coder12
Mar 26, 09:16 AM
I'll be honest--I really like Lion.
Mission control is essentially a hybridization of spaces and expos�. Sure, it still has a few quirks, but it is already very nice.
Fullscreen apps? This is nice, especially with how spaces now work. Most of my bugs occur in fullscreen though, so hopefully they've been ironed out.
The new look is really nice. I can't seem to find much of it that hasn't been changed yet. But they're definitely not done tweaking the GUI yet, especially with those tiny stoplight buttons. There's something radical going on here, methinks.
Airdrop may not be a brand new feature, but it does make remote sharing a bit easier.
Zooming on Safari is pretty nice too, not as nice as the iPad's scrolling, but still nice.
Open GL 3.2, heck, the graphics are really fast too.
I guess what I'm saying is that Lion is still as powerful as all of its predecessors, but has a much more perfected feel to it. I'll definitely be upgrading.
Mission control is essentially a hybridization of spaces and expos�. Sure, it still has a few quirks, but it is already very nice.
Fullscreen apps? This is nice, especially with how spaces now work. Most of my bugs occur in fullscreen though, so hopefully they've been ironed out.
The new look is really nice. I can't seem to find much of it that hasn't been changed yet. But they're definitely not done tweaking the GUI yet, especially with those tiny stoplight buttons. There's something radical going on here, methinks.
Airdrop may not be a brand new feature, but it does make remote sharing a bit easier.
Zooming on Safari is pretty nice too, not as nice as the iPad's scrolling, but still nice.
Open GL 3.2, heck, the graphics are really fast too.
I guess what I'm saying is that Lion is still as powerful as all of its predecessors, but has a much more perfected feel to it. I'll definitely be upgrading.
dclocke
Sep 19, 09:28 AM
AMEN!!!! This whole thread has the tone of a spoiled 13 year old's "I want" tirade. All the benchmarks show little difference between Merom and what you can buy today...and the 64 bit argument is really moot for most users because....(ready for it)....it's a laptop! Very few will have more than 2GB RAM on it anyway, and addressing larger RAM partitions is the #1 64 bit advantage.
Addressing larger RAM partitions is not the #1 advantage for me. I will not be putting >4GB of memory into my laptop. And I suspect it is not the #1 advantage for most of the people posting in this thread. If you don't like the subject matter of this thread, then don't read it. Simple as that.
Addressing larger RAM partitions is not the #1 advantage for me. I will not be putting >4GB of memory into my laptop. And I suspect it is not the #1 advantage for most of the people posting in this thread. If you don't like the subject matter of this thread, then don't read it. Simple as that.
SiliconAddict
Jul 27, 03:29 PM
this blog was also written by jason o'grady, aka the PowerPage rumor site. his writing means nothing to me.
++
99.998% of what is posted on POwerPage is garbage. I love the crap about how he's against a buttonless iPOd because touching the screen would scratch it. o.O No Jason....touching the screen would smuge it. Unless you hands are as hard as sandpaper....anyways. PP is pretty much crap.
Nice news from intel, good for WWDC ...
... Apple will probably announce right before, since SJ said long ago no hard announcements at WWDC.
Of course he reverses A LOT :eek:
ARE PREPARED for the NASTY NEWS THAT COULD COME AT ANY TIME :eek: :eek:
MS will announce that they are dropping Mac development :eek: :eek: :eek: :mad:
DON'T YOU GET IT ...
... this is the plan Bill G., the NICE GUY, leaves MS with his CLOD BULLDOG in charge AND YOU GET WHAT YOU GET, Balmer cuts the Mac devision and probably a TON of other jobs too and then they announce their MP3 player and all sorts of services !!!
This way their player looks more credible then Apple, for a while anyway !!
If Apple was smart after all they would have hired me to test their spreadsheet app a long time ago, I am after all, the SPREADSHEET GOD :cool:
Dude. One word.....Decaf. :rolleyes:
++
99.998% of what is posted on POwerPage is garbage. I love the crap about how he's against a buttonless iPOd because touching the screen would scratch it. o.O No Jason....touching the screen would smuge it. Unless you hands are as hard as sandpaper....anyways. PP is pretty much crap.
Nice news from intel, good for WWDC ...
... Apple will probably announce right before, since SJ said long ago no hard announcements at WWDC.
