eb6
Sep 19, 10:10 AM
30 days on refurbs might mean something actually...
Any ideas?
Could be that they are expecting a flood of returns after they introduce the new MB and MBP. And they are waiting so they can send out fresh referbs. Just a though.
Any ideas?
Could be that they are expecting a flood of returns after they introduce the new MB and MBP. And they are waiting so they can send out fresh referbs. Just a though.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 3, 02:56 PM
I'm think i'm a 15 A-spec, and i just started B-spec to save up money for the Ferrari and Lambo races in the Pro series. I've only done a few spec events, but i've got all gold in B and A licenses as well as 9/10 gold (one silver) in I-C license.
I find the license tests to be more fun now that they arent mandatory. They seem easier too. In GT4 it was work just to pass some of them, but in GT5 i find that i always get silver or bronze on my first attempt. Gold is a bit of work sometimes though.
I find the license tests to be more fun now that they arent mandatory. They seem easier too. In GT4 it was work just to pass some of them, but in GT5 i find that i always get silver or bronze on my first attempt. Gold is a bit of work sometimes though.
caspersoong
Apr 13, 04:53 AM
The longer the wait, the less likely for my family to buy it.
BlizzardBomb
Aug 27, 12:58 PM
Um....
E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz: Release price $316
T2400 Yonah 1.83GHz: Release price $294
That's the old pricing mate :) 1.83 GHz Yonah/ Merom is $240.
E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz: Release price $316
T2400 Yonah 1.83GHz: Release price $294
That's the old pricing mate :) 1.83 GHz Yonah/ Merom is $240.
sanmiguel
Aug 12, 07:15 AM
fake obviously but it seems like a nice possibility....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5qGn7kIkMA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5qGn7kIkMA
BlizzardBomb
Aug 27, 05:37 AM
For a desktop machine those iMac specs are utterly pathetic. A X1600 in 2007? Heck, it was a mediocre card 6 months ago, let alone in 6 months time. A crappy 2Mb cache C2D and both slow as hell compared to what every other desktop manufacturer will be offering?
Crappy 2MB? LOL! So that automatically makes the current iMacs crap. And an X1650 Pro is a brand new card? 600 MHz core/ 700 MHz memory clocks (Apple will probably underclock it though :p) and 12 pixel pipes and great bang-for-buck makes the X1650 Pro the card of choice.
The iMac is a desktop computer and Apple's only desktop computer. It should offer desktop performance, end of. What use is a crippled desktop, with all the problems of a mobile form factor but none of the advantages, to anyone? You might as well buy a Macbook.
You mean only all-in-one. And how is it crippled? You want the GMA 950 from a MacBook? :p
What would be competitive:
MB: 1.83 and 2.0Ghz Merom, Integrated graphics
MBP: 2-2.33Ghz Merom, X1800
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
MB: What I said
MBP: What I said
iMac: You'll be pushing up prices as well as getting into Mac Pro's territory. A low-end X1800 is a possibilty but considering Apple's track record for graphics cards, unlikely.
Mac Mini: If you like liquid Mac Minis then sure :) I have even suggested that an Allendale Core 2 Duo along with a 3.5" HD should be put in the Mini but it would require a case redesign.
Mac Pro: It's already like that.
P.S. And you obviously didn't read what I said about cost of going from a 1.83 GHz Yonah to a 2.4 Ghz Conroe.
Crappy 2MB? LOL! So that automatically makes the current iMacs crap. And an X1650 Pro is a brand new card? 600 MHz core/ 700 MHz memory clocks (Apple will probably underclock it though :p) and 12 pixel pipes and great bang-for-buck makes the X1650 Pro the card of choice.
The iMac is a desktop computer and Apple's only desktop computer. It should offer desktop performance, end of. What use is a crippled desktop, with all the problems of a mobile form factor but none of the advantages, to anyone? You might as well buy a Macbook.
You mean only all-in-one. And how is it crippled? You want the GMA 950 from a MacBook? :p
What would be competitive:
MB: 1.83 and 2.0Ghz Merom, Integrated graphics
MBP: 2-2.33Ghz Merom, X1800
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
MB: What I said
MBP: What I said
iMac: You'll be pushing up prices as well as getting into Mac Pro's territory. A low-end X1800 is a possibilty but considering Apple's track record for graphics cards, unlikely.
Mac Mini: If you like liquid Mac Minis then sure :) I have even suggested that an Allendale Core 2 Duo along with a 3.5" HD should be put in the Mini but it would require a case redesign.
Mac Pro: It's already like that.
