Cougarcat
Mar 26, 07:09 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
How does Rosetta hold back forward progress exactly? It's just small extension for the OS. It's not like it's Classic.
How does Rosetta hold back forward progress exactly? It's just small extension for the OS. It's not like it's Classic.
JeffDM
Sep 16, 04:39 PM
You are right. However, you try to tell consumers "Well we are moving to 2.4Ghz chips" after you just had 2.66Ghz and 3.0Ghz chips. It isnt going to work.
If today, Dell decided to move there whole line back to 1Ghz processors, nobody would buy. Unfortunetly the Ghz myth is a strong as its ever been. Taking a step backward is not an option.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
So I don't think that a quad core Xeon running at 2.66GHz is going to be hurt too much in comparison to a dual core 3.0GHz, it's still a much more powerful processor.
Didn't you get the memo, PowerPC is dead. WTF does that have to do with anything? Do you just have this Pavlovian response to the word "Hyperthreading"?
PPC isn't dead, it's just not in new desktops anymore. IBM is making them (or at least co-designed them) for all the next generation game consoles and a lot of huge supercomputers.
If today, Dell decided to move there whole line back to 1Ghz processors, nobody would buy. Unfortunetly the Ghz myth is a strong as its ever been. Taking a step backward is not an option.
It's already happened, just not in as a melodramatic way as you suggest (back to 1GHz? geez). AMD took a small step back, Hz wise when they introduced dual core, though it still advanced their "+" processor ratings I suppose that few noticed the actual clock reduction. Intel took a major step back Hz wise between Netburst and Core 2. The 5000 and 5100 series Xeon CPUs demonstrate this, you can get a Dell precision 690 with 3.73GHz Netburst based chips or the same 690 with 3.0GHz Core2 based chips.
So I don't think that a quad core Xeon running at 2.66GHz is going to be hurt too much in comparison to a dual core 3.0GHz, it's still a much more powerful processor.
Didn't you get the memo, PowerPC is dead. WTF does that have to do with anything? Do you just have this Pavlovian response to the word "Hyperthreading"?
PPC isn't dead, it's just not in new desktops anymore. IBM is making them (or at least co-designed them) for all the next generation game consoles and a lot of huge supercomputers.
YEMandy
Aug 26, 06:37 PM
Could this mean an iMac update is coming soon as well? I ordered a loaded iMac two weeks ago and it still hasn't shipped yet. The estimated ship date is Aug. 28th with arrival on the 5th...
Nuck81
Nov 25, 02:46 PM
Need For Speed: Shift looks better than GT5. Especially the in car Cockpit cam. The shadows of GT5 are a fickering jaggy especially in car. I'm hoping they can patch all that out. Not to mention the AI of GT5 is horrible. The cars just stay on the driving line like those old time cars at the amusement park. There is no regard to racing or competition. In Shift, the AI is trying to beat you. They bump you they pass you, they get too aggressive and make mistakes, causing wrecks and spin outs. There is no better console racer in that regard. GT5 AI only makes contact if you are in their line, not that they are actually trying to "beat" you.
The Driving feels good though after I switched the brake/gas to the triggers and off the awkward right stick. GT5 would be better to be marketing as a Driving/Time Trial game. Not a Racing/Competition game. I'll put my time into GT5. and it will be a blast trying to beat my times on the tracks with the different cars, but I won't play the game looking to win races against competition. For that, I'm looking forward to Shift 2 already...
GT5 is a 8.5 for me.
The Driving feels good though after I switched the brake/gas to the triggers and off the awkward right stick. GT5 would be better to be marketing as a Driving/Time Trial game. Not a Racing/Competition game. I'll put my time into GT5. and it will be a blast trying to beat my times on the tracks with the different cars, but I won't play the game looking to win races against competition. For that, I'm looking forward to Shift 2 already...
GT5 is a 8.5 for me.
nevir
Sep 19, 12:15 PM
My demanding you to give me a reason has about the same weight as all the people in this thread (and many others) demanding Apple provide them with the machine they think they needed yesterday.
