RedTomato
Sep 13, 12:36 PM
I read the link above about the ZFS filesystem.
Hmm this could remove a lot of the pain I currently have juggling disks on the cheap.
(I hold a lot of footage of deaf people signing for a project, and don't really have any budget to pay for disk storage. I currently have about 200 GB left on a 1 TB RAID5 system inside a Powermac G3)
It seems the concept of individual volumes will vanish, and instead ZFS creates a common pool of filespace and looks after the checksums etc itself. New drives can just be thrown into the array and ZFS will look after optimising the array I/O.
Mixing 15k rpm speed demon drives with 5400rpm storage hog drives mmmm...
I look forwards to being able to buy a cheap chassis with just a power unit and space for 10 drives, and being able to put that next to my G3, and having ZFS sort out what to do with the 8-9 drives in there.
Something like that hooked up to a Cloverton should give significant HD speedup. Not as much as a ramdisk tho :)
One thing, the article says ZFS can cope with drives being removed from the pool. I'd like to see more detail on that. It surely copes with 1 out of 4 drives failing - what about 3 out of 4? What if 3 x 20GB 15k rpm drives fail and the 1x750GB 5400rpm drive is still up?
Hmm this could remove a lot of the pain I currently have juggling disks on the cheap.
(I hold a lot of footage of deaf people signing for a project, and don't really have any budget to pay for disk storage. I currently have about 200 GB left on a 1 TB RAID5 system inside a Powermac G3)
It seems the concept of individual volumes will vanish, and instead ZFS creates a common pool of filespace and looks after the checksums etc itself. New drives can just be thrown into the array and ZFS will look after optimising the array I/O.
Mixing 15k rpm speed demon drives with 5400rpm storage hog drives mmmm...
I look forwards to being able to buy a cheap chassis with just a power unit and space for 10 drives, and being able to put that next to my G3, and having ZFS sort out what to do with the 8-9 drives in there.
Something like that hooked up to a Cloverton should give significant HD speedup. Not as much as a ramdisk tho :)
One thing, the article says ZFS can cope with drives being removed from the pool. I'd like to see more detail on that. It surely copes with 1 out of 4 drives failing - what about 3 out of 4? What if 3 x 20GB 15k rpm drives fail and the 1x750GB 5400rpm drive is still up?
Soura2112
Apr 6, 03:09 PM
First off I'm not a full time pro, I do about 30% pro work the rest is for family and friends who I don't charge cause it's usually simple. That being said I want to get more pro work. I'm in the process if buying a new HD Cam so I want Blu Ray ability. With buying a new video camera and hopefully the new FCP if it meets my standards will be an expensive month since I don't have an internal or external Blu Ray drive yet and I want full use of Blu Ray, even if we must go with LaCie or whatever Blu Ray drive you like.
Even for my non pro videos of my dogs I want Blu Ray use it's that simple, 1080p, not 720 files to run through iTunes then to my Apple TV, only way to stream videos at my house at the moment outside of iPad and iPhone. I could pay to connect my 360 and sadly no PS3 to Mac stream. (I may be wrong on my home streaming so be nice please).
Most of my pro video is sports and some weddings. They all want a disc, not all want Blu Ray but I want the option for my clients.
Jackie Kennedy held a
jackie kennedy fashion.
jackie kennedy fashion photos.
Jacqueline Kennedy jewelry
Jackie Kennedy
jackie kennedy fashion. jackie
jackie kennedy fashion style.
Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis
Jacqueline Kennedy, First Lady
jackie kennedy fashion « Sammy
Looking for Fashion#39;s New Icon
in-jackie kennedy fashion. AttilaTheHun. Jun 13, 05:27 PM. congrats..but why would anyone pay 425$ for a 3GS/32 when most can get the iPhone discount for a
May 8, 1962 - Jackie wears a
Style Jackie Kennedy
Fashion Icon Jacqueline
Fashion Icon: Jacqueline
Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis
Even for my non pro videos of my dogs I want Blu Ray use it's that simple, 1080p, not 720 files to run through iTunes then to my Apple TV, only way to stream videos at my house at the moment outside of iPad and iPhone. I could pay to connect my 360 and sadly no PS3 to Mac stream. (I may be wrong on my home streaming so be nice please).
