Local Media is Twisting Facts About Availability of Calibri Font in 2006

The issue of Calibri Font has come to light again as the accountability court — hearing the Avenfield Apartments reference — questioned a UK based forensic expert and other witnesses to ascertain the legitimacy of a deed signed between Maryam Safdar and her brothers.

For a background, Sharif Family presented a trust deed in court — that was signed back in February 2006 —  which said that Maryam Nawaz was trustee of the London Apartments and not the owner.

One page of the deed is as follows:

While cross-checking the document, it was found that the trust deed was in Calibri font, which had not launch commercially at the time the deed signed (February 2006).

Here’s What Forensic Experts Said in Court

Robert M. Radley, through a video link from Pakistani High Commission in London, testified to the accountability court that Calibri font was available in February 2006, but only in beta version.

He further confirmed that its commercial rollout was done only in early 2007.

Here’s What Local Papers are Trying to Establish

A leading English daily interpreted this testimony as follows:

The star witness against the daughter and the son-in-law of former prime minister Nawaz Sharif in the Avenfield Apartments reference told the accountability court on Thursday that the Calibri font existed when the trust deed of the property was prepared.

Another local paper said:

The forensic expert who had concluded that the Calibri font could not have been used in a “fabricated” trust deed by Maryam Nawaz as it was not commercially available before January 31, 2007, admitted before an accountability court that the font existed since April 2005 in the beta version of Windows Vista.

While above statements are not entirely wrong, they present only half of the truth.

These statements, we believe, require further input from a technical standpoint and thus below facts are presented for the sake of correcting the misconceptions that above statements may give rise to.

Here’s What the Actual Situation is

For those who don’t know, all software or tech-related products are released in following phases:

  • Pre-Alpha: While the software is developed, it’s tested internally by developers themselves
  • Alpha Version: Software is tested by people other than developers, but (mostly) within the company
  • Beta Version
    • Closed Beta: Software is released to a limited number of non-company people for the testing. Closed beta is done through invite only or through volunteers who are pre-selected for the testing.
    • Public Beta: Software is released to the public for testing with a clear communication that software is in public beta. Any damages, financial or otherwise, are not covered by the software company during the public beta.
  • Final Stable and Public Release: Final software is released that is likely to be bug-free and normally comes with warranties

Since we have some understanding of the software life-cycle, let’s get back to our case of Calibri font that was released in closed beta in April 2004.

Calibri’s development started in 2002, mainly commissioned by Microsoft. It was developed and completed before 2004 but was used within Microsoft.

It saw the light of the day — outside Microsoft –when it was incorporated in Windows Longhorn (the closed beta version that later became Windows Vista) on 9 August 2004.

Calibri font was also available in Microsoft Office 2007, from where it gained popularity and became the default font for documents worldwide.

This essentially means that Calirbi Font could be sourced from following two software:

  • Windows Vista
  • Microsoft Office 2007

Timeline of Windows Vista — code-named Longhorn

Timeline of Microsoft Office 2007

  • Closed Beta Release (sent to small number of testers): November 16, 2005
  • Closed Beta-1 Release (a technical refresh build): March 13, 2006
  • Public Beta-2 Release: May 2006
  • Commercial Release: January 30, 2007

These brief timelines show that public beta of Windows Vista and Public Beta of Office 2007 were available only after May 2006.

This essentially means that Windows Vista, Office 2007 — and the Calibri font — was not available to any public testers before May 2006. In fact, it was available to only a select number of testers before the public beta launch in May 2006.


  • Trust Deed Signed on: February 2006
  • Public Beta Versions of Windows Vista and Office 2007: May 2006
  • Public Releases of Windows Vista and Office 2007: January 2007

Before the public beta versions were released in May 2006, both Windows Vista and Office 2007 were available to a small number of trusted testers only.

These early trusted users — back then — numbered just a few thousands, and were consisted of tech savvy people

A solicitor in the UK is extremely unlikely to install a private beta version of Windows Vista on his office computer in his office and prepare a trust deed.

But I won’t want to give a verdict here, instead, I will leave it up to you to decide.

Tech reporter with over 10 years of experience, founder of ProPakistani.PK

  • Good accurate details…thumbs up!!!.. Hopefully someone from Court also reads ur article for facts….


    • If this article is true than why this writer delete all comments against his logic???? You should keep cool to hear opposition, if you can’t– you should probably go to mental hospital for treatment. RIPpropti blog.