Of course he reverses A LOT :eek:
ARE PREPARED for the NASTY NEWS THAT COULD COME AT ANY TIME :eek: :eek:
MS will announce that they are dropping Mac development :eek: :eek: :eek: :mad:
DON'T YOU GET IT ...
... this is the plan Bill G., the NICE GUY, leaves MS with his CLOD BULLDOG in charge AND YOU GET WHAT YOU GET, Balmer cuts the Mac devision and probably a TON of other jobs too and then they announce their MP3 player and all sorts of services !!!
This way their player looks more credible then Apple, for a while anyway !!
If Apple was smart after all they would have hired me to test their spreadsheet app a long time ago, I am after all, the SPREADSHEET GOD :cool:
Dude. One word.....Decaf. :rolleyes:
samcraig
Apr 27, 09:32 AM
How is the talk of slower performance because the database isn't as large any different than the discussion about the data in the first place.
Several people were criticizing people for having tin foil hats when it came to what the data was being used for, etc
And now the same people are wearing the same tin foil hats/complaining about some mythological "slow down" by having a smaller database.
Hypocrisy LOL
Several people were criticizing people for having tin foil hats when it came to what the data was being used for, etc
And now the same people are wearing the same tin foil hats/complaining about some mythological "slow down" by having a smaller database.
Hypocrisy LOL
xPismo
Jul 14, 07:47 PM
WWDC ... it's getting closer ... can't wait to see what's announced. Oh yeah ... we'll see the preview of Leopard too.
Bring it on Steve :D
Yeah. I don't believe a word. No powercord at the top, no tweaked G5 case, no way. Those bits throw the rest into dispute. I think we will all be shocked at what The Steve has for us at wwdc.
OTOH, its been great to finally read the benchmark figures for the new apple processors. It hit me that the mac community will finally have overclocking hardware readily available! Wow!
But this rumor just dosn't look or smell right.
Bring it on Steve :D
Yeah. I don't believe a word. No powercord at the top, no tweaked G5 case, no way. Those bits throw the rest into dispute. I think we will all be shocked at what The Steve has for us at wwdc.
OTOH, its been great to finally read the benchmark figures for the new apple processors. It hit me that the mac community will finally have overclocking hardware readily available! Wow!
But this rumor just dosn't look or smell right.
wnurse
Aug 26, 09:49 AM
Dude. You bought Rev. A machines. I've bought -- EIGHTEEN Macs over the past two years and -- nope NO problems. Granted, they are all PowerPc Macs. Just bought the final Rev. PowerPC 12" Powerbook G4 last week. I'm pleased as punch.
Sorry about your luck but you bought Rev. A machines. The only Rev A machine I ever bought from Apple was the Titanium (tibook) 400mhz G4 Powerbook in August of 2001. Three years later, almost to the day the warranty ended, Apple replaced almost the whole machine under Applecare. That was about my only trouble with Apple, and the problem with the machine was that I was really scared and all thumbs when it came to putting in a stick of memory -- broke the holders and they sent a whole new logic board. That machine is still going strong, with a DayStar CPU upgrade, in a friend's office, and it's got years left in her.
Three of my friends still are on 1998 and 1999 iMacs, going strong with new harddrives only. Two of my other friends are on 2001 and 2000 year iMacs -- one with the same hard drive. Two friends are on 2001/2000 iBooks, going strong. My sister and two other friends are on year 2002 iMacs. All kicking butt. Personally, I prefer my year 2002 667mhz VGA Titanium Powerbook (on it right now) to my other machines and will be upgrading the CPU to 1.2ghz in a few months at Daystar. All to say that Apple makes kickbutt machines. Sorry about your luck. Oh, and again, forgot to mention that since i've been on Apple since 1989, I never had a virus. I bought NOrton Anti Virus out of ignorance once inthe 90's and once in but promptly took it off the puters, unnecessary.
If I were you, I'd have started off with the top of the line G5 2.1ghz 20" iMac (with iSight) and a 14" 1.42ghz iBook. You understand, these are the top of the line of the great PowerPC line of Apple products. It's like buying a 1989 560SL Mercedes (last year) or a 1968 Mustang convertible. I'd ask Apple for a trade 'em in for your rev a machines at least until Rev C Mactels.