It's more along the lines of "We see all these other laptop manufacturers releasing new CPU's in their products. We see that Apple has already recieved these chips. We feel that it is extremely likely that Apple's laptop lines will be updated with these CPU's, and soon. Finally, We don't want to buy a product that will be outdated in just a month or two.
Of course, there's those who have been waiting for more than a couple months. For those, they are looking to 'future-proof' their machine, somewhat. If you notice, more or less every new CPU model that will be coming out is 64-bit, and there's no doubt that developers will write apps that take advantage of that architecture in the coming years. So why buy a computer that has a lower likliehood of supporting all the software you'd like to run over it's lifetime?
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
It's more along the lines of "We see all these other laptop manufacturers releasing new CPU's in their products. We see that Apple has already recieved these chips. We feel that it is extremely likely that Apple's laptop lines will be updated with these CPU's, and soon. Finally, We don't want to buy a product that will be outdated in just a month or two.
Of course, there's those who have been waiting for more than a couple months. For those, they are looking to 'future-proof' their machine, somewhat. If you notice, more or less every new CPU model that will be coming out is 64-bit, and there's no doubt that developers will write apps that take advantage of that architecture in the coming years. So why buy a computer that has a lower likliehood of supporting all the software you'd like to run over it's lifetime?
As for "needing it yesterday", that is a product of the hype; but I think, for the most part, we feel that the laptops could have been ready earlier - and certainly would have liked Apple to have come out and said "MBP updates soonish" (of course that makes no business sense for clearing inventory though).
Piggie
Apr 8, 07:13 AM
I don't know if anyone has explained Best Buy's actions at all and why they would hold back on selling stock the have yet.
I run a branch for a construction supply company and am judged based on daily and monthly goals.
It doesn't matter if I do three times my monthly goal this month if I don't hit goal at all next month. It doesn't make sense but it is the way business works. I have held orders that come in at the end of the month for the beginning of the next if I have already hit this month's goal so that I get a head start on next month's.
For the manager at Best Buy he probably felt that it served him better to the corporate big wigs if he hit his goal every day rather than pass his goal one day and not reach it the next.
Is it best for the COMPANY or for the CONSUMER? No... But in this world of sales and numbers managers tend to do what will make their bosses happy, which is to make sure that when they check the numbers on the spreadsheet every day they hit their numbers and don't get yelled at.
100% agree with you and people need to realise how stupid people high up the ladder are, and out of touch with reality with these things, which then cause the behaviour you have explained to happen.
Actually by selling more than your expected quota this month may even end up with your expected quota being increased for future months.
Effectively shooting yourself in the foot.
To put it in it's simplest form, say someone paid you $5 to walk to the shops and buy them a pizza, and give you 15 mins for the journey. You go the task, get your $5 dollars and everyone is happy.
Now, once you decide to jog a little and arrive back in 10 mins, wow that's great, so much quicker. but from now on, will will only allow you 11 mins to get the pizza for the $5 payment.
Then you are silly enough to run a little one day and come back in just 5 mins, wow, this is an improvement. Head office have now decided to allow you 6 mins to perform the task for your $5.
How stupid are you, when you could have been walking all this time and still of had your original 15mins for your $5 payment.
Perhaps you could of run in just 5 mins, but you really should of stopped and chatted to someone for 10 mins to use your allowed time up.
I run a branch for a construction supply company and am judged based on daily and monthly goals.
It doesn't matter if I do three times my monthly goal this month if I don't hit goal at all next month. It doesn't make sense but it is the way business works. I have held orders that come in at the end of the month for the beginning of the next if I have already hit this month's goal so that I get a head start on next month's.
For the manager at Best Buy he probably felt that it served him better to the corporate big wigs if he hit his goal every day rather than pass his goal one day and not reach it the next.
Is it best for the COMPANY or for the CONSUMER? No... But in this world of sales and numbers managers tend to do what will make their bosses happy, which is to make sure that when they check the numbers on the spreadsheet every day they hit their numbers and don't get yelled at.
