digitalbiker
Aug 25, 03:59 PM
Another person who can never be satisfied.:rolleyes:
Kind of a rude reply to someone who is just posting their experience with Apple.
Without criticism there would never be a reason to improve anything.
Kind of a rude reply to someone who is just posting their experience with Apple.
Without criticism there would never be a reason to improve anything.
ten-oak-druid
Mar 22, 04:24 PM
This is just a preview of the future, Android based tablets will clean the iPads clock. Apple made the so-called iPad 2 as a 1.5. Low res camera, not enough RAM, and low res screen. It's going to be a verrrry long 2012 for Apple. Sure it's selling like hot cakes now, but when buyers see tablets that they don't have to stand inline for, that have better equipment and are cheaper ... Apples house of cards will come crashing down around them.
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
It will be hard for the ipad competition to play the same game they play with computers. You know, subsidizing decent computers with bulk sales of low end devices. They tried this with tablets and they failed. Tablets are a luxury above and beyond a personal computer. No one buying a Dell for $300 is going to add on a tablet.
So how are they going to match Apple's price with the same quality if they can't subsidize with low end garbage? Well samsung did it by using contracts. That is why you find it on amazon rankings not as a tablet but as a mobile phone.
So take your pick. An ipad or a competitor of equal quality with a 2 year contract.
I wonder if Samsung ever sold those 2 million units of the original galaxy that they shipped? And what was the true return rate anyway?
The only strength that Apple has is the app ecosystem; which is why they are going after Amazon for spiting on the sidewalk. They know the world of hurt coming their way.
It will be hard for the ipad competition to play the same game they play with computers. You know, subsidizing decent computers with bulk sales of low end devices. They tried this with tablets and they failed. Tablets are a luxury above and beyond a personal computer. No one buying a Dell for $300 is going to add on a tablet.
So how are they going to match Apple's price with the same quality if they can't subsidize with low end garbage? Well samsung did it by using contracts. That is why you find it on amazon rankings not as a tablet but as a mobile phone.
So take your pick. An ipad or a competitor of equal quality with a 2 year contract.
I wonder if Samsung ever sold those 2 million units of the original galaxy that they shipped? And what was the true return rate anyway?
dwd3885
Mar 31, 04:24 PM
what is this bash apple competitors day?
Ladybug
Aug 7, 06:59 PM
Yeah, I recommended GoBack to a number of users back in the day (I think it was Adaptec that owned it at one point). No-one seemed to like it at the time.
As I and others reminisce it's a feature that has been around for well over 20 years in VMS. It's only relatively new to personal computers.
B
Great info Balamw, your memory is much better than mine :D
I also used GoBack for a short period. The problem with it that I had, was how slow it actually made my computer. I haven't used it in recent years so I really can't say how well it progressed after version 2 I think it was.
As I and others reminisce it's a feature that has been around for well over 20 years in VMS. It's only relatively new to personal computers.
B
Great info Balamw, your memory is much better than mine :D
I also used GoBack for a short period. The problem with it that I had, was how slow it actually made my computer. I haven't used it in recent years so I really can't say how well it progressed after version 2 I think it was.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 10, 12:03 PM
DVD Studio Pro will get a full overhaul and fully support The Bag of Hurt Blu-ray -- on an external burner for the new iMacs which will also be announced. Again, physical media gets an external treatment and the application will be the sperate step child of the newly integrated Final Studio.
Based on the video I'd be betting the other way; that DVD SP will not get updated. It will be supported, but on the way out.
Physical media's relevancy is waning by the day. And if Apple has a "be where the puck will be" attitude then it's not going to put energy in propping up a dying war horse.
If you need a one-off Blu-Ray disc you can already out put to Blu-Ray via Compressor then burn via Toast. I can see Apple declaring hard media dead before I see it enhancing support BD-R.
Based on the video I'd be betting the other way; that DVD SP will not get updated. It will be supported, but on the way out.
Physical media's relevancy is waning by the day. And if Apple has a "be where the puck will be" attitude then it's not going to put energy in propping up a dying war horse.
