Nuvi
Apr 11, 02:35 AM
Except he rewrote iMovie all my himself before showing it to Apple. Jobs then chose to adopt the new interface.
So if anything, what you find crap in iMovie was Ubilos' ideas.
Things I don't like to hear... In all honesty I just hope he wanted to separate iMovie from Pro products even more... I have bad feeling about all of this. Rumors about FCP being FC (literally not going for pro anymore) and aiming for online consumer delivery like YouTube makes me sick. If they have killed tape input / output you know that moment Apple really made iCut"Pro".
So if anything, what you find crap in iMovie was Ubilos' ideas.
Things I don't like to hear... In all honesty I just hope he wanted to separate iMovie from Pro products even more... I have bad feeling about all of this. Rumors about FCP being FC (literally not going for pro anymore) and aiming for online consumer delivery like YouTube makes me sick. If they have killed tape input / output you know that moment Apple really made iCut"Pro".
Squire
Aug 5, 11:30 PM
Does anyone think the recent "problems" at Apple are going to have any effect on what happens Monday.
Story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/05/BUGAHKBK3H1.DTL
If there are products that are they "maybe" list, this might put them on the "go" list. Big news pushes stock prices up and pushes the "problem" stories on page 2.
I agree. In fact, I was going to post the same thing. I was all set to be disappointed by the keynote until I read a new Forbes article on the topic. They are expecting some pretty amazing things; things that will divert media attention away from Apple's embarrassing financial scandal.
-Squire
P.S. How about seamless MSN/Yahoo! Messenger support in iChat?\
<edit> All of which has upped the stakes for Apple and Jobs, the company's public face. He must show the world something new when he delivers the keynote at Monday's conference. Really new. Something revolutionary, not evolutionary, that will excite the fans, grow the business--and change the subject.
http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2006/08/04/ipod-jobs-zune_cx_ck_rr_0804apple.html
Story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/05/BUGAHKBK3H1.DTL
If there are products that are they "maybe" list, this might put them on the "go" list. Big news pushes stock prices up and pushes the "problem" stories on page 2.
I agree. In fact, I was going to post the same thing. I was all set to be disappointed by the keynote until I read a new Forbes article on the topic. They are expecting some pretty amazing things; things that will divert media attention away from Apple's embarrassing financial scandal.
-Squire
P.S. How about seamless MSN/Yahoo! Messenger support in iChat?\
<edit> All of which has upped the stakes for Apple and Jobs, the company's public face. He must show the world something new when he delivers the keynote at Monday's conference. Really new. Something revolutionary, not evolutionary, that will excite the fans, grow the business--and change the subject.
http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2006/08/04/ipod-jobs-zune_cx_ck_rr_0804apple.html
Multimedia
Sep 14, 12:23 PM
i think they're coming up with 2 dual octo-core.......True That. But not until next summer 2007.
samcraig
Apr 27, 10:28 AM
Don't you just love it? Apple identifies an potential issue, and does something to remedy it, and they get yelled at for doing so. If they do nothing, they get yelled at for doing nothing.
Catch 22.
Apple identified it? No. Check your history. It was brought TO Apple's attention over a year ago.
It was again brought TO Apple's attention via various reports and articles.
THEN Apple looked into the matter.
I commend Apple for taking action (now).
But let's not rewrite history, shall we?
Catch 22.
Apple identified it? No. Check your history. It was brought TO Apple's attention over a year ago.
It was again brought TO Apple's attention via various reports and articles.
THEN Apple looked into the matter.
I commend Apple for taking action (now).
But let's not rewrite history, shall we?
