Kebabselector
Mar 22, 12:53 PM
Competition is great, but they market the playbook as a Professional Tablet - which is fine, but if it's a Professional tablet why have so many pictures of it running games?
rovex
Apr 12, 06:28 PM
Please explain this. You'd buy an iPhone 5 with HSPA+, but not one with LTE ? Why ? Makes no sense at all.
The coverage and cost obviously.
The coverage and cost obviously.
leekohler
Apr 27, 12:29 PM
I suspected it was a copy, I've never trusted the president, and I probably never will.
Why? What has he done to make you not trust him? IMO, he's done a decent job so far, and actually gotten quite a bit of good things done.
Why? What has he done to make you not trust him? IMO, he's done a decent job so far, and actually gotten quite a bit of good things done.
BWhaler
Aug 26, 06:37 PM
In other news, Merom this, Merom that, just make sure you get it out on time Apple :p
...and with quality.
Enough of these crappy shortcuts and horific QA Apple; we're premium buyers. Or maybe you didn't notice how well Dell is doing nowadays.
You're screwing up, intel. We don't want 300 trillion transistors on a 1 nm die. We want longer battery life. Idiots.
Agreed. I still think Intel doesn't get it. Yes, faster is good. But Intel has been paying lip service to the 9 - 10 hour battery life for about a decade now.
Only problem with that is that a 2.33 GHz Merom chip will be fifty percent more expensive than a 2.16 GHz Yonah is today. So do you think Apple will increase prices of the MacBook Pro by $150 to $200 or reduce their profit?
Wrong. Just wrong.
Google is your friend. Learn some facts before you post.
Yippee.....
Definitely buying a MBP asap.....not gonna wait for santa rosa!
Me too. I am sure I could squeeze out another 9 months with my 17" PowerBook--which is less than 1 year old--but I think it's time to get with the future.
It's a pretty easy decision given how much faster the Intel Macs are.
Old, but still funny. A little :p
Only if you have no sense of humour! :p
Nothing would make me happier than for the new MacBook Pros to be shipping early next week. And with all of the quality issues worked out.
My expectations for the next generation 17" MacBook Pro:
2.33 Core 2 Duo
Better GPU
160gig HD
Higher quality displays. No more of this uneven backlighting crap.
My hopes:
Longer battery life
Get the power adaptor below 70 watts so we can use them on planes
Lower price
Hell, I'm buying whatever comes next. I just hope there are some solid spec bumps across the board.
And most importantly, I hope Apple fixes the crappy quality issues that have been plaguing their portable line all year.
...and with quality.
Enough of these crappy shortcuts and horific QA Apple; we're premium buyers. Or maybe you didn't notice how well Dell is doing nowadays.
You're screwing up, intel. We don't want 300 trillion transistors on a 1 nm die. We want longer battery life. Idiots.
Agreed. I still think Intel doesn't get it. Yes, faster is good. But Intel has been paying lip service to the 9 - 10 hour battery life for about a decade now.
Only problem with that is that a 2.33 GHz Merom chip will be fifty percent more expensive than a 2.16 GHz Yonah is today. So do you think Apple will increase prices of the MacBook Pro by $150 to $200 or reduce their profit?
Wrong. Just wrong.
Google is your friend. Learn some facts before you post.
Yippee.....
Definitely buying a MBP asap.....not gonna wait for santa rosa!
Me too. I am sure I could squeeze out another 9 months with my 17" PowerBook--which is less than 1 year old--but I think it's time to get with the future.
It's a pretty easy decision given how much faster the Intel Macs are.
Old, but still funny. A little :p
Only if you have no sense of humour! :p
Nothing would make me happier than for the new MacBook Pros to be shipping early next week. And with all of the quality issues worked out.
My expectations for the next generation 17" MacBook Pro:
2.33 Core 2 Duo
Better GPU
160gig HD
Higher quality displays. No more of this uneven backlighting crap.
My hopes:
Longer battery life
Get the power adaptor below 70 watts so we can use them on planes
Lower price
Hell, I'm buying whatever comes next. I just hope there are some solid spec bumps across the board.
And most importantly, I hope Apple fixes the crappy quality issues that have been plaguing their portable line all year.
TennisandMusic
Apr 10, 12:31 AM
I'm a little confused...why was Avid presenting at a Final Cut Pro User Group's meeting anyway? Do they just come in and are like "Hey, you've all made a mistake!" or something?
No idea, but I just don't get those tactics. I mean, other than being ruthless business people. :p
Just show your stuff without having to strong arm...
No idea, but I just don't get those tactics. I mean, other than being ruthless business people. :p
Just show your stuff without having to strong arm...