If you need a one-off Blu-Ray disc you can already out put to Blu-Ray via Compressor then burn via Toast. I can see Apple declaring hard media dead before I see it enhancing support BD-R.
mrblack927
Apr 27, 08:15 AM
Wow. That's surprising. This whole time people downplayed it because there was no evidence that apple was actually transmitting this data. It wasn't a big deal because the db file was local only. Now when Apple addresses it they had to not only admit that the file exists but that they actually were transmitting data.
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
Ah well, still not a big deal. :p
cult hero
Mar 26, 12:19 AM
I'm really not looking forward to Lion at all. It just seems like a huge step backwards for those of us that use our computers as real computers and not toys.
I use my computer as a "real computer" and I like virtually every change I've seen. I wish people wouldn't generalize so broadly and presume that because certain additions aren't something that they use that it has nothing to do with "real work."
I LOATH the whole idea of merging OSX and iOS, they shouldn't even be related.
Why shouldn't they be related? Borrowing concepts and sharing library isn't the same as being merged. The only people who honestly believe the OSes are being merged into one are the paranoid people on this forum.
I hate how they are ruining expose, I really don't want my stuff groups by app, I want to see every window like it is now.
Unless I'm missing something, Mission Control is added in addition to Expos� as it is now. The old functionality will still be there. As for it being "ruined," a couple of days before the Lion preview the graphic artist I work with most was describing changes he wished they'd make to Expos� and we were laughing together a few days later when we watched the preview and boom, there it was. Incidentally, he makes his living off what he does with his "real" computer.
I have no use for "full screen" apps, why would I waste all my screen real estate only showing one thing at a time?
Cool. Don't use "full screen apps." However, they make a lot of sense in a few places. Paired with Spaces I'm looking forward to this when working on my laptop without an external monitor. Also, on a multimonitor setup it makes a lot of sense.
I hate the idea of getting programs through the app store on the Mac, I refuse to do that. I hate all the gesture crap going on, sure it's fine for laptop users, but it's of no use to me on my mac pro.
Again, don't do any of it. I've been using Steam for my games on the PC basically since CounterStrike: Condition Zero was released. It's awesome. I was thrilled with the AppStore for similar reasons. It's just convenient. However, it's not the only distribution method available for software so its existence doesn't impede you.
I also use my trackpad when using my computer like a desktop and love having my Expos� gestures there.
I think all this is just a dumbing down of what is an amazing OS.
What's being dumbed down exactly? Ease of use is very different than "dumbing down." Workflows that aren't what one particular individual likes are not "dumb." There are plenty of UNIX fanatics that think people using anything but CLI for half their workflow are using "dumbed down" interfaces. They're wrong and they're annoying.
I don't use my mac with dual displays anything like I'd use an iPad, so why put that crap in there? I just don't like the direction they are taking OSX in general, and I doubt I will upgrade from snow leopard. To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
Launchpad is, in my opinion, the lamest and most unnecessary addition to Lion. However, it's so minor that I don't care. I know some people will really like it. I am not personally offended by the inclusion of a feature I don't use or care about either.
The vast majority of people using computers are not techies, pros or developers. They're people like my parents. As a developer, I'm generally more excited about a new release of XCode than I am about OS X because overall, it's going to affect what I do far more than the OS will.
To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
If they merge in the sense that the Mac becomes as locked down as an iPhone, I agree that that's it on Macs and even if they don't die in the market from Apple's would be hubris I'll be leaving Apple for something else. Thankfully, this will only occur if most of Apple's leadership is replaced with an army of complete morons.
Really, my point is this: you don't have to like these features. However, that doesn't mean they're not useful. It doesn't mean that they're "dumbed down." It doesn't mean "pros" won't like them. It doesn't mean people who like them don't use their computer as a "real computer" and instead treat it as a "toy." It means you don't like them.
I use my computer as a "real computer" and I like virtually every change I've seen. I wish people wouldn't generalize so broadly and presume that because certain additions aren't something that they use that it has nothing to do with "real work."
I LOATH the whole idea of merging OSX and iOS, they shouldn't even be related.
Why shouldn't they be related? Borrowing concepts and sharing library isn't the same as being merged. The only people who honestly believe the OSes are being merged into one are the paranoid people on this forum.