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Sorry about your luck but you bought Rev. A machines. The only Rev A machine I ever bought from Apple was the Titanium (tibook) 400mhz G4 Powerbook in August of 2001. Three years later, almost to the day the warranty ended, Apple replaced almost the whole machine under Applecare. That was about my only trouble with Apple, and the problem with the machine was that I was really scared and all thumbs when it came to putting in a stick of memory -- broke the holders and they sent a whole new logic board. That machine is still going strong, with a DayStar CPU upgrade, in a friend's office, and it's got years left in her.
Three of my friends still are on 1998 and 1999 iMacs, going strong with new harddrives only. Two of my other friends are on 2001 and 2000 year iMacs -- one with the same hard drive. Two friends are on 2001/2000 iBooks, going strong. My sister and two other friends are on year 2002 iMacs. All kicking butt. Personally, I prefer my year 2002 667mhz VGA Titanium Powerbook (on it right now) to my other machines and will be upgrading the CPU to 1.2ghz in a few months at Daystar. All to say that Apple makes kickbutt machines. Sorry about your luck. Oh, and again, forgot to mention that since i've been on Apple since 1989, I never had a virus. I bought NOrton Anti Virus out of ignorance once inthe 90's and once in but promptly took it off the puters, unnecessary.
If I were you, I'd have started off with the top of the line G5 2.1ghz 20" iMac (with iSight) and a 14" 1.42ghz iBook. You understand, these are the top of the line of the great PowerPC line of Apple products. It's like buying a 1989 560SL Mercedes (last year) or a 1968 Mustang convertible. I'd ask Apple for a trade 'em in for your rev a machines at least until Rev C Mactels.
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
daver969
Sep 13, 12:10 PM
Yes, that's true.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
I'm underutilizing my cpu nearly all of the time, but that's irrelevant-what really matters to me is that fraction of the time when I *am* asking it to do 4 things at once, and I want it do them at the same speed that each could be done individually.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.
I'm underutilizing my cpu nearly all of the time, but that's irrelevant-what really matters to me is that fraction of the time when I *am* asking it to do 4 things at once, and I want it do them at the same speed that each could be done individually.
Cinch
Aug 11, 11:39 AM
This is probably the rumored Apple product I look forward to the most. Could really use a new phone, :p.
I agree at least since the iPod. As an investor, I hope Apple executes their plan well. The mobile phone business is getting crowded all of a sudden e.g. Best Buy, Disney, ESPN etc. I think it will come down to design e.g. Razr.
Cinch
I agree at least since the iPod. As an investor, I hope Apple executes their plan well. The mobile phone business is getting crowded all of a sudden e.g. Best Buy, Disney, ESPN etc. I think it will come down to design e.g. Razr.
Cinch
TMay
Apr 6, 05:42 AM
Have any of you been able to use Sandy Bridge hardware h.264 on the MBP for your AVC files?
I understand that there is an issue with 24p (it's 24.000 hz not 23.976 hz as it should be) which will be corrected with Ivey Bridge, but 30p/60p/60i should work fine. I'm assuming that this feature will show up in Lion, but probably isn't yet supported in SL.
I understand that there is an issue with 24p (it's 24.000 hz not 23.976 hz as it should be) which will be corrected with Ivey Bridge, but 30p/60p/60i should work fine. I'm assuming that this feature will show up in Lion, but probably isn't yet supported in SL.
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 03:08 PM
For those of my friends who are techy and into computers/technology, the XOOM is much more enjoyable.
Riiight. Because when you're "techie" and "into computers," you want a native app catalog of 30?
How many of your "friends" actually have a XOOM?
This is why having competition is good.
Can we just assume "competition is good" so people don't have to repeat it on every single thread?
If Jobs had his way we'd all be stuck with iPads whether we wanted them or not.
And if Motorola had its way, we'd all be stuck with XOOMS whether we wanted them or not, and if Samsung had its way, we'd all be stuck with Galaxy Tabs whether we wanted them or not, and if Microsoft had its way, we'd all be stuck with whatever crappy Win7 tablet is out there whether we wanted them or not. Welcome to...business!
Your attempt to show Jobs in a bad light in this regard is absurd.
Riiight. Because when you're "techie" and "into computers," you want a native app catalog of 30?
How many of your "friends" actually have a XOOM?
This is why having competition is good.