Eidorian
Jul 27, 12:07 PM
hate to be repetative, but this tells me what i already know.
but the quesiton comes with this line:
Does anyone know if the chips that are actually shipping are the same as the prototype chips?
again, sorry for the repatition, but id really like to drop one of these in my mini and dont want to find out AFTER i tear apart the mini that the new chips wont fit!http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=276&type=expert&pid=3
There might be a voltage issue. It will fit though.
but the quesiton comes with this line:
Does anyone know if the chips that are actually shipping are the same as the prototype chips?
again, sorry for the repatition, but id really like to drop one of these in my mini and dont want to find out AFTER i tear apart the mini that the new chips wont fit!http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=276&type=expert&pid=3
There might be a voltage issue. It will fit though.
manu chao
Apr 27, 08:40 AM
Funny comment from Engadget:
Q: Why is my iphone tracking me?
A: It's not. It's tracking networks and cell towers near wherever you go.
Q: What is the difference between tracking me, and tracking the towers wherever I happen to go? Isn't that the same thing?
A: No. Because it's crowd-sourced. Total crowd size = 1.
Q: Umm. Ok? Soo. Why have you been keeping logs for the past year?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Then why was it unencrypted?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Right. Then why when I opted out did it ignore my choice?
A: That was a bug.
I think is quite conceivable that keeping those logs forever, not encrypting them, maintaining them despite an opt out, and not removing the timestamps was done in the spirit of: "Let's keep the data, maybe they will be useful at some point, and why bother do encrypt them, that is just some extra lines of code to write."
And it is this spirit which is somehow worrying.
Q: Why is my iphone tracking me?
A: It's not. It's tracking networks and cell towers near wherever you go.
Q: What is the difference between tracking me, and tracking the towers wherever I happen to go? Isn't that the same thing?
A: No. Because it's crowd-sourced. Total crowd size = 1.
Q: Umm. Ok? Soo. Why have you been keeping logs for the past year?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Then why was it unencrypted?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Right. Then why when I opted out did it ignore my choice?
A: That was a bug.
I think is quite conceivable that keeping those logs forever, not encrypting them, maintaining them despite an opt out, and not removing the timestamps was done in the spirit of: "Let's keep the data, maybe they will be useful at some point, and why bother do encrypt them, that is just some extra lines of code to write."
And it is this spirit which is somehow worrying.
peskaa
Apr 28, 06:15 AM
Wow, this thread and the ridiculous nature of this issue are hilarious. Seriously, you wonder why the US is going down the pan when the entire nation seems to get caught up in a fight over a bloody birth certificate?
mactoday
Apr 6, 11:16 AM
They do:D Speced out 17'' MBP.
Youre totally right though, their notebook displays have been taking backseat to the iOS train. Hell, the iPad3 is gonna have a 2048x1536 display for heavens sake...and they couldnt even give the refreshed 13'' MBP the same res as the months old 13'' MBA. FAIL.
I bet you that you'll never see a iPad with screen resolution like 2048x1536, it's a ****ing nightmare to iOS developers. You don't understand that it's ****ing crazy, iOS interface like MacOS X interface is not scalable. Apple have to change the whole GUI before making this step forward. You know why there is much smaller apps for Android OS that for iOS? Because Adnroid devices have tons of screen resolutions and every ****ing vendor think that this is better but they kill platform with tons of resolutions, it's hard for developers to make apps compatible with all resolutions, again GUI problem.
Youre totally right though, their notebook displays have been taking backseat to the iOS train. Hell, the iPad3 is gonna have a 2048x1536 display for heavens sake...and they couldnt even give the refreshed 13'' MBP the same res as the months old 13'' MBA. FAIL.
I bet you that you'll never see a iPad with screen resolution like 2048x1536, it's a ****ing nightmare to iOS developers. You don't understand that it's ****ing crazy, iOS interface like MacOS X interface is not scalable. Apple have to change the whole GUI before making this step forward. You know why there is much smaller apps for Android OS that for iOS? Because Adnroid devices have tons of screen resolutions and every ****ing vendor think that this is better but they kill platform with tons of resolutions, it's hard for developers to make apps compatible with all resolutions, again GUI problem.