I hate how they are ruining expose, I really don't want my stuff groups by app, I want to see every window like it is now.
Unless I'm missing something, Mission Control is added in addition to Expos� as it is now. The old functionality will still be there. As for it being "ruined," a couple of days before the Lion preview the graphic artist I work with most was describing changes he wished they'd make to Expos� and we were laughing together a few days later when we watched the preview and boom, there it was. Incidentally, he makes his living off what he does with his "real" computer.
I have no use for "full screen" apps, why would I waste all my screen real estate only showing one thing at a time?
Cool. Don't use "full screen apps." However, they make a lot of sense in a few places. Paired with Spaces I'm looking forward to this when working on my laptop without an external monitor. Also, on a multimonitor setup it makes a lot of sense.
I hate the idea of getting programs through the app store on the Mac, I refuse to do that. I hate all the gesture crap going on, sure it's fine for laptop users, but it's of no use to me on my mac pro.
Again, don't do any of it. I've been using Steam for my games on the PC basically since CounterStrike: Condition Zero was released. It's awesome. I was thrilled with the AppStore for similar reasons. It's just convenient. However, it's not the only distribution method available for software so its existence doesn't impede you.
I also use my trackpad when using my computer like a desktop and love having my Expos� gestures there.
I think all this is just a dumbing down of what is an amazing OS.
What's being dumbed down exactly? Ease of use is very different than "dumbing down." Workflows that aren't what one particular individual likes are not "dumb." There are plenty of UNIX fanatics that think people using anything but CLI for half their workflow are using "dumbed down" interfaces. They're wrong and they're annoying.
I don't use my mac with dual displays anything like I'd use an iPad, so why put that crap in there? I just don't like the direction they are taking OSX in general, and I doubt I will upgrade from snow leopard. To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
Launchpad is, in my opinion, the lamest and most unnecessary addition to Lion. However, it's so minor that I don't care. I know some people will really like it. I am not personally offended by the inclusion of a feature I don't use or care about either.
The vast majority of people using computers are not techies, pros or developers. They're people like my parents. As a developer, I'm generally more excited about a new release of XCode than I am about OS X because overall, it's going to affect what I do far more than the OS will.
To me this is very sad news, the day OSX and iOS merge is the day the mac dies.
If they merge in the sense that the Mac becomes as locked down as an iPhone, I agree that that's it on Macs and even if they don't die in the market from Apple's would be hubris I'll be leaving Apple for something else. Thankfully, this will only occur if most of Apple's leadership is replaced with an army of complete morons.
Really, my point is this: you don't have to like these features. However, that doesn't mean they're not useful. It doesn't mean that they're "dumbed down." It doesn't mean "pros" won't like them. It doesn't mean people who like them don't use their computer as a "real computer" and instead treat it as a "toy." It means you don't like them.
aricher
Sep 13, 09:31 AM
Are these processors 32 or 64 bit? I told one of my PC-lovin' IT guys about the 8 core Mac this morning and he said, "32 bit processors are ancient technology no matter how many you stuff into a box, but I guess they are OK for entertainment computers." :rolleyes:
awesomebase
Mar 31, 07:08 PM
Google's "openness" reminds me of the days when people got all excited about being able to use different fonts and font sizes... sure it is exciting to see the possibilities and to be able to "customize" your documents, etc., but in the end, you only end up using a hand full of them (despite thousands of them being available), and most of what is being used is STILL what was the default choices back then.
Just like a kid that thinks they're going to be greater and better than those older than them because they know better; well, surprise, surprise... Google has turned out to be worse than IBM or Microsoft or Apple ever was. The deal with them will just keep getting worse and worse until people come up with genuine alternatives to their constant lying and deceptiveness (oh, yes, picking up 10M wi-fi SSIDs was purely accidental...).
I don't blame them for having to switch gears on this... I blame them for not being able to see 5 mins in front of their face on this issue (like so many other things) and insisting that "they're" correct every time it is obvious to everyone outside their company that they're not...
Just like a kid that thinks they're going to be greater and better than those older than them because they know better; well, surprise, surprise... Google has turned out to be worse than IBM or Microsoft or Apple ever was. The deal with them will just keep getting worse and worse until people come up with genuine alternatives to their constant lying and deceptiveness (oh, yes, picking up 10M wi-fi SSIDs was purely accidental...).