Can we just assume "competition is good" so people don't have to repeat it on every single thread?
If Jobs had his way we'd all be stuck with iPads whether we wanted them or not.
And if Motorola had its way, we'd all be stuck with XOOMS whether we wanted them or not, and if Samsung had its way, we'd all be stuck with Galaxy Tabs whether we wanted them or not, and if Microsoft had its way, we'd all be stuck with whatever crappy Win7 tablet is out there whether we wanted them or not. Welcome to...business!
Your attempt to show Jobs in a bad light in this regard is absurd.
macDrewd
Mar 26, 07:01 AM
Please release OS X Lion on a cool Apple flash drive :cool:
Really don't want another DVD, my shelf is full!
Really don't want another DVD, my shelf is full!
shawnce
Jul 20, 11:43 AM
Strike:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
Insert:
-release of 10.5
Sorry I don't see that happening... Apple has basically always given developers a few months (to several months) lead time with the next major version of Mac OS X. That has taken place yet... so I don't see it being released at WWDC 2006.
aftk2
Aug 25, 04:09 PM
Speaking as someone whose iMac G5 has been out of commission and in the nearby Apple Store for thirty days (!), I'm not the happiest Apple user, either. Thing is, I've only ever had good experiences, prior to this. For example, I had one of the early Apple Studio Displays (the ones that looked like oversized bondi blue iMacs), and when it started wonking out, Apple sent me a box, shipping label pre-printed, and repaired it for free, even after it was out of warranty (there was a known defect.)
This latest episode has been pretty aggravating, though (although the only saving grace is that I'll likely be able to score an Intel iMac out of the deal, which I'm somewhat excited about.)
Heh, maybe I should have the Apple Store twiddle their thumbs for a few more weeks, and I might be able to grab a Core 2 Duo version. :P
This latest episode has been pretty aggravating, though (although the only saving grace is that I'll likely be able to score an Intel iMac out of the deal, which I'm somewhat excited about.)
Heh, maybe I should have the Apple Store twiddle their thumbs for a few more weeks, and I might be able to grab a Core 2 Duo version. :P
EvilEvil
Apr 11, 03:55 PM
makes my recent iphone 4 purchase look like a good decision. Sorry for those who are waiting for the 5 :o
qft!
qft!
DaveTheGrey
Jul 20, 01:52 PM
with 8 cores, the aps will show up two secs BEFORE you'll have clicked on the icon. :D
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
Huntn
Aug 9, 12:12 PM
Can GT be scaled for casual driving and by chance any splitscreen offline coop?
Thanks.
Thanks.
CQd44
Apr 8, 06:53 AM
It'd be nice to have an Apple store around here. The nearest one is 4 hours away.
aswitcher
Aug 11, 09:45 PM
Apple won't put GPS in unless they can create a whole new 'Apple' interface for it.
I'm no GPS expert, but I'm not sure how they could do that with a simple candybar phone. It would need to be some sort of smartphone / pocketPC thing.
We have rumours of something like Google Earth called Maps.
GPS can be put in soemthing the size of a watch.
I think its a strong possibility in the next few years.
I'm no GPS expert, but I'm not sure how they could do that with a simple candybar phone. It would need to be some sort of smartphone / pocketPC thing.
We have rumours of something like Google Earth called Maps.
GPS can be put in soemthing the size of a watch.
I think its a strong possibility in the next few years.
tripleanica
Nov 29, 01:29 PM
real music lovers buy their music in order the support great artists. i don't buy crap from the people at universal. nor do i expect to give them money when i buy an ipod.
bibbz
Jun 14, 06:26 PM
My Radio Shack Manager knows nothing about PIN numbers and is opening at normal 9AM tomorrow. Says he still doesn't know exactly how the pre-orders will be conducted. Hasn't heard from corporate yet. Still in the dark he says. :confused:
Incredible.
The company call was at 3:30pm cst, then my DM held a call with us at 5pm cst. No reason he shouldn't have the info.
Incredible.
The company call was at 3:30pm cst, then my DM held a call with us at 5pm cst. No reason he shouldn't have the info.