DoFoT9
Aug 8, 07:12 PM
i don't know, i still think the Gran Turismo series is the best as far as real driving simulation. by far. and the number of copies sold backs that up
given that its been out for 10 years, i think it would have sold a fair few no matter what :rolleyes: i preferred GT3 A-Spec over anything else.
yeah i still might pre-order the special edition one. i'm not sure yet
do we have an official date yet? or will that be pushed back too :D
given that its been out for 10 years, i think it would have sold a fair few no matter what :rolleyes: i preferred GT3 A-Spec over anything else.
yeah i still might pre-order the special edition one. i'm not sure yet
do we have an official date yet? or will that be pushed back too :D
arkitect
Mar 3, 04:52 AM
I believe that every "gay" person should be celibate.
Why?
I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex
Why?
Yes, I know you "explain", but I just never get it.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
Last year I (male) married my partner (male) — we've been together 11 years. (As an aside, that 11 year relationship has outlasted all — and I mean all my straight cousins's marriages and relationships).
Now, you may not like to hear this, but when we have sex we make love. I do not see him as just an object. I fell in love with him because he is a wonderful man. He makes me happy and content.
No different from other couples straight or gay.
So why should we suddenly live together in a platonic relationship — because you have issues with sex?
We're pretty middle class (Shock *gasp* horror). We look out for our neighbours, our friends come around for dinner and sometimes they bring their little kids along. Listen to music and nod off in front of the TV. We have sex, sorry to freak you out, but we do.
In all respects we are normal adults contributing to society, paying taxes, recycling our (maybe too many) wine bottles etc.
Look I am sorry life apparently dealt you a few nasty cards, but perhaps you should consider a religious retreat — life in a monastery can be I hear very fulfilling for men and women like you.
But please leave the rest of us to deal with 21st century issues.
And as for your two gay friends… well… I don't know if I wouldn't file them under I for imaginary. That is just my gut instinct. (Unless the couple you refer to are Catholic priests, in which case… I guess.)
Why?
I also think opposite-sex monogamous marriage is the only appropriate context for sex
Why?
Yes, I know you "explain", but I just never get it.
I'm heterosexual. I still feel opposite-sex attraction, but my sex drive has been weak for years. I'm grateful for that weakness, too, because I don't see others as mere objects.
Last year I (male) married my partner (male) — we've been together 11 years. (As an aside, that 11 year relationship has outlasted all — and I mean all my straight cousins's marriages and relationships).
Now, you may not like to hear this, but when we have sex we make love. I do not see him as just an object. I fell in love with him because he is a wonderful man. He makes me happy and content.
No different from other couples straight or gay.
So why should we suddenly live together in a platonic relationship — because you have issues with sex?
We're pretty middle class (Shock *gasp* horror). We look out for our neighbours, our friends come around for dinner and sometimes they bring their little kids along. Listen to music and nod off in front of the TV. We have sex, sorry to freak you out, but we do.
In all respects we are normal adults contributing to society, paying taxes, recycling our (maybe too many) wine bottles etc.
Look I am sorry life apparently dealt you a few nasty cards, but perhaps you should consider a religious retreat — life in a monastery can be I hear very fulfilling for men and women like you.
But please leave the rest of us to deal with 21st century issues.
And as for your two gay friends… well… I don't know if I wouldn't file them under I for imaginary. That is just my gut instinct. (Unless the couple you refer to are Catholic priests, in which case… I guess.)
lazyrighteye
Aug 11, 10:33 AM
*woot*
Please let it be good so I can trash my Treo.
My Treo is best smart phone I have used. That said, it's nowhere NEAR where I expect an Apple offering to be - when/if discussing integration.
Depending on what Apple unveils, I am very ready to cut my contract w/ VZW if it means a better user experience than what I am getting now.
Please let it be good so I can trash my Treo.
My Treo is best smart phone I have used. That said, it's nowhere NEAR where I expect an Apple offering to be - when/if discussing integration.
Depending on what Apple unveils, I am very ready to cut my contract w/ VZW if it means a better user experience than what I am getting now.
yg17
Apr 27, 08:45 AM
And now Trump is demanding to see Obama's educational records. It's not going to end. If Obama releases those, then what will Trump demand?
When this whole birther bullcrap started back before the election, I said that if he ever releases the long form, they'll claim it's fake and then demand more proof. Looks like I'm right.
When this whole birther bullcrap started back before the election, I said that if he ever releases the long form, they'll claim it's fake and then demand more proof. Looks like I'm right.
sonnys
Jul 15, 05:04 PM
Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.