    • For all youthias: blogs(dot)msdn(dotdmicrosoft((dot)comficerocker/2005/12/21/calibri/ — for aamir youthia as well. Please do read.

      • Blog post you linked reads:

        Also in beta1 anyway, if you start a new document in Word 12, the default font is still Times New Roman.

        This clearly states that office 12 (which later became office 2007) was in closed Beta by December 2005.

        Uper story main bhi yehi likha hay, app nay koi nayi baat tu nae batayi.

        • Aamir,

          I am not an IT guy, I am engineer but when I was a student I tried every build of every OS of MS via MSDN (Alpha, beta, public etc.) Though mostly buggy but this was mainly to avoid pirated OS which is commonly used in Pakistan.

          Your argument is flawed that it was only available to IT experts.

          2nd why not NAB bring solicitor as a witness ? Solicitors in UK are well trusted by UK courts, and this guy is operating since 1979.

          • Your logic is absurd.
            There’s difference between you and ‘solicitor’. You may try all the versions because you’re an individual and there’s no issue if there’s issues with the OS or the software you’re using.
            NO ONE (I am known of) from any law firm use ‘beta’ version of OS or any major software because of the issues.

            BTW, read what ‘beta testers’ are before sounding silly and curse the software industry :)

            • How silly someone can be, your writing is proof of it. Where the software industry came in?
              If I agree with you that alpha or beta versions weren’t used, still installation of fonts was possible.

              But there is a difference between you and a software guy.

              • You have to use a different brain.
                Brain where ‘NS k khilaaf ho rha hai sab’ is not present to see the reality.

                Read my previous reply again:
                You may try all the versions because you’re an individual and there’s no issue if there’s issues with the OS or the software you’re using.
                NO ONE (I am known of) from any law firm use ‘beta’ version of OS or any major software because of the issues.

                BTW, read what ‘beta testers’ are before sounding silly and curse the software industry :)

        • When are we having your assessment of “computer generated NOC” for Bani Gala house of Imran Khan ?
          Can we compare this computer generated NOC for Imran with other record of year 2005 to verify claim of Land Records Officer that records were hand written during that time?

    • Dear Pro Pakistani Team,

      Can we have your assessment of “computer generated NOC” for Bani Gala house of Imran Khan ?
      Can we compare this computer generated NOC for Imran with other record of year 2005 to verify claim of Land Records Officer that records were hand written during that time?

  • I had access to windows longhorn and I even installed it when it was new & buggy with all sorts of things. I bet I can even find one copy of it in the local CD’s shop now if they don’t throw away their stuff. & yet you are saying it wasn’t available to the masses.

    • You are talking about pirated CDs. You really think a “legal firm in UK” used a “pirated” software “illegaly” to print a “legal” document?

      • yes, they could have, they could not have, maybe it was a pakistani laptop, maybe it was a stolen laptop,the point is. Is that a point u can argue in a court, NO!
        the main point is that it was available during that timeline. How did it end up there is not my concern nor courts.

        • That is a dumb argument and in fact the realm of possibilities argument has already been struck down and won’t stand trial. For that the accused have to present their witness to counter the argument Bradley has given who has basically given a professional opinion that it was forged. So until that dumb argument is given by the law firm or a witness by the accused team, the prosecution teams argument will be taken as GOLD and as beyond doubt.

          • Exactly. Also, if the firm was using beta software (highly unlikely), then it has to go back in its record and furnish other deeds and legal documents that were typed in said font before its public release. It is simple, but watching today’s news, I understand how public opinion is skewed by media houses for their own vested interest. If you watched Geo’s report on the issue in their 9 o clock ‘news’, you would feel like Maryam Nawaz is being wronged by a duplicitous witness. Pathetic state of affairs.

            • Unfortunately, the firm ‘mysteriously’ disappeared from the face of this planet after signing the trust deed :).

                  • And why he has not chosen to stand in defence of Sharifs? Why have Sharifs not been able to bring him in for defence? After all its the biggest publicity he is going to get out of that.

            • Solicitors in UK have 100% credibility rating, UK courts trust them without a doubt, go question why he attested the document if it was forged.

                • First no certificate of credibility are issued to solicitors in UK but if you have examples where solicitors misled courts you should share that to deny my statement, you do not need to be personal as I am NOT your next door neighbor, we are complete strangers and you must keep a level of respect in your argument.

                  There is a difference in conduct by a Pakistani lawyer (who practices as oath commissioner) and a UK solicitor.