JS77
Apr 10, 03:28 AM
wow. You'd think a fcp users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
+1,000,000
+1,000,000
Laird Knox
Mar 31, 04:16 PM
Ya got to love this guy.... Mr Gloom and doom!
Glad to see the hot selling iPad 2 only has "one" advantage against the non-selling Android tablets. :rolleyes:
So that advantage is that people actually buy them? ;)
Glad to see the hot selling iPad 2 only has "one" advantage against the non-selling Android tablets. :rolleyes:
So that advantage is that people actually buy them? ;)
Vulpinemac
Apr 6, 02:51 PM
I've been going to my local Costco for the last month and they have a display kiosk on the floor with cards for sales and pick-up of the Xoom. During that time, the number of cards on the display have not dropped significantly and the majority of customers simply walk past it without looking. In fact, during my visits I've only seen one person (other than myself) take a serious look at the display's information. He walked away without taking a card.
This is why I'm far more interested in real sales numbers and not just units shipped into the market. The display holds some 100 cards and I'm willing to bet they haven't sold ten in a month.
This is why I'm far more interested in real sales numbers and not just units shipped into the market. The display holds some 100 cards and I'm willing to bet they haven't sold ten in a month.
boringName
Nov 29, 10:14 AM
The only thing this royalty grants you is a tacit guarantee that Universal will continue to provide digital content.
Yes, that's the irritating part - Universal isn't providing anyone with anything, here. It seems much more like blackmail to continue offering their music library on iTunes (should this "deal" go through) and the Zune store.
To address another item - I'd like to point out that, while not an angel, I "ripped" far more of my friends' music back in the old-days of cassette tapes.
Yes, that's the irritating part - Universal isn't providing anyone with anything, here. It seems much more like blackmail to continue offering their music library on iTunes (should this "deal" go through) and the Zune store.
To address another item - I'd like to point out that, while not an angel, I "ripped" far more of my friends' music back in the old-days of cassette tapes.
charlituna
Apr 5, 11:48 PM
YES!!! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyqUj3PGHv4)
Did you see the Conan version.
I hope the next release of FCS integrates the different apps within the suite under a single UI.
I don't have an issue with the apps being separate but I do agree that a more common UI would be nice.
And I too hope to see the rest of Shake return in some form or another.
The speculation is that REDRay will be used for everything from 4K DCP playback in movie theaters to a download/streaming version that will be usable for buying up to 4K movies through iTunes.
if this means we could get HD itunes that are actually blu-ray quality without it being 50 GB I'm all for it.
I hope they ship it on DVD as i'm not going to tie up my Internet connection for 3 hrs while it downloads:(
Agreed. If not DVDs then a flash drive like they did the restore stuff for the Airs
I doubt Apple will ship a new version of FCP before they ship lion,
folks said the same thing about FCS3 and Snow Leopard and yet as I recall that is exactly what they did.
Ugh. Final Cut is fine the way it is for now... We need iWeb overhaul!! Make it more search engine friendly, none of the text as an image crap. grrr...
Final Cut is fine but it could be much better. Both full studios in fact could be much much better in a number of ways
That said, there are rumors about iWeb being revamped which is why it wasn't updated in iLife 11. And about the release of an iweb for ipad app. So you might get your wish
Did you see the Conan version.
I hope the next release of FCS integrates the different apps within the suite under a single UI.
I don't have an issue with the apps being separate but I do agree that a more common UI would be nice.
And I too hope to see the rest of Shake return in some form or another.
The speculation is that REDRay will be used for everything from 4K DCP playback in movie theaters to a download/streaming version that will be usable for buying up to 4K movies through iTunes.
if this means we could get HD itunes that are actually blu-ray quality without it being 50 GB I'm all for it.
I hope they ship it on DVD as i'm not going to tie up my Internet connection for 3 hrs while it downloads:(
Agreed. If not DVDs then a flash drive like they did the restore stuff for the Airs
I doubt Apple will ship a new version of FCP before they ship lion,
folks said the same thing about FCS3 and Snow Leopard and yet as I recall that is exactly what they did.