Popeye206
Apr 11, 02:23 PM
Are you serious? The Moto Droid (i.e.: the original one) is slower than molasses. You cannot be talking about the original Verizon Droid. That phone under-delivered out the gate. My friend from work whose entire family uses Verizon bought a Motorola Droid and she thought she was getting the equivalent of an iPhone and hated it ever since. She was jumping up and down when Verizon got the iPhone.
<<<Clip>>>
The moral of that story is that Apple needs a cheaper entry point for an iOS smartphone if they want to command market share and especially to put their phones in the hands of more teenagers.
I don't think that's the market Apple wants. They already have the #1 selling smart phone. They make more profit than all competitors combined off of the iPhone. The Cell phone market is very fluid and Apple knows it just has to keep producing the coolest and more desired phone and they will always have a decent share of the market and make tons of money.
in the mean time, Moto, Samsung, HTC, LG and others all battle it out with the same OS and dropping prices to get market share. A race to the bottom strategy that I'm not sure will last forever.
All Apple needs to do is keep the "coolness" coming. Reward us with nice iOS updates and keep us happy with the best support in the market.
<<<Clip>>>
The moral of that story is that Apple needs a cheaper entry point for an iOS smartphone if they want to command market share and especially to put their phones in the hands of more teenagers.
I don't think that's the market Apple wants. They already have the #1 selling smart phone. They make more profit than all competitors combined off of the iPhone. The Cell phone market is very fluid and Apple knows it just has to keep producing the coolest and more desired phone and they will always have a decent share of the market and make tons of money.
in the mean time, Moto, Samsung, HTC, LG and others all battle it out with the same OS and dropping prices to get market share. A race to the bottom strategy that I'm not sure will last forever.
All Apple needs to do is keep the "coolness" coming. Reward us with nice iOS updates and keep us happy with the best support in the market.
maelstromr
Apr 20, 10:34 AM
Where did i say I don't like how IP works buddy? Where in my post does it read 'don't like the way IP law works' ? Wipe your tears and try again... Don't make $#!t up.
the rest of your blurb about stuff in your head that I didn't event write isn't worth responding too...
My anecdote premise was pretty straight forward...
Two dudes who come from some place where they don't read tech feeds as often as the rest of us here... they go to a city shop and get sold phones that look like the ones they heard about...iPhones... the premise is not necessarily from the US... from any country on the planet where average Joes go to a tech shop to buy a smartphone... they look and feel and work in very similar ways which causes confusion.
P.S. The whole point of Apple's patent leverage is that they have... patented everything about their devices... form factor, processes, icons and interface... When you read deep into the context and content of Apple's submission which includes these comparisons and that Samsung copied everything and then applying a slight-of-hand to make it look a little different...
:rolleyes:
Like i say.. a bunch of Jawa's selling second hand Android's
So maybe I misunderstood your fist post...or your use of ":rolleyes:". If you think suggesting that people could not possibly confuse Samsung products with Apple products is silly, then we agree.
If I did misread, perhaps I should not have used your post as a quote - I stand by my point for all the other ridiculous claims that Samsung's products are not Apple clones or do not impact/infringe on Apple products/sales/market position.
the rest of your blurb about stuff in your head that I didn't event write isn't worth responding too...
My anecdote premise was pretty straight forward...
Two dudes who come from some place where they don't read tech feeds as often as the rest of us here... they go to a city shop and get sold phones that look like the ones they heard about...iPhones... the premise is not necessarily from the US... from any country on the planet where average Joes go to a tech shop to buy a smartphone... they look and feel and work in very similar ways which causes confusion.
P.S. The whole point of Apple's patent leverage is that they have... patented everything about their devices... form factor, processes, icons and interface... When you read deep into the context and content of Apple's submission which includes these comparisons and that Samsung copied everything and then applying a slight-of-hand to make it look a little different...
:rolleyes:
Like i say.. a bunch of Jawa's selling second hand Android's
So maybe I misunderstood your fist post...or your use of ":rolleyes:". If you think suggesting that people could not possibly confuse Samsung products with Apple products is silly, then we agree.
If I did misread, perhaps I should not have used your post as a quote - I stand by my point for all the other ridiculous claims that Samsung's products are not Apple clones or do not impact/infringe on Apple products/sales/market position.
Bonfire
Apr 25, 03:04 PM
Such a waste of time. If they're really that bothered by the "tracking," someone needs to tell them to put their phones on eBay and they'll get their money back in about 3 days to put towards another phone.