not free, It works great.
If you have Dreamweaver then you may have received Homesite with it.
Homesite has the ultimate S&R: multi file, S&R throughout a directory
and optionally subdirectories, multi line (rare, allows easy S&R of
entire code blocks), and support for regular expressions (albeit a
peculiar proprietary variant).

--
Spartanicus
Dec 25 '06 #21
The question of whether to use frames on some new pages you're about
to create is an easy one. Frames have some disadvantages that other
methods that aren't any more difficult to code don't have. So don't
use frames on your new pages.

But how about this question, you have some old pages on a site,
perhaps from some years ago, that use frames and are working just
fine. Is it worth the time and effort that would be necessary to
change them to use another method? If it was two pages that needed to
be changed, I suppose so. What about 22 pages or 222 pages? Suppose
you weren't concerned with search engines being able to find and list
your pages correctly?

The same question came up a few years ago regards using tables for
layout as opposed to CSS. There's almost universal agreement that
tables are wrong for layout and CSS is right, and if you're writing
new pages you should certainly use CSS. But what about the old legacy
pages that still use tables for layout and are working fine. Should
you go to the trouble of changing them? If so, why?

Regards,
Kent Feiler
www.KentFeiler.com
Dec 26 '06 #22
Kent Feiler <zz**@zzzz.comwrote:
>The same question came up a few years ago regards using tables for
layout as opposed to CSS. There's almost universal agreement that
tables are wrong for layout and CSS is right, and if you're writing
new pages you should certainly use CSS. But what about the old legacy
pages that still use tables for layout and are working fine. Should
you go to the trouble of changing them?
No-one can answer that question for you, only you can answer it since it
depends on your particular circumstances.
>If so, why?
The /reasons/ for improving code on legacy pages would be exactly the
same as for new work, other factors however may well result in a
different decision.

--
Spartanicus
Dec 26 '06 #23

Kent Feiler wrote:
What about 22 pages or 222 pages?
22 vs. 2222 pages isn't my problem, that's a problem for my editor
regex or sed script.

The question as to whether I choose to change a legacy frames page or
not is more about the complexity of changing that page (by its
structure) rather than about the mechanical work involved in the
volume. I have computers to deal with that. What are we talking about
anyway? Find a marker for each page and slip in a piece of boilerplate?
There aren't many framed pages that can't be fixed very quickly just
with a one-line SSI to embed a standard menu column.

OTOH, I'd nearly always choose to remove frames from any pages that had
a real future ahead of them. I just want rid of the things, they're
that ugly for ongoing maintenance.
>But what about the old legacy
pages that still use tables for layout and are working fine. Should
you go to the trouble of changing them? If so, why?
Same issues, only even easier.

The reason to get rid of both of these obsolete techniques (frames and
layout tables) is because they're nasty techniques that require large
quantities of ugly code. The better approach is _simpler_. It's hard to
refactor existing code, but refactoring it to a much simpler target
isn't so bad.

Dec 27 '06 #24
"Kent Feiler" asked some questions about frames and tables...

Hey, Kent. Some guys in the newsgroup here tend to come
across pretty hard as far as HTML, CSS and other things
go.

Frames works well in some cases. I personally prefer to
avoid them myself, but one of the better websites I've run
across, that doesn't have any problems with Frames and
search engines is...

http://vbnet.mvps.org/

In fact, the advantage there, is that there's only one page
for the search engine to establish a pagerank for (google
specific). Google however does a great job of indexing
the underlying webcontent.

http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Avbnet.mvps.org

However, each framed page gets it's own DOCTYPE tag,
<headtags, <metatags, and <bodytags. In fact, that's
the ONLY right way to do it. Create the content so if a
browser looks at a particular framed page, then the browser
gets the full content of that page. No need to put keywords
in the meta tags, just a language meta tag is all that's required.

Then use a common CSS <linktag to identify a common
CSS code page so everything gets a uniformed and well-ad-
justed configuration.

I took a look at your own pages and noticed a few problems
with images not getting displayed and such. Also, the textured
background comes across really thick making the text hard to
read.

The guys that create http://www.csszengarden.com/ are pro-
fessional artists. Very few folks have such creative abilities.
But nonetheless, I like alot of the designs they present and I
go through some of their webpages every so often to gather
ideas.

One problem with Frames, is that they present themselves
rather slowly sometimes...

http://www.csszengarden.com/?cssfile...202.css&page=0

While that's a very nice design it makes me feel like I'll never
get a computer fast enough to view the contents of that page
with confidence.

I personally identify a really nice design by the way it looks
when the browser opens up in a full window and what it looks
like when the window shrinks to an 800x600 resolution...

http://www.csszengarden.com/?cssfile...170.css&page=3

One of my favorite designs, Bonsai Sky by Mike Davidson...
http://www.csszengarden.com/?cssfile...69.css&page=16

And the amazing thing is that it looks good in both a Mozilla web
browser and in Internet Explorer, although for some odd reason
Internet Explorer (6) loses the Windowed edge. Nonetheless it
still looks great when displayed at a large resolution and at the
800x600 and smaller resolutions.