                  Solicitors & lawyers in England & Wales are regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). In case of a breach of professional conduct he will not only faces jail sentencing upon conviction but also loses licence to practice law. Anyone lying under oath in England & Wales can be charged for perjury which is a statutory offence under section 1(1) of the Perjury Act 1911 because juries & judges often base their verdicts, sentences, or other important decisions on sworn testimony & signed documents.

          • If you do not understand law please do not call it “GOLD”.

            A doubt is there and benefit of doubt goes to respondent. 2nd it was available and even as a non-IT techie I had access to every pre-public release of every Windows OS.

            Solicitors in UK have 100% credibility rating, UK courts trust them without a doubt, go question why he attested the document if it was forged.

          • No official machine ever contained any beta software.
            All those thinking it was used by some org before official release has never worked in any organization otherwise they should know.

        • FFS, you retard, grow up. Stop defending that corrupt twat and his spoiled, bratty family. No professional worth his salt was using Calibri circa 2005. No professional worth his salt would use beta versions of Windows or the beta version of a font.

        • It actually is a concern. If there is any doubt on the legitimacy of document, it cannot be used in court as evidence

      • Lala Gee, I witnessed pirated windows running on digital signage systems across the US embassy (Islamabad) back in 2014 (Sub chalta hy)

      • From where you got this idea that he is talking about pirated CDs? He is talking about Alpha and beta releases dude. If you do not understand please avoid commenting.

        7 s!lly people even upvoted it.

        • Windows vista “closed beta” was originally licensed to only handful of people for “testing purpose”. Copies circulating in local CD’s shop are “pirated” version, genius!

          • Lol! he is actually arguing that the firm was actually using pirated version.
            Here goes the legitimacy of firm itself?

            • You cannot bring Nawaz down untill these ignorants stand with him.And this is first and foremost focus of their policy.Gather “Jahils” around them.Dont you remember the “ecama” Slogan or benazir’s character assasination .Every move is to cover the
              uneducated people which for now make more than 70% of our population.
              This is a pointless battle.What in the world can any institution do.This is a democracy.As long as he is able to cover the JAHILS he will come on top

              • These ‘people’ know jack sh*t about IT and posing themselves as some IT experts just to save their ‘Roohani Abbu’.

    • Even I had pirated CD of Long Horn. But I am damn sure a legal firm in UK will never use it. Simply because it is illegal. On other hand pirated softwares have security issues. Got it?

      • But the same legal firm will issue a fake legal document, notarize it and attest it is legal. I am sure that makes a lot sense !

        • Are you trying to say that lawyers and law firms dont conspire or commit perjury? Head of JIT hired his own lawyer cousin to say whatever JIT wanted. So, why wouldnt Sharifs do the same crisis ‘management’:) ?
          You know the reality of notary attestation. Quite a farce at least in
          our country. Pay 10 or 20 rupees and get stamp on any document – as long as its not blank. Need I say more?
          Sharifs produced a document. Onus of proof lies on them. Once they produce scribe of the document to testify in court of law, many questions must arise. Does the law firm send copy of font as well as beta release of office or font to its clients so they could read it on their own computers – in blatant violation of EULA? Did the law firm have, or still has, any policies in place allowing/promoting/enforcing use of beta software in its computers? Does it distribute beta office/font to all its lawyers, legal/paralegal/associate/security/manager staff as well as court staff owing to its unusual affinity to use beta versions of fonts? Did it really have a printer at that time which was able to miraculously print a beta font with DPI as good as today’s printers? When they install a beta software/font, do they install it across the board? Is the law firm still using beta releases of software nowadays? Finally, is it a law firm or a software house engaged in software quality assurance (SQA)?
          Didn’t calibri become default office font upon public release thereby raising possibility that dates were incorrectly or mistakenly put on the deed document? How about that? Isnt that a possibility? Benefit of doubt goes to JIT version this time. Regardless, justful prowess of our judiciary will be tested intensively and i will be watching with keen interest. – especially cross examination done by NAB prosecutor.

          • Solicitors in UK and “notary public” in Pakistan have a different trust level. Courts in UK trust solicitors without a doubt as they maintain high level of credibility and professionalism.

        • for that they got lots of money? why would they go for pirated windows when they had windows xp? I am sure this makes lots of sense?

      • So you mean to say UK Citizens cannot violate the law?

        Remember Altaf Hussain and his cases ?

        Let me know if you need more examples.