P.S. And you obviously didn't read what I said about cost of going from a 1.83 GHz Yonah to a 2.4 Ghz Conroe.
reden
Apr 6, 01:36 PM
I purchased a Xoom over the weekend it's a great device, a little heavy, but very awesome for its first pass. I used to own an iPad 1, gave it away, didn't want an iPad 2. Why do I need two devices of the same OS where the UI was designed for the iPhone (smaller device) to begin with? I love the versatility of honeycomb, widgets are phenomenal on a large tablet screen. Everything is great about the interface so far, although there are a few things here and there which make no sense, but I'm sure they'll fix that. I ran into some bugs, called Moto support, they troubleshooted with me, fixed it and were really cool about it. As far as hardware, the materials are great, but definitely Motorola needs to learn a thing or two about button placement. They put the sleep/wakeup button on the back of the device. I used to like to hit the home button on the iPad to wake it up and do stuff (while I was having a bowl of cereal for example), with the Xoom I can't do that, I HAVE to pick up the device. Another interface/hardware awkwardness are the volume buttons and I cannot find a way to change volume within the device itself, unless I press the volume hardware buttons a window will popup.
Other than that, I can live with all this, and the device is extremely awesome and a fresh feeling of a new UI the way it should be done for a tablet.
Other than that, I can live with all this, and the device is extremely awesome and a fresh feeling of a new UI the way it should be done for a tablet.
-SD-
Aug 19, 02:25 PM
Kart racing and Course Maker videos and pictures over on Joystiq (http://www.joystiq.com/2010/08/19/gran-turismo-5-course-maker-and-kart-racing-unveiled/).
:apple:
:apple:
Mr. Retrofire
Apr 6, 07:21 PM
if anyone knows how to change architectures its Apple. we all know they've got OS X running on an iPad already it the labs.
iOS is Mac OS X, just for ARM-processors and optimized for the platform.
iOS is Mac OS X, just for ARM-processors and optimized for the platform.
medelman
Apr 7, 10:34 PM
I wonder if what was happening is that they would stop selling the ipads when they had sold enough extended warranties, cases, etc for that day rather then continuing to sell their ipad stock
If other customers had come in and bought and ipad after the quota was met, then any accessories that they purchased wouldn't count toward what they needed to get their "gold star" for the day.
Serves them right. Bastards. It's amazing how easily they sucker people into buying an $80 hdmi cable when they can get a higher quality cable from monoprice for less then five bucks.
If other customers had come in and bought and ipad after the quota was met, then any accessories that they purchased wouldn't count toward what they needed to get their "gold star" for the day.
Serves them right. Bastards. It's amazing how easily they sucker people into buying an $80 hdmi cable when they can get a higher quality cable from monoprice for less then five bucks.
netdog
Aug 12, 02:40 AM
I'll be happy as long as it resurrects the Wild Eep.
rufwork
Apr 8, 12:05 AM
Screwing around is how they lost Macs in the first place. They wanted to only sell certain iMac Colors and Apple said you can sell what we send or not at all, that's why Apple left them in the first place years ago. Then they cam back with the "store in a store" concept.
I think the deal was that they had to sell the same number of each color, so if they got a shipment of 10 of each and had 5 limeys left over, they couldn't order 10 more of, say, blue until limey was gone.
Right? (And I owned a lime iMac, so quit your whinin'! :D)
I think the deal was that they had to sell the same number of each color, so if they got a shipment of 10 of each and had 5 limeys left over, they couldn't order 10 more of, say, blue until limey was gone.
Right? (And I owned a lime iMac, so quit your whinin'! :D)
SiliconAddict
Aug 5, 08:01 PM
*shrugs* I have no money so it not that big of a deal for me. It will be nice to know more about 10.5.
Anonymous Freak
Jul 15, 02:16 PM
Can anyone tell me the purpose of dual drive slots nowadays? I can see the use for them (and had computers with) when they were limited to one function, i.e. DVD-ROM for one and a CD-RW for the other but now that everything can happen in one drive with speed not being an issue, is it really nececcary to have two?
Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD�R(W)/CD-R(W).
Early Blu-Ray burners can't read or write CDs, and are slow at DVDs. Maybe we'll see a Blu-Ray burner and a high-speed DVD�R(W)/CD-R(W).
62tele
Mar 31, 05:19 PM
Good. I hope they take one of the last strengths of the iPad ecosystem away from it.
I thought your post was stupid and full of vitriol. Then I read your tag line and considered your level of intellect!
I thought your post was stupid and full of vitriol. Then I read your tag line and considered your level of intellect!
Dan==
Jul 31, 09:35 AM
I think that the bigger issue with Dan=='s design (full credit and kudos for the idea!) is that the Mac Mini is so small that it only uses laptop components. If you want to have a full-size optical drive or a full-size hard drive, you need to use a larger form factor. This is part of the reason for the size of my design.
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
Here's a comparison in sizes (I've also changed the floor because my wife thought that the reflection was confusing...)
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsFrontSm.png
http://www.ghwphoto.com/3MacsBackSm.png
Cheers!