I don't blame them for having to switch gears on this... I blame them for not being able to see 5 mins in front of their face on this issue (like so many other things) and insisting that "they're" correct every time it is obvious to everyone outside their company that they're not...
nefan65
Apr 6, 02:54 PM
It's nice for Apple to have high iPad2 sales, and I think that's great. It's too bad the Xoom isn't selling more, although 100k isn't too terrible right out of the gate.
I've seen and hefted a Xoom, and you know what? It's a pretty decent piece of gear. Good job Moto! From a hardware perspective I liked it every bit as much as the iPad2. In my opinion, its only downfall is Android. For me, Android is not intuitive at all. I can deal with that when it comes to traditional computers, but I don't have time to waste with that sort of nonsense on an appliance - I want it to just work, and that's what Apple provides.
Actually, 100,000 is pretty bad. I think it was released sometime in late Feb. the iPad 2 sold 300,000 in the first weekend.
Regardless, I think competition is good. If the XOOM had a WiFi only @ $400, it's make a huge dent. Plus, I've read that Honeycomb is less than polished, so I think that, along with a high price tag has some people turned off...
That's just my opinion though..and we all know what opinion's are like...lol
I've seen and hefted a Xoom, and you know what? It's a pretty decent piece of gear. Good job Moto! From a hardware perspective I liked it every bit as much as the iPad2. In my opinion, its only downfall is Android. For me, Android is not intuitive at all. I can deal with that when it comes to traditional computers, but I don't have time to waste with that sort of nonsense on an appliance - I want it to just work, and that's what Apple provides.
Actually, 100,000 is pretty bad. I think it was released sometime in late Feb. the iPad 2 sold 300,000 in the first weekend.
Regardless, I think competition is good. If the XOOM had a WiFi only @ $400, it's make a huge dent. Plus, I've read that Honeycomb is less than polished, so I think that, along with a high price tag has some people turned off...
That's just my opinion though..and we all know what opinion's are like...lol
Chupa Chupa
Apr 10, 09:12 AM
Something is rotten in the state of Denmark, and it ain't the whole fact that Apple pushed aside every professional vid company just to announce their product. It's that they never have announced pro-level products at/alongside professional trade shows prior to this. CES is one thing, but I don't ever recall Apple ever placing any presence at/during NAB or AES (the latter of which they would present something related to the Logic Pro) before.
You need to consult a doctor ASAP because your memory isn't so good. It's only been a few years since Apple pulled out of NAB. Prior to that Apple use to announce products alongside NAB all the time. In fact the very first version of FCP was announced at Supermeet.
Since then:
NAB '01: DVD SP 1.5
NAB '02, '03: new versions of FCP
NAB '05, 06, 07, 09: new versions of FCS
Anyone else call BS on that whole article?
Huh? Did you see the video. This is a legit NAB discussion panel. But I see where you are coming from b/c it's completely unlike Apple to go off on a new paradigm. I mean Apple would be the last company to shock customers and the industry by ditching the floppy drive at the peak of it's existence. And it would never just completely rewrite a popular consumer program like iMovie. Or take the lead on a new connector like Thunderbolt. Never, because we all know Apple is a company that follows other's lead. :rolleyes:
I since there will be a lot of the usually howling when this new FCP is previewed. It looks like Apple is taking video editing in a completely new direction, hence the sentimental journey back to the place where FCP was first launched. Based on the video Apple is jettisoning old media (TV, Movie) editing for new media (web). The latter market is bigger and it also fits in better with Apple's new consumer-leaning sales model.
Personally I'm excited to see what Tues brings.
Although a new FCP is great news, I'm wondering if the new Motion is going to be equally exciting. It's about time it stepped up and challenged After Effects.
I suspect Apple did a re-think of the entire suite and the Motion graphics will not only give AE a run for it's money but that Motion will be better integrated into FCP.
You need to consult a doctor ASAP because your memory isn't so good. It's only been a few years since Apple pulled out of NAB. Prior to that Apple use to announce products alongside NAB all the time. In fact the very first version of FCP was announced at Supermeet.