        • Irfan Bhai, don’t miss the main message. It’s a defendant’s evidence. They have to prove it beyond doubt or the ownership is clearly with Maryam. When the document has other dubious content like dates as well, benefit of the doubt does go to JIT’s version. Again if it had been a prosecution’s document, onus lied with them. This deed is not an acceptable evidence in the court of law as it is not truth beyond doubt.

          • So there is no possibility that solicitor or anyone who printed that document had pre-release of vista ? Prosecutor has to prove that as well.

            Also prosecutor will have to prove that UK solicitor was part of forgery if any.

        • most foolish relating example! PML n can go to any extent of foolishness just to oppose and arguing! mere bhai ALLAH nay apko aqal di hai bura mat mana unko is had tak defend na karo!

          • Examples of how people defend in Pakistan:

            1- Imran got married now or on 1st January.
            2- Plants were 1 billion, less or more.
            3- It was Imran who ousted Nawaz, not judiciary or generals.

            Do not call others foolish as at some point you are doing the same .

    • Bhai simple logic aap logoun ko samajh kyun nhi aa rhi k ik legal firm kabhi bhi Alpha/Beta version use nhi krti OS ka. Saaloun tak woh ik hi OS version pe rehtay hain.
      You think that a ‘legal firm’ will use a buggy OS/software for their day-to-day work?

      Aur janab aap individual ho, aap koi bhi version daal skte ho. Ik aisi firm jiska kaam hi computer pe ho woh kabhi ye mazaaq nahi krti.

  • Pretty interesting article but I don’t understand why isn’t Microsoft clarifying this issue.

    You have your own timeline maybe they could up with one of theirs.

    Just ask them: Could a document have written in Calibri before Feburary 2006? If they say yes, it’s fine. If they say no, the Sharifs are lying.

    I remember using calibri since a long time. I am pretty sure I used to use it well before Facebook and I did not get on facebook until 2007.

      • Yes, I do understand. But I am arguing that it is very much possible for the law firm to have gotten access to the font before its official release.

        There are way too many instances here where they would gotten it so.

        I, myself, remember using it long time before 2007. I definitely think I used it during 2006. Maybe also before March 2006.

      • Does timeline links with the argument that solicitor’s office or anyone who printed that document was not having access to pre-releases of Microsoft OS or had no expertise to install fonts ?

        Nice effort Aamir but still….see you on PTI booth in NA-55 voting for Sheikh Rasheed ;)

    • How stupid are we as a nation if we still have people like srhzaidi, who, despite all the evidence presented in this article, still think that documents could be real! It honestly boggles the mind!

      • What I am trying to imply is that I remember using this font well before 2007.

        I really think this issue is being made more than it is. It is very much possible that the law firm could have gotten the font at the time this document was made.

        There is being a lot of bias regarding the issue. Don’t consider the white people to be impartial and fair. Even if they have knowledge that the font could have been used before the time they say it was possible to use it, they will hide that knowledge.

        That is the kind of people they are.

        My only point here is that Nawaz and his family are being treated very unfairly in the matter. This is pretty much a non-issue. There are way too many loopholes in the argument for it to be considered as an irrefutable evidence.

    • > why isn’t Microsoft clarifying this issue.

      They don’t care enough? They aren’t obligated to do anything in this matter.

      > Could a document have written in Calibri before Feburary 2006? If they say no, the Sharifs are lying.

      Yes. But the Sharifs are still lying for all the reasons presented in the article.

      Hope that clears things up.

      • Carbon date the document. If its older, its justified. If carbon dating presents itself before us as recent, the Sharifs are left with no further argument.

        • The Sharif’s said that they lost the original documents. Hence the documents provided to the JIT were photocopies of the original ones. Hence that takes away carbon dating

          • JIT could ask solicitor for the record, but cousin of JIT’s head who was “selected” for many jobs in UK couldn’t do this.

        • Do you think JIT couldn’t do that?

          Do you think they couldn’t approach solicitor to provide other such deeds signed during that time in same font ? But their sole source was cousin of Wajid Zia, head of JIT given a task to reach a pre-defined conclusion.

  • I think it’s very hard to conclude anything. Back then Beta versions were widely in use due to lack of strict piracy policies. Software companies often offer Beta releases to corporate clients for there feed back. There is fair posibility that font might also be available on freeware websites back then.

    • I would not want to establish anything, but piracy in UK, particularly for official work, is pretty much non existent.

      That’s where deed was prepared.

      • Assume the law firm used Calibri font during its beta phase. I demand to show us any other legal document prepared for any anyone in February 2006 by that law firm using the Calibiri font.