Most of my pro video is sports and some weddings. They all want a disc, not all want Blu Ray but I want the option for my clients.
skunk
Mar 1, 04:18 PM
Ah, let us define slavery, does: "slavery is the condition of involuntary servitude in which a human being is regarded as no more than the property of another, as being without basic human rights; in other words, as a thing rather than a person" work for you?No, not really. Why is this relevant?
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a manThey are not permitted to marry their chosen partner, so no, this is again complete bollocks.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogressRetrogress is a verb, and they were not retrograde, on the contrary they were very progressive in many respects.
In short, your cogency is significantly inferior to Lee's.
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a manThey are not permitted to marry their chosen partner, so no, this is again complete bollocks.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogressRetrogress is a verb, and they were not retrograde, on the contrary they were very progressive in many respects.
In short, your cogency is significantly inferior to Lee's.
BC2009
Apr 7, 11:42 PM
When I worked retail in high school I can remember we had a daily sales goal and that goal was based on how we had done last month and the previous year at that time. The managers were rated on their ability to achieve their sales goals and by how much they sold overall (i.e.: the best managers were the ones with the highest goals and still made their goals). However, the managers got dinged for missing for their goals.
I am betting that this is a game that Best Buy managers have played for quite some time to ensure they can consistently make their sales goals and avoid their their goals from being artificially inflated to a level where they could not consistently achieve their goals. I doubt this was a company-wide Best Buy policy, but rather a consequence of the way they do performance ratings on their store managers.
Either way it is DEFINITELY poor customer service. If somebody takes the time to drive down to your store and you have stock that has already been received into the inventory system and could be sold and you turn that customer away because the manager is looking out for his performance rating then you just told your customer that the manager's performance goals and ratings are more important than the people who help you achieve those goals with their hard-earned money.
I am betting that this is a game that Best Buy managers have played for quite some time to ensure they can consistently make their sales goals and avoid their their goals from being artificially inflated to a level where they could not consistently achieve their goals. I doubt this was a company-wide Best Buy policy, but rather a consequence of the way they do performance ratings on their store managers.
Either way it is DEFINITELY poor customer service. If somebody takes the time to drive down to your store and you have stock that has already been received into the inventory system and could be sold and you turn that customer away because the manager is looking out for his performance rating then you just told your customer that the manager's performance goals and ratings are more important than the people who help you achieve those goals with their hard-earned money.
Daremo
Apr 19, 01:28 PM
The sales numbers are impressive, but not surprising.
Reach9
Apr 11, 04:11 PM
Perhaps solely in the phone part of the equation. Here's the newsflash: the "smart" part of "smartphone" encompasses much more than a voice-driven contact list and actual phone calls.
The iOS ecosystem completely destroys Android, no matter how many widgets you're able to install.
You're right, but here's where i think is the difference. Browsing the Internet, Calendar, Checking Mail, Listening to songs, Texting, Multitasking, Notifications, Cut-Copy-Paste, ability to open and use Office files, Navigation system, basic tools like Currency converters, To-Do lists etc. These are what i believe encompasses in a "smartphone", and here's the newsflash: Android OS meets them perfectly.
I'm not talking about widgets, customization, dynamic wallapers etc
The iPhone was late on MMS, Multitasking, Cut-Copy-Paste, and now it's going to be a notification system. Plus, browsing the internet, checking mail and practically everything is much better on a bigger screen.
I feel the App Store is just an added feature, and that's why i'd get an iPod Touch for.
Imagine your iPhone without the App store and all the apps you downloaded from it. Now imagine the HTC EVO without the Android app store. Which is the better smartphone? It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Android OS already has the "smartphone" features down, and they're just working on the bonus features such as the Android App Store.
iOS on the other hand is catching up to these "smartphone" features. My old Nokia E63 had a better notification system than the iPhone, and that's pathetic.
The iOS ecosystem completely destroys Android, no matter how many widgets you're able to install.