Since then:
NAB '01: DVD SP 1.5
NAB '02, '03: new versions of FCP
NAB '05, 06, 07, 09: new versions of FCS
Anyone else call BS on that whole article?
Huh? Did you see the video. This is a legit NAB discussion panel. But I see where you are coming from b/c it's completely unlike Apple to go off on a new paradigm. I mean Apple would be the last company to shock customers and the industry by ditching the floppy drive at the peak of it's existence. And it would never just completely rewrite a popular consumer program like iMovie. Or take the lead on a new connector like Thunderbolt. Never, because we all know Apple is a company that follows other's lead. :rolleyes:
I since there will be a lot of the usually howling when this new FCP is previewed. It looks like Apple is taking video editing in a completely new direction, hence the sentimental journey back to the place where FCP was first launched. Based on the video Apple is jettisoning old media (TV, Movie) editing for new media (web). The latter market is bigger and it also fits in better with Apple's new consumer-leaning sales model.
Personally I'm excited to see what Tues brings.
Although a new FCP is great news, I'm wondering if the new Motion is going to be equally exciting. It's about time it stepped up and challenged After Effects.
I suspect Apple did a re-think of the entire suite and the Motion graphics will not only give AE a run for it's money but that Motion will be better integrated into FCP.
DudeDad
Mar 26, 05:17 PM
Reading most of the posts, especially the negative / critical ones, I'm relieved that you guys don't work for Apple!
IMO, Lion will "merge"/"blend" some of the IOS look and feel. It will be a great selling point for those who own iPhones and iPads, but have not taken the Mac plunge....familiarity will be a huge selling point.
Don't like Launchpad? Don't use it. Use the dock or finder. I don't use spaces, but know many who swear by it. To each, his own.
I welcome the next version of Mac OS X, but I do not expect something so radically different that I'm setting myself up for disappointment.
Cheers....
IMO, Lion will "merge"/"blend" some of the IOS look and feel. It will be a great selling point for those who own iPhones and iPads, but have not taken the Mac plunge....familiarity will be a huge selling point.
Don't like Launchpad? Don't use it. Use the dock or finder. I don't use spaces, but know many who swear by it. To each, his own.
I welcome the next version of Mac OS X, but I do not expect something so radically different that I'm setting myself up for disappointment.
Cheers....
Nuck81
Nov 25, 02:46 PM
Need For Speed: Shift looks better than GT5. Especially the in car Cockpit cam. The shadows of GT5 are a fickering jaggy especially in car. I'm hoping they can patch all that out. Not to mention the AI of GT5 is horrible. The cars just stay on the driving line like those old time cars at the amusement park. There is no regard to racing or competition. In Shift, the AI is trying to beat you. They bump you they pass you, they get too aggressive and make mistakes, causing wrecks and spin outs. There is no better console racer in that regard. GT5 AI only makes contact if you are in their line, not that they are actually trying to "beat" you.
The Driving feels good though after I switched the brake/gas to the triggers and off the awkward right stick. GT5 would be better to be marketing as a Driving/Time Trial game. Not a Racing/Competition game. I'll put my time into GT5. and it will be a blast trying to beat my times on the tracks with the different cars, but I won't play the game looking to win races against competition. For that, I'm looking forward to Shift 2 already...
GT5 is a 8.5 for me.
The Driving feels good though after I switched the brake/gas to the triggers and off the awkward right stick. GT5 would be better to be marketing as a Driving/Time Trial game. Not a Racing/Competition game. I'll put my time into GT5. and it will be a blast trying to beat my times on the tracks with the different cars, but I won't play the game looking to win races against competition. For that, I'm looking forward to Shift 2 already...
GT5 is a 8.5 for me.
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
emotion
Jul 20, 11:25 AM
Somehow I doubt that Intel would change thier roadmap for/because of Apple. They are probably one of their smallest customers :P
For an individual customer Apple are actually quite large. They are also high profile.
For an individual customer Apple are actually quite large. They are also high profile.
freeny
Aug 7, 04:25 PM
I really dont give a cr@p who made what first or who stole this or that. All I care is that it works....
chrmjenkins
Apr 27, 10:32 AM
I'm a little confused at the magnitude of people's reaction here.