Anyways, that kind of stuff is for artsy folks who know how to
create images and design around such images.

Personally, I don't like frames much at all and I won't build a
site with frames.

As far as changing the content of pages, some tools help when
doing mass changes. FrontPage works, but it takes some time
getting to learn about it's quirks. The other tools, like the Unix
tools (sed, grep and other command line tools) each require
learning how to use them.

Learning CSS takes some time. I still learn after doing it for the
10 years. Sometimes it's relearning things.

Anyways, as far as frames go, make sure the framed content
can stand alone and you'll be good. Make sure you use a
common CSS file to keep a consistent layout. Build your pages
to be visually stimulating, easily readable (as some people are
sight impaired, meaning certain colors might look reversed, and
sometimes certain colors - as in reg/green color blindness look
the same). If your background color is light, make sure your
foreground color is dark (or vice versa).

Good luck.

--
Jim Carlock
Post replies to the group.
Dec 28 '06 #25
Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Kent Feiler <zz**@zzzz.com>
writing in news:mr********************************@4ax.com:
The question of whether to use frames on some new pages you're about
to create is an easy one. Frames have some disadvantages that other
methods that aren't any more difficult to code don't have. So don't
use frames on your new pages.
I wouldn't say that. There are _some_ uses for frames. For an intranet
or for your own use, they can serve a useful function. For example, at
work I have a list of generated product links - I click on a link and
the product is shown in a lower frame. I can resize the frame, scroll,
etc. Again, this is only for internal use - not appropriate for the
www.
>
But how about this question, you have some old pages on a site,
perhaps from some years ago, that use frames and are working just
fine. Is it worth the time and effort that would be necessary to
change them to use another method? If it was two pages that needed to
be changed, I suppose so. What about 22 pages or 222 pages? Suppose
you weren't concerned with search engines being able to find and list
your pages correctly?
You don't have to change them all right away. You can use a script (as
someone else suggested), or you can convert them at your leisure.
However, I would say that it would be better to convert them as soon as
possible. Who knows what browsers/se's are going to be like in the
future?
>
The same question came up a few years ago regards using tables for
layout as opposed to CSS. There's almost universal agreement that
tables are wrong for layout and CSS is right, and if you're writing
new pages you should certainly use CSS. But what about the old legacy
pages that still use tables for layout and are working fine. Should
you go to the trouble of changing them? If so, why?
There are accessibility issues, download speed issues, debugging issues,
etc., that are inherint when using tables for layout. The pages may
seem like they are working fine, but are they really?

--
Adrienne Boswell at Home
Arbpen Web Site Design Services
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share

Dec 29 '06 #26

Adrienne Boswell wrote:
There are _some_ uses for frames. For an intranet
or for your own use, they can serve a useful function.
I'd disagree with that. What's bad about frames is just as bad on an
intranet as it is on the intawebs.

The _only_ advantage I can see for frames is that they're sometimes
quicker and easier to code, particularly if it's a file-based access to
the pages rather than HTTP (so no chance of using SSI). Possibly this
would then count as "acceptable for intranets".

ActiveX and a bunch of trust-based technologies get more useful on
intranets than the web, but I don't see frames going the same way.

Dec 29 '06 #27
Gazing into my crystal ball I observed "Andy Dingley"
<di*****@codesmiths.comwriting in news:1167390126.559038.185360
@h40g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
>
Adrienne Boswell wrote:
>There are _some_ uses for frames. For an intranet
or for your own use, they can serve a useful function.

I'd disagree with that. What's bad about frames is just as bad on an
intranet as it is on the intawebs.

The _only_ advantage I can see for frames is that they're sometimes
quicker and easier to code, particularly if it's a file-based access
to
the pages rather than HTTP (so no chance of using SSI). Possibly this
would then count as "acceptable for intranets".

ActiveX and a bunch of trust-based technologies get more useful on
intranets than the web, but I don't see frames going the same way.

You can't beat a frame for its ability to be resized. A frame can be
set up like an application, perhaps a list of links to search results on
top, and the actual page on the bottom. The list at top can easily be
scrolled. Another example is the MSDN library, which also uses
resizable frames (there are many other things wrong with that site, but
that's not one of them).

--
Adrienne Boswell at Home
Arbpen Web Site Design Services
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share

Dec 30 '06 #28

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

2 posts views Thread by les | last post: by
40 posts views Thread by JohnnyCJohnny | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Jan Ebbe Jensen | last post: by
5 posts views Thread by AES/newspost | last post: by
25 posts views Thread by Steal | last post: by
5 posts views Thread by Dfenestr8 | last post: by
7 posts views Thread by dj Bass | last post: by
6 posts views Thread by howa | last post: by
reply views Thread by suresh191 | last post: by
4 posts views Thread by guiromero | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.