kenaustus
Jul 20, 08:52 PM
If Intel designates Kentsfield as a desktop processor it will make its way into Mac Pros as fast as the competition can deliver their desktop versions. Apple is now one of the "Intel Big Boys" and there will be continual (internal & external) pressure not to be left behind.
I would also think Apple is getting ready for Kentsfield - they have had the same pre-release information that the other Intel Big Boys have received.
I think that the surprise will be next month when Steve J is talking about Leopard. He'll mention something like, "You might have read a bit about a new chip from Intel called Kentsfield. You might like to know that Leopard is designed to take full advantage of Kentsfield when it's released." He really doesn't need to say anything else - that alone will drive MS nuts.
With a quad core arriving rather fast I believe that Apple may be looking at the headless range. Right now there is only the mini and (upcoming) Pro. Lots of room in between the two and that room gets bigger with Kentsfield. It presents a very good argument for a mid range headless to fill the gap.
SInce the mini has been out for a while there will be a lot of users that "switched" to a Mac because of the mini and now went something more powerful - without loosing their investment in their display. If the Pro is overkill then APple is going to loose the upgrade. Others, like me, use a PB with a large display - mine is the 23". I don't want a huge tower under the table and I don't see the value of moving to a mini. I'll reach for the credit card after Kentsfield is released IF there is a mid-range that excites me.
I would also think Apple is getting ready for Kentsfield - they have had the same pre-release information that the other Intel Big Boys have received.
I think that the surprise will be next month when Steve J is talking about Leopard. He'll mention something like, "You might have read a bit about a new chip from Intel called Kentsfield. You might like to know that Leopard is designed to take full advantage of Kentsfield when it's released." He really doesn't need to say anything else - that alone will drive MS nuts.
With a quad core arriving rather fast I believe that Apple may be looking at the headless range. Right now there is only the mini and (upcoming) Pro. Lots of room in between the two and that room gets bigger with Kentsfield. It presents a very good argument for a mid range headless to fill the gap.
SInce the mini has been out for a while there will be a lot of users that "switched" to a Mac because of the mini and now went something more powerful - without loosing their investment in their display. If the Pro is overkill then APple is going to loose the upgrade. Others, like me, use a PB with a large display - mine is the 23". I don't want a huge tower under the table and I don't see the value of moving to a mini. I'll reach for the credit card after Kentsfield is released IF there is a mid-range that excites me.
tk421
Nov 29, 11:11 AM
Oh yeah - for anyone who thinks most music these days sucks, you're just looking in the wrong place. Major labels ceased to produce anything of worth quite some time ago. Dig a little deeper and there's a wealth of wonderful music being made right now (and over the last 10 years specifically).
Ain't that the truth!! Here's quite a few recommendations (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=126692).
Ain't that the truth!! Here's quite a few recommendations (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=126692).
Apple Corps
Aug 27, 09:21 AM
Simple. Apples' current sale for students on getting a MAJOR discount on iPods when you buy a new mac, ends on Friday the 15th. Thus, the following monday, will come the new updates. They wouldn't release before, because they would be cutting their profits even more than they are now.
Are you sure that discount applies to the NEW Merom based Macs - I don't think so?
Are you sure that discount applies to the NEW Merom based Macs - I don't think so?
Yvan256
Apr 6, 01:45 PM
Once people start buying and using software (even freeware), the game is over. Most people don't want to lose what they use right now, it's their "personal software libraries".
That's why Microsoft Windows still dominates the desktop and even a free OS like Linux cannot compete. More than two decades of Windows near-monopoly on the desktop can't be pushed aside as easily as OSS folks would like to, though they did win on the server side.
That's also why the iPad currently dominates the tablet market and probably will for at least a few years down the road. The only chance competitors have is to sell a tablet for at most half the price of the iPad, with equivalent features (browser, music, videos, books). Unfortunately for them, the iPad can also run software made for the iPhone and iPod touch, so they are much more than a year late as far as "personal software libraries" go.
Apple, on the other hand, are simply competing with themselves. Their goal doesn't appear to be "beat the competitors products", it's probably "beat the previous iteration of our own product".
Twice as much RAM, faster dual-core CPU, up to 9 times faster GPU, facetime cameras... the iPad 1 just can't compare to the iPad 2. Imagine what's to come for future models.
That's why Microsoft Windows still dominates the desktop and even a free OS like Linux cannot compete. More than two decades of Windows near-monopoly on the desktop can't be pushed aside as easily as OSS folks would like to, though they did win on the server side.
That's also why the iPad currently dominates the tablet market and probably will for at least a few years down the road. The only chance competitors have is to sell a tablet for at most half the price of the iPad, with equivalent features (browser, music, videos, books). Unfortunately for them, the iPad can also run software made for the iPhone and iPod touch, so they are much more than a year late as far as "personal software libraries" go.
Apple, on the other hand, are simply competing with themselves. Their goal doesn't appear to be "beat the competitors products", it's probably "beat the previous iteration of our own product".
Twice as much RAM, faster dual-core CPU, up to 9 times faster GPU, facetime cameras... the iPad 1 just can't compare to the iPad 2. Imagine what's to come for future models.
pocketrockets
Aug 26, 11:33 AM
Does anyone know what happens when you dial Applecare (1800 275 2273) and hit 9? I accidentally did that...
And also, I registered my Applecare and when I go to apple.com/support to see how many days left on the warranty, it says 90 from when the last service was. How come it doesnt say the hundreds of days I should have left.
And also, I registered my Applecare and when I go to apple.com/support to see how many days left on the warranty, it says 90 from when the last service was. How come it doesnt say the hundreds of days I should have left.
SmileyBlast!
Apr 11, 12:28 PM
They should stick to the June update each year. I know it may not be their fault but Apple need to keep the iPhone up to date, otherwise they will lose ground. Mobile phones are very competitive.
I definitely agree with this.
They need to keep their Market Share and Lead position with regular updates to the iPhone franchise.
I definitely agree with this.
They need to keep their Market Share and Lead position with regular updates to the iPhone franchise.
iRobby
Apr 12, 01:54 AM
it's a shame seeing all these negative attitudes concerning the iPhone 5. stating that only because of 3-5 month delay people switching to Android. Also others stating that the iPhone currently is antiquated and doesn't measure up to the competition.
I know for myself that since purchasing my first and only Apple product in October 2009 a iPhone 3GS I am looking forward to converting to an 27" iMac from a 6 year old Dell Dimension E510 desktop as well as upgrading my iPhone 3GS no matter how long it may take for the iPhone 5 to come out due to my experience with my iPhone 3GS being nothing but stellar telling me that whatever how long the wait it will be worth it.
I only wish that after purchasing the iPhone 5 and 27" iMac this year I can still afford an iPad2 and not have to wait till the iPad3 since currently I don't even own an iPad1.
I know for myself that since purchasing my first and only Apple product in October 2009 a iPhone 3GS I am looking forward to converting to an 27" iMac from a 6 year old Dell Dimension E510 desktop as well as upgrading my iPhone 3GS no matter how long it may take for the iPhone 5 to come out due to my experience with my iPhone 3GS being nothing but stellar telling me that whatever how long the wait it will be worth it.
I only wish that after purchasing the iPhone 5 and 27" iMac this year I can still afford an iPad2 and not have to wait till the iPad3 since currently I don't even own an iPad1.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
snouter
Apr 6, 11:09 AM
Umm... You do realise clock speed is not everything don't you?
I hope you don't think a C2D is better then a SB Core i5
True.
Clock for clock the Arrandales are faster than C2D and Sandy Bridge is clock for clock faster than the Arrandales.
So a 1.4 Sandy Bridge will be quite a bit faster than than a 1.4 C2D within the same power envelope.
I hope you don't think a C2D is better then a SB Core i5
True.
Clock for clock the Arrandales are faster than C2D and Sandy Bridge is clock for clock faster than the Arrandales.
So a 1.4 Sandy Bridge will be quite a bit faster than than a 1.4 C2D within the same power envelope.
Great Dave
Apr 5, 11:04 PM
Nobody's using Blu-Ray...
Seriously?!?! Have you been Zombitizied by Steve?
I have been highly critical of Apple of late - their "Pro?" stuff - harware and software - gets further and further behind the competition all the time.
And I always wait for them, because of these stupid rumors. Will this one finally be accurate?
Seriously?!?! Have you been Zombitizied by Steve?
I have been highly critical of Apple of late - their "Pro?" stuff - harware and software - gets further and further behind the competition all the time.
And I always wait for them, because of these stupid rumors. Will this one finally be accurate?
Eidorian
Jul 14, 06:02 PM
oh, btw, i did some of my own investigations and found this site:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.You can get the 7xxx series in the Power Mac G5.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/7_series_techspecs.html
which may mean that the standard cards are compatible with mac os x now.You can get the 7xxx series in the Power Mac G5.
NikeTalk
Apr 11, 12:36 PM
Enough with all the damn secrets. What other company keeps you in the dark about their products?! I've noticed a lot of people get tired of the same old waiting game with the iPhone and go ahead and get something else. Sometimes they like it and stick to the brand instead of Apple. This secrecy strategy was good at first but now it's starting to work against Apple.
LegendKillerUK
Apr 6, 10:53 AM
SB processor is great. I hope it has a backlit keyboard.
But I thought integrated graphics typically were not very good, and some software won't even work with it.
Apple giveth, Apple taketh away.
The current nvidia chip is also integrated so it's not that much of a step down. As a 13" Pro user I can happily tell anyone that for what the product is made for, it's perfectly usable. At first I was pissed at the idea but it turned out the Intel HD 3000 were more powerful than the graphics in my old laptop.
But I thought integrated graphics typically were not very good, and some software won't even work with it.
Apple giveth, Apple taketh away.
The current nvidia chip is also integrated so it's not that much of a step down. As a 13" Pro user I can happily tell anyone that for what the product is made for, it's perfectly usable. At first I was pissed at the idea but it turned out the Intel HD 3000 were more powerful than the graphics in my old laptop.
bretm
Apr 10, 11:10 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
The other presenters just had to toss months of planning out the window and scramble to reschedule events w/less than a weeks notice during the industry's biggest annual convention. Hopefully the members of the audience that signed up to see the original line-up will be able to make it to all the reschedule events and, on top of that, everyone going to the SuperMeet has now paid money for tickets to what is nothing more than an Apple PR event.
Dick move by Apple but all will be forgiven as long as they release the holy grail of editing on Tuesday. If they preview 'iMovie Pro' lord help them...
He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
To be fair to Mark (the head of Post at Bunim/Murray) there really isn't anything he could say due to the NDA. Just because what he saw of the new FCP might not lead him to believe it would work in Bunim/Murray's current workflow doesn't mean it might not be awesome for someone else's work flow. It was a tough spot for Mark to be in and I'm not exactly sure why he even kicked off the meeting with "I was there, but don't ask me about it because I'm under NDA". He could've never even have brought it up and it wouldn't have altered the course of the conversation at all.
Lethal
So Avid, Adobe and Canon spent 10 months preparing for a lecture at a FCP users group? And a FCP users group was going to be their main/only avenue for presentation? I think not. This is just another spot they will advertise at during NAB. I'm sure Avid will be at Adobe and Adobe at Avid user groups. FCP just decided to present at NAB at the last second and this was their only in.
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
The other presenters just had to toss months of planning out the window and scramble to reschedule events w/less than a weeks notice during the industry's biggest annual convention. Hopefully the members of the audience that signed up to see the original line-up will be able to make it to all the reschedule events and, on top of that, everyone going to the SuperMeet has now paid money for tickets to what is nothing more than an Apple PR event.
Dick move by Apple but all will be forgiven as long as they release the holy grail of editing on Tuesday. If they preview 'iMovie Pro' lord help them...
He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
To be fair to Mark (the head of Post at Bunim/Murray) there really isn't anything he could say due to the NDA. Just because what he saw of the new FCP might not lead him to believe it would work in Bunim/Murray's current workflow doesn't mean it might not be awesome for someone else's work flow. It was a tough spot for Mark to be in and I'm not exactly sure why he even kicked off the meeting with "I was there, but don't ask me about it because I'm under NDA". He could've never even have brought it up and it wouldn't have altered the course of the conversation at all.
Lethal
So Avid, Adobe and Canon spent 10 months preparing for a lecture at a FCP users group? And a FCP users group was going to be their main/only avenue for presentation? I think not. This is just another spot they will advertise at during NAB. I'm sure Avid will be at Adobe and Adobe at Avid user groups. FCP just decided to present at NAB at the last second and this was their only in.
840quadra
Apr 27, 09:49 AM
Incorrect - it's not tracking your direct location as you assert.
For instance, when you're visiting "Harry's Sex Shop and under the counter Heroin sales" it doesn't track that you're actually at that business.
It tracks that your phone contacted "AT&T Cellular Site 601-2L" which might be within line of sight of such a business or it might be in the surrounding neighborhood or somewhat nearby.
My own phone shows that I travel all over the Twin Cities of Minneapolis/St. Paul since I am an IT staffer who journeys between 25 different offices all of the time that are dispersed all over town - and I think you would be hard pressed to find out ANYTHING from looking at that picture, it's a giant mess of dots all over town and one satellite facility southeast of town:
<snip>
Anyway. Yes, an enterprising thief with access to your phone could use it potentially. But as it is, collating that data would require some smarts and effort.
You stole my map!!!
For instance, when you're visiting "Harry's Sex Shop and under the counter Heroin sales" it doesn't track that you're actually at that business.
It tracks that your phone contacted "AT&T Cellular Site 601-2L" which might be within line of sight of such a business or it might be in the surrounding neighborhood or somewhat nearby.
My own phone shows that I travel all over the Twin Cities of Minneapolis/St. Paul since I am an IT staffer who journeys between 25 different offices all of the time that are dispersed all over town - and I think you would be hard pressed to find out ANYTHING from looking at that picture, it's a giant mess of dots all over town and one satellite facility southeast of town:
<snip>
Anyway. Yes, an enterprising thief with access to your phone could use it potentially. But as it is, collating that data would require some smarts and effort.
You stole my map!!!
Funkymonk
Apr 19, 01:37 PM
Couldn't Samsung just claim that the Galaxy S line is an evolution of the Samsung F700? Pretty strong argument for samsung.
iVoid
Apr 27, 11:24 AM
Well, I think it's good that Apple is addressing this issue (although I wonder if they'll release an update for the 3G, since they are no longer doing iOS upgrades for it and the original iPhone).
But their statement: "The iPhone is not logging your location" is ridiculous. They are logging your location. For a long time. In an insecure way.
Outside of the PR butt saving double-speak, this is a good move by Apple to address this issue.
But their statement: "The iPhone is not logging your location" is ridiculous. They are logging your location. For a long time. In an insecure way.
Outside of the PR butt saving double-speak, this is a good move by Apple to address this issue.
xfiftyfour
Aug 7, 11:21 AM
anyone see that the apple store online says "we'll be back soon - we are busy updating the store for you and will be back within the hour"?
Oh, and if it's already been said, I'm sorry - I'm not going back and reading through 10 pages... haha
Oh, and if it's already been said, I'm sorry - I'm not going back and reading through 10 pages... haha
Feynman
Apr 5, 06:27 PM
I'm willing to bet there will be a price drop and only available on the Mac App Store.
Didn't Aperture go from 499 to 299 to 99 now currently at 79?
I see Final Cut Studio 4 dropping to 499, hoping for 299 but that's getting my hopes up high! lol
I'm also hoping a new iMac is released next week as well, to put Final Cut Studio 4 on of course!
Didn't Aperture go from 499 to 299 to 99 now currently at 79?
I see Final Cut Studio 4 dropping to 499, hoping for 299 but that's getting my hopes up high! lol
I'm also hoping a new iMac is released next week as well, to put Final Cut Studio 4 on of course!
Benjy91
Mar 26, 10:28 AM
People seem to have "Simple & Easier" and "Dumbed-Down" confused with each other.
CaoCao
Feb 28, 06:47 PM
Wow. I have never, ever in my life been so tempted to troll a MacRumors thread, nor have I ever been so infuriated by the use of a set of double quotation marks.
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
2) okay, they can pretend to get married
3) We don't care what they are doing in there
5) Divorce is a terrible and tragic thing
6) The Catholic Church doesn't pretend that the people in it are perfect.
A) Maybe your feelings on the situation would be different if you actually had a girlfriend.
B) I'm interested to learn what exactly the physical and psychological risks of non-marital sex are?
You're kidding. Right?
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
Definitions are useful
No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?
That is because to a Christian they aren't married. He probably doesn't because a marriage between two non-Catholic Christians is generally valid.
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
inclusivism is not inherently good and that position holds no hatred or malice
They decided not to rehire him, so?
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
2) okay, they can pretend to get married
3) We don't care what they are doing in there
5) Divorce is a terrible and tragic thing
6) The Catholic Church doesn't pretend that the people in it are perfect.
A) Maybe your feelings on the situation would be different if you actually had a girlfriend.
B) I'm interested to learn what exactly the physical and psychological risks of non-marital sex are?
You're kidding. Right?
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
Definitions are useful
No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?
That is because to a Christian they aren't married. He probably doesn't because a marriage between two non-Catholic Christians is generally valid.
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
inclusivism is not inherently good and that position holds no hatred or malice
They decided not to rehire him, so?
Carlson-online
Jul 20, 11:47 AM
I remember hearing about how it is possible to make multiple cores act like one (Idon't remember where I heard this). Anyways, whether 8 cores acting separately or together like 1 big processor has an advantage depends on the program you use. If the program is multi-threaded, then the cores acting separately might have the advantage while single threaded apps will have an advantage if the cores are acting like one. However, many apps today won't see that much improvement either way (like a simple calculator, or solitare and word processing).
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
yes, its known as reverse hyper threading. AMD are working on it
http://www.dvhardware.net/article10901.html
ergle2
Sep 14, 11:29 PM
It is a shame, but sadly those are the real cheap chips right now. The good news is that they'll change those over soon enough with more Allendales, then millville and so on and so on taking on more segments of the market.
I think as they transition to 45nm we'll see more and more Core chips, simply because they'll want as much manufacturing to be on the new process as possible, and they don't need to scale the D's etc. down to it.
Indeed. The Netburst chicken has been decapitated, it just hasn't yet stopped running around the marketplace...
I think Intel wants the transition to go as quickly as possible, given the aggressive pricing of Core 2 - not as cheap as Pentium D, but a much better bang for the buck, so to speak. Of course, that's also connected to trying to beat back the AMD surge of recent years...
I think as they transition to 45nm we'll see more and more Core chips, simply because they'll want as much manufacturing to be on the new process as possible, and they don't need to scale the D's etc. down to it.
Indeed. The Netburst chicken has been decapitated, it just hasn't yet stopped running around the marketplace...
I think Intel wants the transition to go as quickly as possible, given the aggressive pricing of Core 2 - not as cheap as Pentium D, but a much better bang for the buck, so to speak. Of course, that's also connected to trying to beat back the AMD surge of recent years...
axio
Apr 9, 03:09 PM
Would AMD's APU be a solution?
No comments:
Post a Comment