Cell phone companies already do this. This is how they track potential crime victims locations'. They can access the cellular provider's database and get a ping with a cell tower and location. This is also timestamped. Your cellular provider already has more information than Apple ever had.
Cell phone companies already do this. This is how they track potential crime victims locations'. They can access the cellular provider's database and get a ping with a cell tower and location. This is also timestamped. Your cellular provider already has more information than Apple ever had.
aricher
Sep 13, 12:44 PM
I think we can all read at normal size. Besides, how do you know the IT dude typed that vs. the poster just typing what he said?
I did a direct copy-paste from my IT guy's email. What a knucklehead - him not you.
I did a direct copy-paste from my IT guy's email. What a knucklehead - him not you.
balamw
Aug 7, 04:15 PM
This is not what Apple is doing here, as they are simply storing the old version of the file on the backup system.
Which takes us back to the behavior that was the default on VAX systems running VMS 20 years ago... Microsoft is implementing something similar in Vista as well. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060730-7383.html
B
Which takes us back to the behavior that was the default on VAX systems running VMS 20 years ago... Microsoft is implementing something similar in Vista as well. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060730-7383.html
B
zero2dash
Sep 18, 02:26 PM
The Thinkpad X40 I'm typing from Bluescreened on me no longer than three weeks ago. My crime? coming out of suspend mode.
Windows Crashes.
Believe it or not, Mac OS X can crash too. While it is prettier, it's still a crash.
Pretty funny reading the last few pages, thanks for the laughs.
I'll never forget at my old job (Kinkos) when our dual G4 running Panther had that system crash screen come up that is gray and basically says "your FUBAR'D" in like 8 languages...we were all stunned. :D Good times...never thought I'd see a bad crash like that in OSX. Or back in 2000 when our workstations were all running Windows 95b - I lost track of how many blue screens we'd get in a day. Man Win95 was garbage. :p Big for it's time - utter garbage now.
Windows Crashes.
Believe it or not, Mac OS X can crash too. While it is prettier, it's still a crash.
Pretty funny reading the last few pages, thanks for the laughs.
I'll never forget at my old job (Kinkos) when our dual G4 running Panther had that system crash screen come up that is gray and basically says "your FUBAR'D" in like 8 languages...we were all stunned. :D Good times...never thought I'd see a bad crash like that in OSX. Or back in 2000 when our workstations were all running Windows 95b - I lost track of how many blue screens we'd get in a day. Man Win95 was garbage. :p Big for it's time - utter garbage now.
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:25 PM
Apple will never ship a desktop machine so close in size to the mini. Impractical and too much market confusion. I'm expecting a ~25% decrease in size of the current G5 tower, making it more mid-tower sized. This would still be an improvement to the current behemoths.
Wow, you're pulling out my deep cuts with your sig. They never did fit a G5 in a notebook, I guess that was my intention with that quote. The G4 was never a great chip. It ran hot and the only way to make it faster was to make it run hotter, Apple needed a new chip and they knew it. Because they couldn't find a producer of efficient PPC chips, they switched to Intel, and I don't think anyone saw that coming.
Sometimes, chip makers move backwards to an architecture that works. Look at Intel's latest chips, they're an evolution of the Pentium M architecture and a departure from what previously was their "best" and fastest, the Pentium 4.
Wow, you're pulling out my deep cuts with your sig. They never did fit a G5 in a notebook, I guess that was my intention with that quote. The G4 was never a great chip. It ran hot and the only way to make it faster was to make it run hotter, Apple needed a new chip and they knew it. Because they couldn't find a producer of efficient PPC chips, they switched to Intel, and I don't think anyone saw that coming.
Sometimes, chip makers move backwards to an architecture that works. Look at Intel's latest chips, they're an evolution of the Pentium M architecture and a departure from what previously was their "best" and fastest, the Pentium 4.