Now you've got some skills. I especially like the shadowing, reflections and detail on the back side. Very nice.
I agree with your size assessment.
Actually, our designs are quite close, differing primarily in cosmetics. What I'm refering to is my earlier design, (which I suspect you missed) not boncellis'. boncellis wished to see a wider, flatter version for use in home entertainment, so I conjured that 2nd one up for visualization. While that form factor has grown on me somewhat, I still like the taller version, as I had done earlier, and you've shown here, as well.
Here's my initial design, from earlier in this thread.
http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/9648/macandmacminipx9.jpg
The size of mine is a little smaller (narrower) - I wanted the whole thing less than 8" wide, though it could go back a little deeper, i.e. not necessarily square.
Also, see possible/hoped for product specs earlier in the thread.
Personally, I think I still prefer the smoother Mini-like skin than the perforated look of the Pro, but I'm just quibbling.
Thanks for the imagery.
-Dan
citizenzen
Mar 22, 01:18 PM
Bush was attacked endlessly about conducting a war for oil, and that it was really the U.S. alone, because his coalition was small/weak.
One difference here is that there was a U.N. resolution backing this use of force. So while the coalition of forces might be small, you'd have to in some sense include all the nations who voted for the resolution as backing this effort.
I wonder what the list would look like then?
Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russian Federation abstained from voting. However, if my memory serves, either China and Russia could have vetoed the measure with a no vote, yet did not. Which is a tacit form of approval.
Bosnia, Colombia, Gabon, Germany, India, Lebanon, Nigeria, Portugal and South Africa all cast yes votes along with France the U.K. and the U.S. This for all intents and purposes increases the number of nations in your coalition to include these countries as well.
But personally, I don't support this intervention. Protecting people against genocide is one thing. But intervening in a civil war is another. As a general rule I believe that it's best for a country to work these issues out themselves ... provided once again, that issues of genocide don't arise.
One difference here is that there was a U.N. resolution backing this use of force. So while the coalition of forces might be small, you'd have to in some sense include all the nations who voted for the resolution as backing this effort.
I wonder what the list would look like then?
Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russian Federation abstained from voting. However, if my memory serves, either China and Russia could have vetoed the measure with a no vote, yet did not. Which is a tacit form of approval.
Bosnia, Colombia, Gabon, Germany, India, Lebanon, Nigeria, Portugal and South Africa all cast yes votes along with France the U.K. and the U.S. This for all intents and purposes increases the number of nations in your coalition to include these countries as well.
But personally, I don't support this intervention. Protecting people against genocide is one thing. But intervening in a civil war is another. As a general rule I believe that it's best for a country to work these issues out themselves ... provided once again, that issues of genocide don't arise.
drlunanerd
Aug 25, 05:08 PM
I've just come out the other side of a protracted saga with AppleCare.
Bought my first personal Apple laptop, a MacBook, in May (having supported and bought a lot of their hardware over the years in my job).
It had a couple of faults so I decided to send it in to get repaired.
It took them 2 months to get a working laptop back to me.
After 1 month I had the original MacBook returned, which they hadn't repaired at all, apparently due to spare parts availabilty problems.
After another 2 weeks they sent a replacement MacBook. Which was DOA. At this point I asked for a refund as I had no confidence in the quality control of the product.
Customer Relations then offered me an upgrade to a new Macbook Pro, which I have now and am happy with.
So a happy ending, but a disgracefully long wait to get to it. Unfortunately this has been my experience with AppleCare over the years - it takes far too long to get hardware repaired - whether you take it to an Authorised Repair Centre or send it to AppleCare. It's useless in a business environment. At the least Apple need to add a next business day service, just like all the other 'tier one' PC manufacturers do. I'm baffled why Apple don't offer this.
Bought my first personal Apple laptop, a MacBook, in May (having supported and bought a lot of their hardware over the years in my job).
It had a couple of faults so I decided to send it in to get repaired.
It took them 2 months to get a working laptop back to me.
After 1 month I had the original MacBook returned, which they hadn't repaired at all, apparently due to spare parts availabilty problems.
After another 2 weeks they sent a replacement MacBook. Which was DOA. At this point I asked for a refund as I had no confidence in the quality control of the product.
Customer Relations then offered me an upgrade to a new Macbook Pro, which I have now and am happy with.
So a happy ending, but a disgracefully long wait to get to it. Unfortunately this has been my experience with AppleCare over the years - it takes far too long to get hardware repaired - whether you take it to an Authorised Repair Centre or send it to AppleCare. It's useless in a business environment. At the least Apple need to add a next business day service, just like all the other 'tier one' PC manufacturers do. I'm baffled why Apple don't offer this.
macgeek2005
Aug 19, 09:43 PM
While it is true I have no life, it is not true I have fully decided to skip buying a Mac Pro. These discussions have lead me to a place of indecision about it rather than what I previously thought, which was to skip it. I never intended to talk anyone out of buying one if they want one. And I never intended to talk bad dirt against it. My apologies to anyone who thought I did. :(
My heartly congratulations to all who have taken the Mac Pro plunge already.