100% agree with you and people need to realise how stupid people high up the ladder are, and out of touch with reality with these things, which then cause the behaviour you have explained to happen.
Actually by selling more than your expected quota this month may even end up with your expected quota being increased for future months.
Effectively shooting yourself in the foot.
To put it in it's simplest form, say someone paid you $5 to walk to the shops and buy them a pizza, and give you 15 mins for the journey. You go the task, get your $5 dollars and everyone is happy.
Now, once you decide to jog a little and arrive back in 10 mins, wow that's great, so much quicker. but from now on, will will only allow you 11 mins to get the pizza for the $5 payment.
Then you are silly enough to run a little one day and come back in just 5 mins, wow, this is an improvement. Head office have now decided to allow you 6 mins to perform the task for your $5.
How stupid are you, when you could have been walking all this time and still of had your original 15mins for your $5 payment.
Perhaps you could of run in just 5 mins, but you really should of stopped and chatted to someone for 10 mins to use your allowed time up.
steve_hill4
Jul 27, 02:07 PM
How about a new Mac at WWDC?
Lower Model:
CConroe E6300 - 1.86 GHz � FSB1066 � 2 MB cache - ($185)
1GB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
One open PCI-Express expansion slot
One open Optical drive slot [maybe] (i.e. for 2nd DVD drive)
Graphics Card with 128MB SDRAM
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0, USB/FW800
Remote [(?] I think this box will still be small enough to fit into home entertainment setups.]
Keyboard, Mighty Mouse...................................................... $999
Some Options:
Conroe E6600 - 2.40 GHz � FSB1066 � 4 MB cache � (+$100)
Wireless Keyboard/Mouse +$60
Add DVD/CD ROM drive (in 2nd slot) + $50
250GB SATA hard drive +$75
+1GB RAM (2GB total) +$100
+3GB RAM (4GB total) +$300
Slightly Better Graphics Card with 256MB SDRAM + $50
Much Better Graphics Card +$200+
While I like your thinking, your mock-up is wrong. If Apple are going to release a mid-Tower it has to appeal to both gamers and those looking for a headless iMac. They would really have to bring out about three main models, one which was basically an upgradable iMac spec for a couple to few hundred bucks less than the real deal and two higher spec conroes, (short of Mac Pro though). From what I can see, yours looks too small to easily customise, which would appeal to gamers.
Single optical, single HD (2nd slot free), assume better specs will mainly lie with graphics and ram.
Lower Model:
CConroe E6300 - 1.86 GHz � FSB1066 � 2 MB cache - ($185)
1GB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
One open PCI-Express expansion slot
One open Optical drive slot [maybe] (i.e. for 2nd DVD drive)
Graphics Card with 128MB SDRAM
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0, USB/FW800
Remote [(?] I think this box will still be small enough to fit into home entertainment setups.]
Keyboard, Mighty Mouse...................................................... $999
Some Options:
Conroe E6600 - 2.40 GHz � FSB1066 � 4 MB cache � (+$100)
Wireless Keyboard/Mouse +$60
Add DVD/CD ROM drive (in 2nd slot) + $50
250GB SATA hard drive +$75
+1GB RAM (2GB total) +$100
+3GB RAM (4GB total) +$300
Slightly Better Graphics Card with 256MB SDRAM + $50
Much Better Graphics Card +$200+
While I like your thinking, your mock-up is wrong. If Apple are going to release a mid-Tower it has to appeal to both gamers and those looking for a headless iMac. They would really have to bring out about three main models, one which was basically an upgradable iMac spec for a couple to few hundred bucks less than the real deal and two higher spec conroes, (short of Mac Pro though). From what I can see, yours looks too small to easily customise, which would appeal to gamers.
Single optical, single HD (2nd slot free), assume better specs will mainly lie with graphics and ram.
shawnce
Sep 13, 12:04 PM
Whilst true in that regard, BeOS also had threads for event queues too if you used BLooper, which could also be overused.
Mac OS X has runloops which are flexible event processing constructs that can be run per thread. So nothing really unique in regards to BeOS in that regard.
Mac OS X has runloops which are flexible event processing constructs that can be run per thread. So nothing really unique in regards to BeOS in that regard.
W. Ademczyk
Aug 27, 02:12 PM
I hate to say it, but I think the chances of Apple dropping the merom chips into laptops before September 5th are pretty slim. It's probably more likely that the waiting times are due to back to school rush shortages; Apple has doubled its laptop market share with the Macbook. http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/7/25/4753
In addition, thinksecret reported earlier this month that we might be seeing an updated case for the MBP. http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0606macpro.html While this would be a good thing, because it alludes to Apple maybe addressing the heat issue, it is pretty unlikely that Apple would start shipping a machine to buyers without diclosing that the case looks different.
Apparently, the September 5th date stems from reports that Apple is scheduled to recieved a massive product shipment from Asia. http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1965 This coincides with other reports of the new Macs being ready "after Labor Day."
It's pretty safe to say that we will be able to get our Merom Macs at the very latest by the second week of September; thus, we will all be able to capitolize on the ipod deal that runs through the 16th. Personally, I think that the likelyhood of time running out on the nano deal is pretty slim because that sale is likely in response to an imminent refresh in the nano's own product line. http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
In addition, thinksecret reported earlier this month that we might be seeing an updated case for the MBP. http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0606macpro.html While this would be a good thing, because it alludes to Apple maybe addressing the heat issue, it is pretty unlikely that Apple would start shipping a machine to buyers without diclosing that the case looks different.
Apparently, the September 5th date stems from reports that Apple is scheduled to recieved a massive product shipment from Asia. http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1965 This coincides with other reports of the new Macs being ready "after Labor Day."
It's pretty safe to say that we will be able to get our Merom Macs at the very latest by the second week of September; thus, we will all be able to capitolize on the ipod deal that runs through the 16th. Personally, I think that the likelyhood of time running out on the nano deal is pretty slim because that sale is likely in response to an imminent refresh in the nano's own product line. http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
wpotere
Apr 28, 06:19 PM
Look...I'll be the first to admit..there are some wacko Christians out there..like this dude from florida who burned the Quran..i mean wth was he thinking? but we're not all wacko as alot of you suggest... the posts a lot of people on here make, lump ALL of us together. And thats just not cool...
Same goes for conservatives and tea party members...Yes a lot of tea party members are quite radical. But not ALL of them you can probably safely say 99% of racists would consider themselves tea party..but that doesn’t mean everyone in the tea party is racist...
Consider this please before any of you go lumping all of a particular group into one derogatory name..
The problem is that they are the ones that are currently speaking out. You are the exception to the rule in this case and are trying to set it straight. I have no problems with Christians in general but the fanatics are the ones that are making the noise currently and rather than folks like you standing up and saying something you guys let it happen. IMHO, people are people. Believe in what you want but don't try to force it on me and if you don't like what someone is doing simply ignore it.
Lastly, if you have leaders that are racist, that is what your group will be labeled as. If you don't like the label, step up and be the change in your group!
Same goes for conservatives and tea party members...Yes a lot of tea party members are quite radical. But not ALL of them you can probably safely say 99% of racists would consider themselves tea party..but that doesn’t mean everyone in the tea party is racist...
Consider this please before any of you go lumping all of a particular group into one derogatory name..
The problem is that they are the ones that are currently speaking out. You are the exception to the rule in this case and are trying to set it straight. I have no problems with Christians in general but the fanatics are the ones that are making the noise currently and rather than folks like you standing up and saying something you guys let it happen. IMHO, people are people. Believe in what you want but don't try to force it on me and if you don't like what someone is doing simply ignore it.
Lastly, if you have leaders that are racist, that is what your group will be labeled as. If you don't like the label, step up and be the change in your group!
leekohler
Mar 1, 10:23 AM
Lee, you should already know my answer to that question. It's an emphatic "no." Nor do I support the gay rights movement.
I don't tell others what to do, but that doesn't mean I think it's all right for them do everything they want to do. I'll share my opinions with others if they're willing to hear them. I don't want to control anyone, and I will not be a codependent caregiver. I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.
But you ARE trying to control others Bill. It's quite obvious. There are no negative consequences inherent to being gay. I'm a 43 year old man, and quite happy. The only negative consequences I've suffered have been at the hands of people like you, who think you know how everyone should live and try to force your beliefs on us with laws. You absolutely want to control others, or at the very least, impose your punishments on us.
My parents, especially my Mom, hated to see me do some foolish things when I was a boy. They let me walk the half mile to the steakhouse when they knew that I probably would have been too tired to walk back home. They let me stand outdoors in the winter when I tried to run away from home in the winter. The front porch was too icy for me to stand on, so I couldn't walk down the steps.
Hmm...but did they make any laws against you doing any of those things?
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other. So I'll post a link to some evidence for my opinion (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html). Notice, the document's author is a medical doctor.
There are risks inherent in any sexual activity Bill, heterosexual or homosexual. I'm well aware of the risks of both. Apparently, you seem to feel that all gay men engage in sodomy, which is far from the truth. Also, many of these statistics are based on the results of promiscuous behavior. Gay people marrying would discourage promiscuity, which would most likely reduce those statistics. One would think you should be pro gay marriage rights in that case. But hey, we all know that's not what your real concern is. Your concern is to get everyone to conform to your rules.
I don't tell others what to do, but that doesn't mean I think it's all right for them do everything they want to do. I'll share my opinions with others if they're willing to hear them. I don't want to control anyone, and I will not be a codependent caregiver. I refuse to protect others from negative consequences when they need to learn from them.
But you ARE trying to control others Bill. It's quite obvious. There are no negative consequences inherent to being gay. I'm a 43 year old man, and quite happy. The only negative consequences I've suffered have been at the hands of people like you, who think you know how everyone should live and try to force your beliefs on us with laws. You absolutely want to control others, or at the very least, impose your punishments on us.
My parents, especially my Mom, hated to see me do some foolish things when I was a boy. They let me walk the half mile to the steakhouse when they knew that I probably would have been too tired to walk back home. They let me stand outdoors in the winter when I tried to run away from home in the winter. The front porch was too icy for me to stand on, so I couldn't walk down the steps.
Hmm...but did they make any laws against you doing any of those things?
I believe that people with same-sex attractions are endangering themselves at least physically when they have sex with each other. So I'll post a link to some evidence for my opinion (http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html). Notice, the document's author is a medical doctor.
There are risks inherent in any sexual activity Bill, heterosexual or homosexual. I'm well aware of the risks of both. Apparently, you seem to feel that all gay men engage in sodomy, which is far from the truth. Also, many of these statistics are based on the results of promiscuous behavior. Gay people marrying would discourage promiscuity, which would most likely reduce those statistics. One would think you should be pro gay marriage rights in that case. But hey, we all know that's not what your real concern is. Your concern is to get everyone to conform to your rules.
roadbloc
Mar 26, 06:43 PM
I'm glad rosetta is going away. Maybe the dev will finally update the app.
By saying that you clearly misunderstand the idea of a legacy app. Say I have an old PPC game that I still enjoy to play. Why on earth would the dev want to update the old game to work in intel, especially if the dev is busy with new and more profitable endeavours?
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
By saying that you clearly misunderstand the idea of a legacy app. Say I have an old PPC game that I still enjoy to play. Why on earth would the dev want to update the old game to work in intel, especially if the dev is busy with new and more profitable endeavours?
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
mrsir2009
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
Good for them.
leekohler
Mar 3, 10:30 AM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Oh please. Can the condescension. If you know what I meant, there no reason for you to give me a dictionary link. And gee- could you be a little more insulting assuming that I don't know what sodomy is? Wow. Hey Bill, newsflash- I'm an adult- 43 years old. I went to college. I know what words mean, but I guess I should have been more clear and said "anal sex". Next time I will. I also know that people express themselves with words in different ways and that words can have several meanings due to their context. Apparently you do too. And by the way, I did mean "feel", not "believe". Your zeal on this subject is indicative of that.
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
That's an awfully big "if" Bill- and certainly not one I'm willing to bet my life on. BTW- man made God and the Bible. You guys made your own rules.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
But you want to make sure Big Brother keeps us from being able to marry. You absolutely do. It's about control for you, Bill. Admit it.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
They're called condoms, Bill. Sensible people use them to protect against the very things you describe. Because ya know, we DO know about such things. Oh wait- that's against your Catholic teaching. So much so, that your religion tells people in Africa not to use them, making the AIDS epidemic even worse. Thanks for that.
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
Bill- if you were sincere about this, you would support the gay rights movement and support equal marriage rights for gay people. Your examples are silly. Everyone has the right to speak out against opinions they oppose. In none of the examples you used is anyone trying to legally deny anyone anything. People are entitled to their opinions. people are NOT entitled to deny others legal rights simply because they disagree with them. No one is trying to pass a law against Glenn Beck or you. You guys ARE trying to pass laws against us.
No, but standing on your porch and walking to a restaurant are usually morally indifferent actions.
Lee, first, do me a favor when we correspond with each other, would you? Please don't say "feel" when you mean "believe" or "think." This conversation isn't about emotion. It's about truths and falsehoods.
Second, by the definition of sodomy at the dictionary at Dictionary.Reference.com), same-sex couples do engage in sodomy (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/sodomy).
Oh please. Can the condescension. If you know what I meant, there no reason for you to give me a dictionary link. And gee- could you be a little more insulting assuming that I don't know what sodomy is? Wow. Hey Bill, newsflash- I'm an adult- 43 years old. I went to college. I know what words mean, but I guess I should have been more clear and said "anal sex". Next time I will. I also know that people express themselves with words in different ways and that words can have several meanings due to their context. Apparently you do too. And by the way, I did mean "feel", not "believe". Your zeal on this subject is indicative of that.
Third, if the Catholic Church is right, I didn't make the rules. God did.
That's an awfully big "if" Bill- and certainly not one I'm willing to bet my life on. BTW- man made God and the Bible. You guys made your own rules.
Fourth, again, I say what I believe. Others need to chose what they'll do. I'm not their dictator. I'm not their lawgiver. But if they're doing something they shouldn't do, they may get negative consequences here or hereafter. But I won't give them them those consequences. I won't punish anyone for what he does in his bedroom. I don't have the authority to do that. And I don't want Big Brother to spy on same-sex attracted people when they're in bed together. I'm not going to ask my policeman friend Kurt to batter down your bedroom door if I think you're having sex. Moral rightness or wrongness is one thing. Whether it's prudent to outlaw some potentially immoral action is something else.
But you want to make sure Big Brother keeps us from being able to marry. You absolutely do. It's about control for you, Bill. Admit it.
Fifth, sure some opposite-sex sex is dangerous, too. Whether a man or a woman is the recipient, anal sex an cause colon leakage. Anal sex kills epithelial cells and semen suppresses the recipient's immune system. It needs to do that during vaginal sex, too, because if it didn't do it, white blood cells would attack the sperm. Vaginas are well-suited for sex partly because they contain a natural lubricant that rectums don't contain. Does anyone notice a hint of natural teleology there, hmm?
They're called condoms, Bill. Sensible people use them to protect against the very things you describe. Because ya know, we DO know about such things. Oh wait- that's against your Catholic teaching. So much so, that your religion tells people in Africa not to use them, making the AIDS epidemic even worse. Thanks for that.
Sixth, for people who think I'm trying to control them or punish them, I'll put the shoe one the other foot. How many liberals attack Beck personally when they don't even listen to him? How many try to shout down conservatives or to silence them when they say something that the shouters and the would-be silencers hate to hear? How many generalize hastily about people "like me" when they assume that anyone who thinks "gay" sex is immoral is obviously a hateful homophobe? How many would try to limit my free speech by outlawing my so-called hate speech? How many don't distinguish between condemning a person and condemning an action?
Bill- if you were sincere about this, you would support the gay rights movement and support equal marriage rights for gay people. Your examples are silly. Everyone has the right to speak out against opinions they oppose. In none of the examples you used is anyone trying to legally deny anyone anything. People are entitled to their opinions. people are NOT entitled to deny others legal rights simply because they disagree with them. No one is trying to pass a law against Glenn Beck or you. You guys ARE trying to pass laws against us.
NAG
Mar 31, 03:14 PM
The real Android bait-and-switch is calling the platform "open" to consumers. Sure, there are a few "Google Experience" devices that have not been mutilated by handset makers, but even those often have closed hardware. The way I see it, Google uses this ruse of openness to get geek support. Geeks then advocate their platform, which is a great form of marketing.
The reality is that any Android handset with a locked bootloader or no root access from the factory is just about as closed as any iOS device (or BlackBerry, WebOS, Windows, etc. device). The open vs. closed = Android vs. iOS argument is ridiculous, because it focuses on the part of the platform (underlying source code) that matters the least to almost all users.
Actually, I think the open shtick was probably mostly to convince handset makers to abandon Windows Mobile (not that they needed to do much with Microsoft finding new and inventive ways to shoot themselves in the foot). It's open and free meant that the handset makers were not beholden to Redmond, which everyone was chafing under. Just look at HP if you want a good example of former Redmond partners fleeing as fast as they can (which isn't very fast but still).
The handset makers only recently realized, apparently, that Google is not their white knight and Google is just trying to use them as pawns to make everyone dependent on Google advertising. Does this come as any surprise after handset makers started toying with things like removing Google search for Bing or removing the Android marketplace entirely?
Google wanting greater control so they can maintain their business plan isn't evil, of course since only Apple is evil. :rolleyes: Seriously though, the issue here is that Google's true plan (or loyalties, I guess) are being laid bare and they are not what they've been claiming (although if you were paying attention you would have known they were lying from the start). Did they plan to do this from the start? I doubt it. Android has always been reactionary � they tried to fix it with the various Google phones that failed and then tried to decouple components of the OS so they could be updated via the marketplace and not as reliant on the handset makers/carriers. It still doesn't excuse Google for blatantly lying about their motives.
The reality is that any Android handset with a locked bootloader or no root access from the factory is just about as closed as any iOS device (or BlackBerry, WebOS, Windows, etc. device). The open vs. closed = Android vs. iOS argument is ridiculous, because it focuses on the part of the platform (underlying source code) that matters the least to almost all users.
Actually, I think the open shtick was probably mostly to convince handset makers to abandon Windows Mobile (not that they needed to do much with Microsoft finding new and inventive ways to shoot themselves in the foot). It's open and free meant that the handset makers were not beholden to Redmond, which everyone was chafing under. Just look at HP if you want a good example of former Redmond partners fleeing as fast as they can (which isn't very fast but still).
The handset makers only recently realized, apparently, that Google is not their white knight and Google is just trying to use them as pawns to make everyone dependent on Google advertising. Does this come as any surprise after handset makers started toying with things like removing Google search for Bing or removing the Android marketplace entirely?
Google wanting greater control so they can maintain their business plan isn't evil, of course since only Apple is evil. :rolleyes: Seriously though, the issue here is that Google's true plan (or loyalties, I guess) are being laid bare and they are not what they've been claiming (although if you were paying attention you would have known they were lying from the start). Did they plan to do this from the start? I doubt it. Android has always been reactionary � they tried to fix it with the various Google phones that failed and then tried to decouple components of the OS so they could be updated via the marketplace and not as reliant on the handset makers/carriers. It still doesn't excuse Google for blatantly lying about their motives.
technicolor
Sep 20, 04:12 AM
Ah, a mature, intelligent, well reasoned reply.
No, one that just ignores you and your inquiries because it was already clear where you were coming from..thus I feel no obligation to engage you in my thought process and your self important questioning. Has nothing to do with my maturity, and everything to do with my lack of caring about you or your opinion.
No, one that just ignores you and your inquiries because it was already clear where you were coming from..thus I feel no obligation to engage you in my thought process and your self important questioning. Has nothing to do with my maturity, and everything to do with my lack of caring about you or your opinion.
Chaszmyr
Aug 15, 01:00 PM
I would have thought that the Final Cut Pro benchmark would have really blown away the G5 - not so much, right?
I couldn't say for sure, but I would guess that the current version of FCP was carefully optimized for the G5, and has not yet undergone the same treatment for Intel chips.
I couldn't say for sure, but I would guess that the current version of FCP was carefully optimized for the G5, and has not yet undergone the same treatment for Intel chips.
j-traxx
Apr 11, 11:47 AM
My 3Gs contract ends in June and Apple will be pushing it's luck for me to go half a year without me being tempted to jump platforms instead of waiting for the iPhone 5.
ooh they'd better if they know what's good for them! you tell them off!
ooh they'd better if they know what's good for them! you tell them off!
Miles Davis
Sep 19, 04:26 AM
Perhaps I didn't read this already, but has anyone thought that the reason Macbooks are pushed back is because Apple seems to be having serious problems with their Random Shutting Down? Computers are still out on repair for lots of people, they might be waiting for a new heatsicnk or logic board. I know I have to bring mine in for repair when i get back to the states...
Moyank24
Feb 28, 09:02 PM
We all have our crosses to bear. Ultimately it is up to the homosexual to sin or not
What does my post have to do with cinema excellence?
default: a preselected option adopted by a computer program or other mechanism when no alternative is specified by the user or programmer.
Unless influenced otherwise the brain develops heterosexually
Yeah, I know what default means. Your explanation has to be one of the most ridiculous I have encountered. Thanks for the laugh.
Though, i do have to wonder. What do you think "influcenes" the brain that may cause homosexuality?
What does my post have to do with cinema excellence?
default: a preselected option adopted by a computer program or other mechanism when no alternative is specified by the user or programmer.
Unless influenced otherwise the brain develops heterosexually
Yeah, I know what default means. Your explanation has to be one of the most ridiculous I have encountered. Thanks for the laugh.
Though, i do have to wonder. What do you think "influcenes" the brain that may cause homosexuality?
PBF
Apr 11, 11:05 PM
If they delay iPhone 5 until Fall/Winter, then they'd better release the white iPhone 4 some time in Spring as promised by Phil Schiller. :mad:
notjustjay
Apr 8, 12:13 AM
I wouldn't be surprised. The quota explanation was given already, but they might also be holding back stock of the cheaper models in order to drive more sales of the higher end ones. "Oh, you wanted the 16 gig wifi model? Sorry, all sold out. But we do have this lovely 64 gig 3G version. If you really want the iPad 2, this is your big chance... it's only a little bit more..."
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
bmturney
Apr 27, 09:01 AM
It's always entertaining reading the paranoid ramblings of conspiracy theorists.
Vulpinemac
Apr 6, 03:22 PM
No matter what Apple does lately or how much they sell or how good the forecasts are for sales Apple Stock continues it quick downward slide. What the HELL!! I just do not understand it ... Specially while Google stock continues to climb at an incredible pace week, after week, after week.. :confused::confused::mad:
I have to wonder where you get your information. Apple's stock is near the top of a two-year climb of almost $250, showing only a $15 drop in the last three days while Google is almost $100 below its peak only 2 months ago and barely above its high of only a year ago. In fact, even if you only count this week, Google is $20 below its high just three days ago. Yes, Google may have a higher peak overall in the last two years, but Google has also proven to be more volatile, swinging higher--and lower than Apple over the same time period.
I have to wonder where you get your information. Apple's stock is near the top of a two-year climb of almost $250, showing only a $15 drop in the last three days while Google is almost $100 below its peak only 2 months ago and barely above its high of only a year ago. In fact, even if you only count this week, Google is $20 below its high just three days ago. Yes, Google may have a higher peak overall in the last two years, but Google has also proven to be more volatile, swinging higher--and lower than Apple over the same time period.