I think we can look at what Apple has done with its other lineups this past year as a guide to the future. Based on what we've seen, I don't think Apple will be redesigning the Mac Pro case -- it's large enough to accommodate anything they wish to throw in there. I also think it's a great industrial design, physically alluding to the power within.
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.
Having two optical drives makes sense if one of the drives is going to be BluRay -- isn't BluRay incompatible with writing DVD and HD-DVD content? It would make sense if one of the drives was BluRay, the other was HD-DVD, giving Mac Pro users access to the full spectrum of DVD authoring hardware. If two optical bays are provided, I believe this type of configuration will be offered.
I'll be watching the announcement closely, although my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 (single core) handles everything I throw at it and has never ever given me reason to even want to upgrade. However, if the new Mac Pro hits 3 GHz I may be very tempted... if it doesn't, I'll wait it out. If the new high end Mac Pro doesn't go to 3 GHz like Dell and others, the Mac Pro will sink plenty fast.
I think we can look at what Apple has done with its other lineups this past year as a guide to the future. Based on what we've seen, I don't think Apple will be redesigning the Mac Pro case -- it's large enough to accommodate anything they wish to throw in there. I also think it's a great industrial design, physically alluding to the power within.
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.
Having two optical drives makes sense if one of the drives is going to be BluRay -- isn't BluRay incompatible with writing DVD and HD-DVD content? It would make sense if one of the drives was BluRay, the other was HD-DVD, giving Mac Pro users access to the full spectrum of DVD authoring hardware. If two optical bays are provided, I believe this type of configuration will be offered.
I'll be watching the announcement closely, although my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 (single core) handles everything I throw at it and has never ever given me reason to even want to upgrade. However, if the new Mac Pro hits 3 GHz I may be very tempted... if it doesn't, I'll wait it out. If the new high end Mac Pro doesn't go to 3 GHz like Dell and others, the Mac Pro will sink plenty fast.
jonnysods
Apr 8, 06:04 AM
Seems like a pretty big slap on the wrist. Wonder if this is true....
cmaier
Apr 19, 02:12 PM
One of the three basics that must be proven in order to win a trade dress case, is the likelihood of confusion.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
That sort of misstates the test for likelihood of confusion. A consumer might, for example, believe that Apple licenses or otherwise blesses the Samsung products. That's probably good enough.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
That sort of misstates the test for likelihood of confusion. A consumer might, for example, believe that Apple licenses or otherwise blesses the Samsung products. That's probably good enough.
cmaier
Apr 19, 04:27 PM
Samsung, circa 2006:
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_at_cebit_2006-news-177.php
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_at_cebit_2006-news-177.php
handsome pete
Apr 6, 08:57 AM
Yes, there are ways in FCP, but they are clunky! It was much easier for my project to do it in iMovie. Naturally, it is not true for every project.
For example, I can't do Multicam edits in iMovie. FCP has also its advantages, for sure! If FCP could marry with iMovie and make a child, the new FCP, that would be heaven.
If you can't do precision edits in FCP quickly and easily, then you just don't know the software that well.
Changing FCP to mimic iMovie would be the death of it as a "pro" application. It would turn away most of it's established user base. There aren't many complaints about the mechanics of the interface. After all, almost all pro NLEs are based in the same structure. What a new version of FCP needs instead are things like better media management, 64 bit support, better blu-ray authoring, etc.
For example, I can't do Multicam edits in iMovie. FCP has also its advantages, for sure! If FCP could marry with iMovie and make a child, the new FCP, that would be heaven.
If you can't do precision edits in FCP quickly and easily, then you just don't know the software that well.
Changing FCP to mimic iMovie would be the death of it as a "pro" application. It would turn away most of it's established user base. There aren't many complaints about the mechanics of the interface. After all, almost all pro NLEs are based in the same structure. What a new version of FCP needs instead are things like better media management, 64 bit support, better blu-ray authoring, etc.
aaronb
Jul 27, 03:21 PM
I always thought it was "Time" but I could be wrong!
adamfilip
Aug 27, 08:53 AM
You're screwing up, intel. We don't want 300 trillion transistors on a 1 nm die. We want longer battery life. Idiots.
I think you are missing the point
just cause a processor has 300 quadrillion transistors doesnt mean it will consume a huge amount of power.
if they released a memron that ran at 200mhz but lasted 24 hrs. would you buy it.. eventho it would be painfully slow?
its hard to balance Performance demands and power consumption
I think you are missing the point
just cause a processor has 300 quadrillion transistors doesnt mean it will consume a huge amount of power.
if they released a memron that ran at 200mhz but lasted 24 hrs. would you buy it.. eventho it would be painfully slow?
its hard to balance Performance demands and power consumption
addicted44
Mar 31, 02:30 PM
This brings up the question of how willing manufacturers are going to be to replace their Android phones with WP7 phones.