I am also waiting to see what the full scope of Core 2 offerings will be as I want a 17" Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro more first.
As far as the comment that Toast and Handbrake can use all four cores goes, Toast definitely does in the Mac Pro and if you add a significant action to the Quad G5, it will negatively impact the 2-3 core performance of Handbrake as well as Toast. That is what I meant. If it wasn't clear before now, I apologize for the imcomplete explanation of my meaning.
I feel misunderstood by some of you. No harm intended. Not anti-Mac Pro at all. Not trying to ratinoalize Quad G5 as somehow better - no way. Not trying to negatively impact Mac Pro sales. I'm totally Pro Mac Pro. Regret the misunderstanding. Wish I hadn't hurt some people's feelings. :o
That's okay. No worries. I just get a little defensive when I spend $5000 on a new system, and then see you posting about how it'll be better with Clovertown. But that's my problem I guess. :rolleyes:
Anyway, it's all cool.
My heartly congratulations to all who have taken the Mac Pro plunge already.
I am also waiting to see what the full scope of Core 2 offerings will be as I want a 17" Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro more first.
As far as the comment that Toast and Handbrake can use all four cores goes, Toast definitely does in the Mac Pro and if you add a significant action to the Quad G5, it will negatively impact the 2-3 core performance of Handbrake as well as Toast. That is what I meant. If it wasn't clear before now, I apologize for the imcomplete explanation of my meaning.
I feel misunderstood by some of you. No harm intended. Not anti-Mac Pro at all. Not trying to ratinoalize Quad G5 as somehow better - no way. Not trying to negatively impact Mac Pro sales. I'm totally Pro Mac Pro. Regret the misunderstanding. Wish I hadn't hurt some people's feelings. :o
That's okay. No worries. I just get a little defensive when I spend $5000 on a new system, and then see you posting about how it'll be better with Clovertown. But that's my problem I guess. :rolleyes:
Anyway, it's all cool.
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 7, 09:54 AM
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
rmwebs
Mar 26, 04:43 AM
Looks like they are going for another Snow Leopard (aka disappointingly small) release.
Not sure about what everyone else wants out of the OS, but I certainly don't want ANY of the iOS style features they have announced. I can see launchpad becoming another unused feature (I'm looking at you dashboard!) that people forget about.
I guess we'll know just how committed Apple are to the Mac after this. We already know they couldn't give a damn about the hardware side of the business any more. The final stab in the back would be XCode for windows.
I really do fear that within 3-5 years Apple will have a tiny mac lineup with all focus on iOS. No more yearly OS updates, no more updates to iLife, etc. They make peanuts from it compared to the iOS income.
Not sure about what everyone else wants out of the OS, but I certainly don't want ANY of the iOS style features they have announced. I can see launchpad becoming another unused feature (I'm looking at you dashboard!) that people forget about.
I guess we'll know just how committed Apple are to the Mac after this. We already know they couldn't give a damn about the hardware side of the business any more. The final stab in the back would be XCode for windows.
I really do fear that within 3-5 years Apple will have a tiny mac lineup with all focus on iOS. No more yearly OS updates, no more updates to iLife, etc. They make peanuts from it compared to the iOS income.
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
takao
Dec 2, 04:09 PM
is it just me or does the quality of the 'Standard' cars also vary quite a bit ? i've got some which look really great (nissan fairlady '78, alfa romeo '63) and some which look barely 'acceptable' (a 90ties 'skyline')
-my biggest gripe so far: b-spec modus 'reward cars' seem to be always better than the a-spec ones ...really ? that is their way of telling us to play b-spec more ?
-also just like in gt4 the rewards in some races seem to be either:
a.) a car worse than the one you had to buy to win the race (lupo race
b.) a car which after the race has really little use since ... well the only race you can use it on is the race you just finished
-my biggest gripe so far: b-spec modus 'reward cars' seem to be always better than the a-spec ones ...really ? that is their way of telling us to play b-spec more ?
-also just like in gt4 the rewards in some races seem to be either:
a.) a car worse than the one you had to buy to win the race (lupo race
b.) a car which after the race has really little use since ... well the only race you can use it on is the race you just finished
ctdonath
Mar 22, 12:48 PM
The models we saw weren't final -- in fact, they didn't even power on
'nuff said (http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/22/samsung-galaxy-tab-8-9-and-new-galaxy-tab-10-1-thinner-than-the/).
'nuff said (http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/22/samsung-galaxy-tab-8-9-and-new-galaxy-tab-10-1-thinner-than-the/).
No comments:
Post a Comment