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:17 PM
I've built a gaming PC around the Core 2 Duo E6700. I'd like to be able to install OS X on it, because the only reason why I'd ever use Windows is for the latest games. Here are the spec's, think this would run OS X nicely? ;-)
Intel 975XBX Motherboard
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (should overclock to around 3.2 to 3.5 GHz with my Zalman CNPS9500 AT air cooler)
ATI Crossfire x1900 (crossfire master card)
Sapphire ATI x1900xt (in crossfire)
1GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2 800 Memory
2 x 320GB Seagate Perpendicular Recording SATA2 HD's in RAID 1
Antec Trupower II 550 watt power supply
Antec P180 case in black
... keep in mind I am a diehard Mac fan, but I've always wanted to build a gaming rig since I'm a hardcore gamer. After all, I'm writing this entry on my MacBook Pro. Mmmmm.
You should have waited for a Mac Pro. By hacking OS X to run on your custom built machine, you're constantly going to have to deal with a buggy Mac OS. There's no doubt that with every OS update, Apple will try to disable your hacked copy, if not fry your OS X installation. Make sure you partition...
I'm a gamer too and I'm just sitting on my hands waiting for a Mac Pro. Sure, it may be more expensive than a custom-built Intel machine, but it will run OS X like a charm, and that's ultimately the most important factor in my computer purchase. But access to Windows games and Mac OS X, that's a dream come true for this mac fanatic. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that virtualization makes big enough strides that I never have to leave OS X to play Windows-based games.
Intel 975XBX Motherboard
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (should overclock to around 3.2 to 3.5 GHz with my Zalman CNPS9500 AT air cooler)
ATI Crossfire x1900 (crossfire master card)
Sapphire ATI x1900xt (in crossfire)
1GB Crucial Ballistix DDR2 800 Memory
2 x 320GB Seagate Perpendicular Recording SATA2 HD's in RAID 1
Antec Trupower II 550 watt power supply
Antec P180 case in black
... keep in mind I am a diehard Mac fan, but I've always wanted to build a gaming rig since I'm a hardcore gamer. After all, I'm writing this entry on my MacBook Pro. Mmmmm.
You should have waited for a Mac Pro. By hacking OS X to run on your custom built machine, you're constantly going to have to deal with a buggy Mac OS. There's no doubt that with every OS update, Apple will try to disable your hacked copy, if not fry your OS X installation. Make sure you partition...
I'm a gamer too and I'm just sitting on my hands waiting for a Mac Pro. Sure, it may be more expensive than a custom-built Intel machine, but it will run OS X like a charm, and that's ultimately the most important factor in my computer purchase. But access to Windows games and Mac OS X, that's a dream come true for this mac fanatic. I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that virtualization makes big enough strides that I never have to leave OS X to play Windows-based games.
mc68k
Dec 6, 01:20 PM
I have only done one. But I didn't feel as if I could start the race, leave, come back and have won. The race I did, I watched. My guy was in 1st the up until the last lap, and the person in 2nd over took him. I am sure if I was not there to instruct him to "over take" he would not have done it and I would have gotten 2nd.
Maybe I just need to level up?yeah your bspec driver will really suck until he's leveled up a bit. still havent figured out why you would want more than one bspec driver, prob for the later enduro races? got my bspec up to 12, he's racing and overtaking much better now. the amount the bspec driver levels up every time is small, so it's very grind-y but at least you don't have to watch it, and you get some diff gift cars than the same race in a-spec
Maybe I just need to level up?yeah your bspec driver will really suck until he's leveled up a bit. still havent figured out why you would want more than one bspec driver, prob for the later enduro races? got my bspec up to 12, he's racing and overtaking much better now. the amount the bspec driver levels up every time is small, so it's very grind-y but at least you don't have to watch it, and you get some diff gift cars than the same race in a-spec
appleguy123
Feb 28, 06:42 PM
Got me on "ignore", have you? :p
I could never ignore you. :D
I actually had something typed up to refute it, but it wasn't consistent with what I actually believe or do on the PRSI(and didn't want it used for quote mining against me :) ), so I deleted it. Then I saw that more people were quoting that, so I had to officially resign the point.
I could never ignore you. :D
I actually had something typed up to refute it, but it wasn't consistent with what I actually believe or do on the PRSI(and didn't want it used for quote mining against me :) ), so I deleted it. Then I saw that more people were quoting that, so I had to officially resign the point.