JimEJr
Apr 27, 10:30 AM
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Well then shut your eyes and plug your ears...or kiss your content (aka what you DO want) good bye as those ads are what is paying for you to enjoy that news story you refer to and most anything else that is free or a lower cost than it would be without ads. You can't have it both ways. Want all bloggers, media, etc. to do everything without ads AND without a charge? You try running a biz that way...see how long you'll be able to pay your bills.
In reality, the more data advertisers have about you, the better they will be able to put forth ads that are much more relevant to you. If we're going to have ads, might as well have them be for something of genuine interest to each one of us.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Well then shut your eyes and plug your ears...or kiss your content (aka what you DO want) good bye as those ads are what is paying for you to enjoy that news story you refer to and most anything else that is free or a lower cost than it would be without ads. You can't have it both ways. Want all bloggers, media, etc. to do everything without ads AND without a charge? You try running a biz that way...see how long you'll be able to pay your bills.
In reality, the more data advertisers have about you, the better they will be able to put forth ads that are much more relevant to you. If we're going to have ads, might as well have them be for something of genuine interest to each one of us.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 04:30 PM
If you were picking on Mail.app's Stationery I'd probably agree with you.
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
None of the things that Time Machine have been compared to seem even close to what they are planning to do. Including my own VMS file versioning analogies. System Restore is not capable of restoring a single file, and particularly not within a running application. It seems kind of more like a system wide undo function when it comes to files...
B
I'm not comparing it to system restore but to Volume Shadow Copy from Windows Server 2003. File-by-file snapshot by MS 3 years ago!
I think Time Machine looks and probably is good, but after having seen all the pictures of the banners at WWDC mocking Vista, I expected someting REALLY NEW, not just warmed up. If they can't show the super super secret new stuff yet, then they shouldn't have used those banners. I find that arrogant...
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
LethalWolfe
Apr 12, 11:22 AM
So the presentation should be in about 10 hours?
Has any one heard of live coverage? A livestream will probably be too much to ask, but maybe one of the tech blogs is doing a text/photo update.
There have been live streams in the past but last I heard Apple killed it for this meeting.
Lethal
Has any one heard of live coverage? A livestream will probably be too much to ask, but maybe one of the tech blogs is doing a text/photo update.
There have been live streams in the past but last I heard Apple killed it for this meeting.
Lethal
slabbius
Sep 13, 10:44 PM
you know what? since my dinosaur of a desktop (3yr old :rolleyes: 3Ghz P4 HT that can't even run a retail 3DSMax without me getting fatal exception blue screen of death errors on winxpsp2) the time value of money says that a new Mac Pro Quad Core machine is still worth more now than a Mac Pro Octo Core machine in the future. Reason is I need a much more viable means of work NOW, not later. I can always upgrade, and besides, the new chips will probably be rather pricey, therefore causing a rise in the current mac pro price? I'm no analyst so don't flame me if i'm wrong. ;)
Besides I'm a young full sail student that just got an educational loan to purchase a computer and a camera.... and maybe an ipod :) Don't try to give me the "if you wait" lecture, either.
Besides I'm a young full sail student that just got an educational loan to purchase a computer and a camera.... and maybe an ipod :) Don't try to give me the "if you wait" lecture, either.
the vj
Apr 6, 02:53 PM
I remember when I was a kid and I asked my father for a toy and he came with a different one... I was the saddest kid on earth.
I believe that who ever asked for an iPad and got a Motorola would feel the same.
(Dad, I love you)
I believe that who ever asked for an iPad and got a Motorola would feel the same.
(Dad, I love you)
Willis
Aug 26, 05:43 PM
If the power consumption is the same... does that mean that the Merom and the current chips suck the same amount energy while going full throttle?
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512ke
no.. what it means is that the chip is 20% more efficient using the same amount of power... Some have said that the chips do run a bit cooler because they are more efficient, but until they come out in the MBP... who knows?
If the above is true, if you turned down the Merom to match the speed of the current chips, wouldn't the Merom be drawing 20% less power?
In other words if the Merom and the current chip were both going 60 mph down the freeway, would the Merom be drawing less power?
Am I missing something here (such as the basics of electricity, the basic way that chips work, etc.)?
512ke
no.. what it means is that the chip is 20% more efficient using the same amount of power... Some have said that the chips do run a bit cooler because they are more efficient, but until they come out in the MBP... who knows?
No comments:
Post a Comment