      • Please add even after public release, it takes months to adopt upgrade for softwares. It is extremely unlikely to be in use at this particular situation .

      • How much you got for writing this by the way?
        I know you very well and your political affiliations.
        Unfortunately today that guy himself said that I had calbiri at that time but I’m not the IT expert.
        You better claim your money from Ghafoor Pain before this article become useless.

        • lol, Bro before pointing fingers just ask the yourselft are firms or even individuals upgrade their software or use beta in initial days? No. I have seen many first still using XP and 7. So how you could expect a law firm to use a beta software too early?

  • Dear Aamir; when you say “extremely unlikely”, that itself is a Verdict….

    As far as Sharif’s are concerned, they only need to prove that it is a possible. That is what “Benefit of Doubt” is.

    • No, they won’t get benefit of doubt since expert opinion has established beyond reasonable doubt that the deed is forged. Defense doesn’t have to prove that it was possible but that it was plausible in this specific context. It is also possible that Maryam tested Iphone X before release but that doesn’t make it at all plausible. Defense needs to establish that their law firm had signed up for closed beta testing by showing the agreement with Microsoft. That isn’t enough either. They also need to show that this firm was using calibri for official docs even though it was NOT the default font in beta version of Vista and in fact was unknown. They need to bring forth other docs typed in Calibri and dated 2006. If they do all this, they would have created some doubt. Keep in mind that these trust deeds directly contradict official response of AG BVI confirming Maryam is Beneficial Owner.

  • Wikipedia kholo sab kuch wahn likha hai. Feb 2006 mai calibari font available tha. Chachy wo beta tha ya pro font file jab out ho jati tu koi bhi use kar skta hai.

    • No. It was NOT available to public in Feb 2006. Anyone could not use it. Only beta testers who had signed agreement with Microsoft could do so.

    • It was publicly available for beta testing after March 2006, whereas the document was made a month earlier. So it’s highly unlikely that such a font would be used in official documentation given the fact that it wasn’t even publicly available for beta testing!

    • not to the general public just because you have been pirating indian movies and songs for 20 years doesnt mean u are doing the right thing.
      Maryam nawaz was not a beta tester ,UK firm couldn`t have used a beta version because most firms install new os after their releases.And also if tommorow wikipedia call u a theif willu accept that truth as well..

      Allah ko mano jahil awam Jhoot jhoot hota hai jitna kaala kar lo.

  • Now Ali Salman will come and bash ProPK and Amir Ata for writing this article …

    But not one word will be uttered by him against the Sharifs but baseless claims will be made by him instead.

    Ah fun times we live in.

  • Even the designer of the font ‘Lucas de Groot’ said its highly unlikely to use Calibiri went its not even commercially available.
    Groot assertef that why would anyone use a completely unknown font for an official document in 2006?
    And also asked a legit Q if the person using Calibri was such a font lover that he or she had to use the new Calibri, then he or she should be able to prove that other documents were printed with Calibri in 2006, and these prints should be in the hands of other people as well.

  • Why would a law firm use a font which is not available to Sharif’s and rest of the public :) ? Did the law firm send copy of the font to Sharifs so they could open the deed on their own PC? Software houses dont bother themselves that much; let alone a law firm.
    And yes, as crowd wisdom poured in comments, the law firm must bring other documents to show that Sharif’s well not the only beneficiary of calibri early adoption. Quite a tech savvy firm it indeed is. btw, it will bury itself under privacy laws should courts ask it to come clean.
    Hopefully, the judge will use preponderance of probabilities to strike the deed down. Onus of proof lies on the house of Sharif when it comes to legitimacy of the document they produced before the court. They havent produced the scribe of the document. So it will be struck down on this count alone :)