Ugh. Final Cut is fine the way it is for now... We need iWeb overhaul!! Make it more search engine friendly, none of the text as an image crap. grrr...
Final Cut is fine but it could be much better. Both full studios in fact could be much much better in a number of ways
That said, there are rumors about iWeb being revamped which is why it wasn't updated in iLife 11. And about the release of an iweb for ipad app. So you might get your wish
arkitect
Mar 22, 12:55 PM
Competition is good.
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
greenstork
Jul 27, 09:45 PM
but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
This was one of the advantages of the G5 but IBM stalled and Intel has essentially blown past everybody. AMD will answer no doubt, but it appears that Intel has about a 6 month jump on them.
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
This was one of the advantages of the G5 but IBM stalled and Intel has essentially blown past everybody. AMD will answer no doubt, but it appears that Intel has about a 6 month jump on them.
jsw
Aug 26, 06:51 PM
Note: I believe I accidentally merged someone's (possibly a couple of people's) posts into BWhaler's post (3 above this post). Sorry. :o
Motley
Nov 28, 06:14 PM
Hadn't seen it posted yet:
Coming off of their deal with Zune, Universal is now considering getting money for each iPod sold.
Why Thank you Microsoft! (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyid=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml):mad:
Coming off of their deal with Zune, Universal is now considering getting money for each iPod sold.
Why Thank you Microsoft! (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyid=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml):mad:
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:38 PM
So if the new iMacs are using 64-bit merom or conroe chips, what is the likelihood of them offering 4Mb of RAM?
And if they did, is the RAM likely to cost any more than it does for the current iMacs, due to the no of slots?I think you mean 4GB of RAM. The likelyhood of Apple offering it is ZERO. If they did, it would be offered for two to three times what you could buy it from a third party.
2GB sticks are still too expensive. See the G5 Quad prices for 2GB sticks:
Non ECC is $4700 for 8 sticks $587.50 each or $1175 per pair
ECC is $10,300 for 8 sticks or $1287.50 each or $2575 per pair
These prices are not in the class that an iMac buyer would want to consider paying.
And if they did, is the RAM likely to cost any more than it does for the current iMacs, due to the no of slots?I think you mean 4GB of RAM. The likelyhood of Apple offering it is ZERO. If they did, it would be offered for two to three times what you could buy it from a third party.
2GB sticks are still too expensive. See the G5 Quad prices for 2GB sticks:
Non ECC is $4700 for 8 sticks $587.50 each or $1175 per pair
ECC is $10,300 for 8 sticks or $1287.50 each or $2575 per pair
These prices are not in the class that an iMac buyer would want to consider paying.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 11:06 AM
Nope, he looked it up on his computer and
told me preorders start Thursday for Radio Shack.
However, I would love to be proved wrong on that.
told me preorders start Thursday for Radio Shack.
However, I would love to be proved wrong on that.
fastlane1588
Jul 27, 12:19 PM
thats a pretty cool concept i must say
sampdoria
Jun 14, 01:57 PM
What day? Tomorrow, Tuesday or Thursday?
Pre-order at Radio Shack tomorrow June 15th as early as they open.
Pre-order at Radio Shack tomorrow June 15th as early as they open.
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
cyberdogl2
Aug 27, 05:20 PM
I see where you're coming from.
So does this mean there will be no Powerbook G5s next tuesday?
So does this mean there will be no Powerbook G5s next tuesday?
bwanac
Aug 8, 01:05 AM
Nothing impressive really... top secrets should be good.
Time Machine is ok. It looks awful for an Apple product, what is up with that background? Ugly. And I really want to know how much disk space it will be taking backing everything up constantly. I would most likely turn it off.
Time Machine is ok. It looks awful for an Apple product, what is up with that background? Ugly. And I really want to know how much disk space it will be taking backing everything up constantly. I would most likely turn it off.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario