THX1139
Apr 10, 08:28 PM
So munch elitism there it's dripping off my screen. Your post is funny b/c when FCP 1.0 was announced the many of "pro" editors of the time gasped b/c it, well, "dumbed down" editing, similar to how Pagemaker 1.0 dumbed down publishing.
What Apple does best, what it's always done best, is define new paradigms. It sounds like that is what may happen on Tues. Clearly, for all your snobbery, you are a horse and buggy driver and not a buyer into the Model T thing. Enjoy your Linux, but physical media is still dying, nonetheless. Editing for the web needs a new set of editing tools. YouTube has a lot of professionally edited material. It's not all cell phone clips.
So, in other words... you are excited that Apple might be dumbing down FCS for you? Well, good for you! Maybe you will be understand how to use it now to edit weekend skate videos of you and your buddies. Have fun with that.
What Apple does best, what it's always done best, is define new paradigms. It sounds like that is what may happen on Tues. Clearly, for all your snobbery, you are a horse and buggy driver and not a buyer into the Model T thing. Enjoy your Linux, but physical media is still dying, nonetheless. Editing for the web needs a new set of editing tools. YouTube has a lot of professionally edited material. It's not all cell phone clips.
So, in other words... you are excited that Apple might be dumbing down FCS for you? Well, good for you! Maybe you will be understand how to use it now to edit weekend skate videos of you and your buddies. Have fun with that.
Yvan256
Apr 10, 12:02 PM
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
At least the one on their website looks fine (yet still ugly), the one on MacRumors looks resized and the pixels got messed up... :confused:
At least the one on their website looks fine (yet still ugly), the one on MacRumors looks resized and the pixels got messed up... :confused:
Nuck81
Dec 2, 09:24 AM
There are more bothersome things about the game than the implementation of damage.
It's a really good game, but some bad decisions and broken features kept it from being great...
It's a really good game, but some bad decisions and broken features kept it from being great...
cmcgivern
Jun 15, 02:51 PM
Radio Shack is no longer doing Pre-orders...I was told there are no more iPhones available for them...
The Best Buy in my area is doing a $50 Pre-order but it's BS...The $50 doesn't go towards the iPhone...You're still going to have to pay full price (not guaranteed that you will get one on launch) and the $50 that was originally paid will be returned to you as a gift card. Are you serious????
The Best Buy in my area is doing a $50 Pre-order but it's BS...The $50 doesn't go towards the iPhone...You're still going to have to pay full price (not guaranteed that you will get one on launch) and the $50 that was originally paid will be returned to you as a gift card. Are you serious????
gus6464
Mar 22, 08:20 PM
If you meant the HTC View for Sprint (aka the Flyer), then I don't think it needs Honeycomb right away to become popular.
It'll start with Gingerbread, Sense and the Scribe pen technology, which is plenty to play and be useful with.
I'm looking forward to trying its ability to allow typed, drawn, and voice memos during the day, saved into Evernote. Latest demo video here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVK-OTnxnp0). HTC is going out on a limb here, but I think it's a good one.
The Flyer is a good concept but I think holding it back is Sense and not necessarily Gingerbread. Sense has become too clunky and sluggish for it's own good and at the end of the day is it really needed? HTC should just concentrate on making apps that take advantage of the scribe pen than building everything around Sense. Android has evolved enough that there is no need for Sense, Motoblur, Touchwiz anymore. Make it optional not mandatory. I have seen way too many apps not work correctly just because of the damn UI layer that the manufacturer is running. It would be very easy to have all those UI's available on the app market and allow the consumer to make a choice. Differentiate your product by the hardware and build quality, and not some clunky, useless UI overlay.
It'll start with Gingerbread, Sense and the Scribe pen technology, which is plenty to play and be useful with.
I'm looking forward to trying its ability to allow typed, drawn, and voice memos during the day, saved into Evernote. Latest demo video here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVK-OTnxnp0). HTC is going out on a limb here, but I think it's a good one.
The Flyer is a good concept but I think holding it back is Sense and not necessarily Gingerbread. Sense has become too clunky and sluggish for it's own good and at the end of the day is it really needed? HTC should just concentrate on making apps that take advantage of the scribe pen than building everything around Sense. Android has evolved enough that there is no need for Sense, Motoblur, Touchwiz anymore. Make it optional not mandatory. I have seen way too many apps not work correctly just because of the damn UI layer that the manufacturer is running. It would be very easy to have all those UI's available on the app market and allow the consumer to make a choice. Differentiate your product by the hardware and build quality, and not some clunky, useless UI overlay.
Multimedia
Aug 21, 01:25 AM
Mac Pros will need 64bit Leopard to achieve their full multi-core potential. Expect all Core 2 based Macs to hold value well through the next release cycle of OSX Leopard.
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros! :rolleyes:Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......While I may be married to my Quad G5, we're not exclusive and she likes a threesome with the younger faster models as much as I do too. :p
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros! :rolleyes:Quad G5 is only $2799 on the SAVE refurb page. Refurbs are the same as new with a new warranty. But I think that would be a poor choice compared to a Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is not cheaper because you have to add more expensive RAM. But it is faster overall and Rosetta Photoshop performance isn't bad. Quad G5 will also benefit from Leopard don't forget. It's not like Leopard is going to not be written to take advantage of the 64-bit G5 as well.
But I would not recomend a G5 Quad to anyone at this point. I'm pondering a Mac Pro purchase myself. But I'm going to try and hold out for a refurb or even see if I can wait for Clovertown. But I'm likely to be one of the first to snag a Mac Pro refurb when they hit the SAVE page in November-December. By then I may even be thinking about waiting for the January 9th SteveNote. Quad G5 is no slouch. But Mac Pro is faster overall.And I thought you were married to your quad last week ......While I may be married to my Quad G5, we're not exclusive and she likes a threesome with the younger faster models as much as I do too. :p
Mister Snitch
Mar 31, 02:46 PM
I knew it would happen eventually.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2IVPfOaZAFQZEqPJy5BXekjJf_tfdz8xLj-nTF-8ie9TR3PSLd0J0jK3xLn50UMBnEurWTt9IALGL2lXNFQTAN96RlcbXOWG7vodrGIXjxLRLChYNJURIzh6TDOuTjYpAm3ez5qT8wqFG/s1600/darth-vader-face.jpg
It was.... their DESTINY!
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2IVPfOaZAFQZEqPJy5BXekjJf_tfdz8xLj-nTF-8ie9TR3PSLd0J0jK3xLn50UMBnEurWTt9IALGL2lXNFQTAN96RlcbXOWG7vodrGIXjxLRLChYNJURIzh6TDOuTjYpAm3ez5qT8wqFG/s1600/darth-vader-face.jpg
It was.... their DESTINY!
hob
Apr 5, 05:15 PM
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
Nobody's using Blu-Ray, in my experience. It's just another way of sucking money out of home consumers. Everything's done online in terms of delivery...
Nobody's using Blu-Ray, in my experience. It's just another way of sucking money out of home consumers. Everything's done online in terms of delivery...
KnightWRX
Mar 22, 12:59 PM
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Coaches all over the world. You know, to replace their paper Playbooks. ;)
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Coaches all over the world. You know, to replace their paper Playbooks. ;)
VanNess
Aug 7, 04:24 PM
By the way, I don't want to say Leopard is a disappointment compared to Vista, obviously we were not shown Leopard in action to any great degree yet. But the keynote (at least the Leopard part) was definitely a disappointment. It hardly scratched the surface of just about everything that everybody was most interested in/concerned about.
http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/CryBaby2.gif
http://www.misterbg.org/AppleProductCycle/CryBaby2.gif
Brandon4692
Jun 21, 09:55 PM
I've been reading this whole post and I'm finally gonna chime in. I went into my local radioshack the day of pre orders/request and they took down my info and tried getting me a pin... They called me back the next day saying they couldn't get any. But their website says they will have the iPhone 4 "coming soon" so I'm nervous about if they will have some at launch so I went to the same store and the idiot behind the counter had no clue about what he was talking about (different guy than before) he said to try on Thursday cause they won't know till actually Thursday if/when they will get them. I may be an idiot for trusting radioshack but I want to trade in my 3GS so... I'll be waiting outside of my radioshack atleast an hour before they open on Thursday. Wish me luck!
satty
Jul 20, 09:10 AM
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
But as some already pointed out, many applications can't use multiple cores, therefore you won't get any performance improvements with multi cores.
generik
Aug 6, 03:10 AM
No Macbook Pros?? I hope there won't be any. My MBP gets to stay top of the line for few more weeks ;)
This kind of thinking is truly lame, just buy a Dell and go for penis enlargement surgury with the money you saved. No one will know the difference.
This kind of thinking is truly lame, just buy a Dell and go for penis enlargement surgury with the money you saved. No one will know the difference.
hyperpasta
Aug 5, 03:47 PM
This roundup is missing:
*New Cinema Displays with iSight - Widely Anticipated
*xServe - Almost definitely in my opinion, because without these, Steve cannot say that "the transition is complete".
*"Maps" application in Leopard - according to AppleInsider
*New Cinema Displays with iSight - Widely Anticipated
*xServe - Almost definitely in my opinion, because without these, Steve cannot say that "the transition is complete".
*"Maps" application in Leopard - according to AppleInsider
xsnightclub
Aug 6, 04:34 PM
Mike - I'm sure Apple had their IP counsel do a IP search prior to deciding on any names and filing for registration. That is the first and most basic step and is not going going to escape the experienced folks at whatever large firm Apple is using for IP these days. A TM approval from the USPTO doesn't take long at all, 10 to 18 months. Are you operating under the impression that Apple's registration hasn't already been approved? Did you protest the trademark during the time provided for the filing of protests during the trademark registration process? If you've registered mac-pro in the past, did you follow all the guidelines (e.g. providing notice that you were using the term within 6 months of your approval to the USPTO or request a six month extension with USPTO, etc.) have you renewed the registration? If you did file, had it approved, provided the notices of use to the the USPTO, and protested and lost on Apple's application, a bid for a TRO will be interesting as - assuming that last list of events - there are no rights being infringed. Of course, I'm not an IP att'y and there's a long list of assumptions here, and I'm sure if you did have an issue, a post on the MR forum wouldn't be your means of pursuing it.
I think the only assumption that matters with this matter, is that the poster actually is who he says he is. Which is highly doubtful.
This information is all easily found under corporate registration searches and USPTO filings.
This all seems like a child trying to copy the Tiger Direct fiasco.
Anyway, Bring on the new Mac Pros!
I think the only assumption that matters with this matter, is that the poster actually is who he says he is. Which is highly doubtful.
This information is all easily found under corporate registration searches and USPTO filings.
This all seems like a child trying to copy the Tiger Direct fiasco.
Anyway, Bring on the new Mac Pros!
drumpat01
Aug 25, 02:47 PM
I tried to type in my battery serial number only to have it say it was invalid even though I fell with in the given range of serial numbers. So I called Apple and after waiting on hold for about 20min they said I WAS VALID! So I dont know whats going on, but if you seem to be having the same problem you should DEFINITELY call them and double check your battery serial number.
spydr
Mar 31, 10:05 PM
Google is really trying hard to anything but their big motto. :eek:
anim8or
Sep 19, 06:04 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
AppleInsider expects that Apple will update its complete laptop line (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2060) (13" MacBook and 15/17" MacBook Pros) to Core 2 Duo "Merom" before the holiday shopping season starts in late November. According to the site, development has been completed and the launch is simply awaiting Apple's marketing team to "pull the trigger."
MacShrine and MacOSXRumors expect the MacBook Pro to be updated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060915171825.shtml) at Apple's September 25th event preceding Photokina. AppleInsider is unsure whether the updated MacBook will be unveiled at that event or be held off to ensure adequate supply of Intel's Core 2 Duo Merom chip.
Many users have pointed to extended ship dates and delays for MacBooks as evidence of an impending update. While possible, the shipping delays may simply be due to a demand backlog which was noted (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1896) in Apple's Q3 2006 conference call in July. At the time Apple stated they expected to reach a supply/demand balance by the end of September (the end of Apple's current fiscal quarter).
Why is everyone getting so jumpy!!!
It says, Appleinsider EXPECTS that the range will be updated BEFORE the holiday season in November.
Hell i EXPECT IT TOO!!!!!!!! And before November comes September and October in case no one knew that!!!!!
The MBPs will most likely be updated soon, with the MacBooks following shortly after, if not at the same time!
People should read posts before they panic, and then start to panic everyone else.
AppleInsider expects that Apple will update its complete laptop line (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2060) (13" MacBook and 15/17" MacBook Pros) to Core 2 Duo "Merom" before the holiday shopping season starts in late November. According to the site, development has been completed and the launch is simply awaiting Apple's marketing team to "pull the trigger."
MacShrine and MacOSXRumors expect the MacBook Pro to be updated (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060915171825.shtml) at Apple's September 25th event preceding Photokina. AppleInsider is unsure whether the updated MacBook will be unveiled at that event or be held off to ensure adequate supply of Intel's Core 2 Duo Merom chip.
Many users have pointed to extended ship dates and delays for MacBooks as evidence of an impending update. While possible, the shipping delays may simply be due to a demand backlog which was noted (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1896) in Apple's Q3 2006 conference call in July. At the time Apple stated they expected to reach a supply/demand balance by the end of September (the end of Apple's current fiscal quarter).
Why is everyone getting so jumpy!!!
It says, Appleinsider EXPECTS that the range will be updated BEFORE the holiday season in November.
Hell i EXPECT IT TOO!!!!!!!! And before November comes September and October in case no one knew that!!!!!
The MBPs will most likely be updated soon, with the MacBooks following shortly after, if not at the same time!
People should read posts before they panic, and then start to panic everyone else.
mattpol
Nov 28, 10:04 PM
Where are the recording studios in this future? Nowhere. Artists might still need them for promotions, music videos etc... but that is all bells and whistles. You don't even need the studios for a good music video, just look at how famous this (http://youtube.com/watch?v=okZwbxi7p0A) video has become, its even on MTV. It all comes down to the music, and if its good, people will buy it. Artists provide the content, iTMS the distribution. Record labels' presence will be greatly diminished. They are scared to death.
Great argument, except that OK Go are signed to a major label, Capitol Records, only one of the most histroically great labels!! Please see: The Beach Boys, Pink Floyd, The Beatles, Nat King Cole, etc.)! :rolleyes: YouTube doesn't sell music; just look at OK Go's numbers, they are mediocre at best. One hugely popular viral video is not going to move that many CDs.
Also, as an aside, they are not "recording studios," they are "recording labels," or more commonly, "record labels."
Great argument, except that OK Go are signed to a major label, Capitol Records, only one of the most histroically great labels!! Please see: The Beach Boys, Pink Floyd, The Beatles, Nat King Cole, etc.)! :rolleyes: YouTube doesn't sell music; just look at OK Go's numbers, they are mediocre at best. One hugely popular viral video is not going to move that many CDs.
Also, as an aside, they are not "recording studios," they are "recording labels," or more commonly, "record labels."
rovex
Mar 22, 12:54 PM
Well, minus the screen size too. Equal to isn't going to cut it against an Apple product. Just look at how the Zune fared.
Yes the small screen isn't going to cut it but honestly carrying the iPad around is a hastle. People will be tempted with the size for portability.
Yes the small screen isn't going to cut it but honestly carrying the iPad around is a hastle. People will be tempted with the size for portability.
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
hyperpasta
Aug 5, 04:50 PM
I'd be willing to bet that there will be at least two major surprises on Monday, one to do with some fab capability in Leopard that Apple has succeeded in keeping us in the dark about, and one fab piece of consumer hardware. By the second, I don't mean something we all expect like Mac Pros or Meroms in the MBPs. I mean something radical. Something that will make some real headlines.
They can't do things according to their old schedules now that they are on with Intel. Get used to new patterns. Apple is coming out of the shadows now, with sales and mindshare building at a strong pace. Waiting until January to annouce big new consumer pushes because WWDC is for developers won't do anymore. Welcome to the new Apple.
Think big. It's okay. Apple won't disappoint.
I will remember you said that when the announcements are dissapointing :)
Maybe they will and maybe they won't. But in the mean time, it's best to be conservative and hope we might be surprised.
They can't do things according to their old schedules now that they are on with Intel. Get used to new patterns. Apple is coming out of the shadows now, with sales and mindshare building at a strong pace. Waiting until January to annouce big new consumer pushes because WWDC is for developers won't do anymore. Welcome to the new Apple.
Think big. It's okay. Apple won't disappoint.
I will remember you said that when the announcements are dissapointing :)
Maybe they will and maybe they won't. But in the mean time, it's best to be conservative and hope we might be surprised.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 22, 04:50 PM
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
The problem with having too much memory and resources available to spare, is that many programmers tend to become sloppy and careless about optimizing their code. This is one reason why Microsoft Office requires more and more RAM and CPU every time a new version is released.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
The problem with having too much memory and resources available to spare, is that many programmers tend to become sloppy and careless about optimizing their code. This is one reason why Microsoft Office requires more and more RAM and CPU every time a new version is released.
jlblodgett
Apr 11, 12:49 PM
This will be disappointing, if true.
I was expecting the iPhone 5 to be introduced at WWDC -- even if it wasn't available for a month or so. But I cannot imagine them introducing the iPhone 5 at WWDC and then not making it available for retail sale for 5-6 months.
I was expecting the iPhone 5 to be introduced at WWDC -- even if it wasn't available for a month or so. But I cannot imagine them introducing the iPhone 5 at WWDC and then not making it available for retail sale for 5-6 months.
0 comments:
Post a Comment