    • There are problems with the declaration document of the deed. It says “Sunni shariah law” but does not specify whether Pakistani, or British interpretation shall apply. It does not say the number of pages that the deed comprises of. If the two pages in the deed are separated, how will one associate one page to the other? Staple pins means nothing. The document carries no stamp on either of the pages. It does not mention professions, parentage and ages of Maryam or Hussain Nawaz. Just writing their names and vague addresses is insufficient especially when Maryam has an address in PK. it does not even mention the incorporation dates, directors etc of the companies in the deed. It does not say what would happen if beneficiary and trustee die at the same time. It does not say who will conduct oversight. It does not contain signatures of Maryam and Hussain on each page with date and preferably time. It dose not list legal identity documents which were used by the notary in order to verify signatures of Maryam and Hussain (if any) . The list goes on.
      Getting the deed notorized meant signs of Maryam or Hussain were legit. Nothing more than that. Why was it notorized in 2016, after a decade of preparation – begs many questions. Were there other deeds in between? Was the deed cancelled but resurrected? Why were descendants of Hussain left out of the deed? He could not find a trustee among his wife/kids? Was the deed prepared and notorized once journalists started contacting victims of Panama leaks? The solicitor who witnessed the deed dissolved his company after Supreme Court had taken notice of Panama papers. The law firm was dormant and active intermittently. Why was it necessary to dissolve it? I doubt the solicitor shall ever appear before court to testify. Notary attestation done in 2016 does not answer questions related to calibri font used in declaration of 2006. Interesting times ahead.

  • Mosharraf Zaidi sums up sorry state of our nation in one tweet.

    Let’s never forget that during the week when the FATF situation brewed, we were discussing people’s marriage dates, the Calibri font, and legislative “blasphemy”.

    It isn’t PTI, or PML-N or, the Army, or the media.

    This is a whole-of-nation fail.

  • I wont say that your analysis is perfectly correct, but its quite strong. I think you can appear in the court to testify on the matter, as to whether or not a font can be available. It’s not matter of a font, it’s a question of integrity for those holding the highest public offices.

  • Even if you get access to font before its public beta release, the court will never accept it.
    Microsoft has registered testers and if you are not one of them then having closed beta software is illegal. Court will never accept it. Isn’t it simple?

  • Fake Pakistani Media. Specially Geo and Jung group believe to fool people for save corupt Nawaz sharif

  • well it is not “local media” in fact it is only “Nawaz media” including Geo and partners.

  • i totally agree with the argument that this fount might be accessible to lot of the people especially country like Pakistan where crack and beta and pre-alpha apps and fount peep in to local market.
    but. in Europe i dont agree that it is available due to piracy law. and legal firms know the consequences of using it on legal deeds.
    even then NS team can sue that firm for the damages if all is right.

  • Software never comes with warranties. Not even final super duper stable public release version. You are trying to clear things up but you yourself don’t know what you are talking about. Go read the Microsoft EULA.

  • After a very long time I have read a whole article. Very concise and understandable even though there are too many dates involved to get confused. But thumbs up to the writer.

  • bhai jab gawah khud keh reha hai key wo 2005 mein Vista use kerta reha hai, aur wo IT expert nahen hai…. to aap ko kia masla hai?

  • Anyone can download and use a font without VISTA or Office. Aap ney sari kahani ko Vista aur Office key beta versions sey kaisey jorr diya ???

    • Yes there are fonts available, outside operating system, but those are accessed and used by designers and pro users mainly – and not by common users like me or you.

      For a reference, there are tons of fonts available even today but we don’t use them instead we use fonts that come with windows or office only.

      Having said this, just for your pleasure, chances of Sharif family (or their solicitor) using calibri font in 2006 are bare minimum, one out of hundred or even less.

  • What abt Robert’s own confession of not being tech geek or IT expert but using the same font since 2005.

  • Good efforts Aamir. The law proceeds need this kind of detailed technical description of the evidences. Only then it can reach to a conclusion.

  • I don’t know what bullsh*t this article is all about as i am not interested in Youthiyas interrogation. But back in 2005 i installed longhorn on my Pentium 4 and was amazed by new look and everything but it was the sh*ttiest pre-vista release as disks in ‘My Computer’ would take forever to load. I was just a kid in 9th grade and not some techy guy. I was just interested in exploring new things. But i am sure many Professionals would have kept those betas as side OS on their PCs and must be using for small works like typing or printing stuff.

  • Common user hardly bother to change the settings and writing formats set as default by MS Office, until then it was Times New Roman. The document old is recent since the chances of downloading and using one out of thousands available fonts on web in 2006 are minimum.

  • Jis tarhan se Ali Salman aur 2-3 aur logoun ne yahan ‘knowledge’ na hotay hoe support kia hai ‘baadshah salamat’ ko woh tareef k qaabil hai.
    Aisay log aur chahian hamain taakay mulk hamesha daldal main dooba rahay aur inkay aaqa loot’tay rahain hum sab ko.

  • Ah ! The Sharifs,
    the only brains they have is from “Nihari”,
    and only leg to stand on from “Paya”.
    To save their chori they will change the Constitution.

  • Ltd feature videos

    Watch more at LTD