You're right, but here's where i think is the difference. Browsing the Internet, Calendar, Checking Mail, Listening to songs, Texting, Multitasking, Notifications, Cut-Copy-Paste, ability to open and use Office files, Navigation system, basic tools like Currency converters, To-Do lists etc. These are what i believe encompasses in a "smartphone", and here's the newsflash: Android OS meets them perfectly.
I'm not talking about widgets, customization, dynamic wallapers etc
The iPhone was late on MMS, Multitasking, Cut-Copy-Paste, and now it's going to be a notification system. Plus, browsing the internet, checking mail and practically everything is much better on a bigger screen.
I feel the App Store is just an added feature, and that's why i'd get an iPod Touch for.
Imagine your iPhone without the App store and all the apps you downloaded from it. Now imagine the HTC EVO without the Android app store. Which is the better smartphone? It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
Android OS already has the "smartphone" features down, and they're just working on the bonus features such as the Android App Store.
iOS on the other hand is catching up to these "smartphone" features. My old Nokia E63 had a better notification system than the iPhone, and that's pathetic.
SWC
Aug 7, 08:01 PM
great . . . i just get a new macbook with tiger now i'm gonna have to get leopard . . . how much will this put me back?
$129 is history proves true
$129 is history proves true
bbplayer5
Mar 31, 03:19 PM
Android > iOS. This just makes it even better that they are going to tighten up with providers are doing to bend over the consumer.
gsander
Jun 10, 10:05 AM
You've got questions. We've got transistors.
I don't think any Radio Shack sales people know what a transistor is.
You got questions? We have cell phones.
I don't think any Radio Shack sales people know what a transistor is.
You got questions? We have cell phones.
babyj
Sep 19, 07:57 AM
It amazes me that people who are so opposed to discussion of upcoming Merom notebooks still click on the links to the forums with titles using the terms "Merom" and "MacBook Pro". If you're a regular on the forums, sure, I can see how constant discussion about the "next" platform might get old. So ignore them. Do something productive with your time.
That isn't exactly what I said, I don't have a problem with people discussing new and upcoming products and features and when we might see them. Count me in.
Its the people that are getting so worked up, annoyed at Apple, threatening to dump the platform and move to Windows, claiming Apple are three months behind Windows systems and generally bitching.
Its all pointless as the same people will start up again with the next technology advances as soon as the Macbook range is updated with Merom.
That isn't exactly what I said, I don't have a problem with people discussing new and upcoming products and features and when we might see them. Count me in.
Its the people that are getting so worked up, annoyed at Apple, threatening to dump the platform and move to Windows, claiming Apple are three months behind Windows systems and generally bitching.
Its all pointless as the same people will start up again with the next technology advances as soon as the Macbook range is updated with Merom.
rolandf
Aug 8, 05:14 AM
I just went through my older posts, concerning Apple's strategy and future, e.g. the role of Vista. I still think, what I said several month ago is still an issue. Having seen Leopard as it stands is not very promising for Apple's future.
Let me remember you, that some of the key people at Apple left the company! In the posts there has been "monolithic kernel" and "NEXT" bashing.
Question: Did they improve the kernel?
Question: How much will the integration / interoperability be with Unix / Linux?
Question: Is there still a future for the Open Source community, or is Leopard just making OS X more proprietary?
Question: Are they continuing to water down their PRO Apps, intermingling it with the OS and making everything more childish?
Question: Is this OS 10.5 usable for a tablet PC? How strong are features like handwriting and speech recognition? (Remember, we are approaching 2010!)
Question: Will they still continue to make the UI more heterogeneous and disorganised, this mix of unmotivated 3D, lack of resolution independence, for every single task a separate application etc.
Question: Virtualisation is a standard for many OS's in the Unix world. A company that sells servers, should be comfortable with that.
Question: How efficient will the OS be, given the arrival of multi-core processors, e.g. quad etc.?
But as it seems, OS X still lives from the legacy, from the NEXT computer that quantum leap in computer history and meanwhile MS with Vista just improved a lot the feel and look, so as others also remarked it, the need to switch to Mac is not given for an everyday user.
Apple conveys to me the image of a company working on too many things at the same time, loosing focus, innovation and good people. Further since the Intel switch even the motivation to further push the design of the hardware did not happen, and the "products we wanted to build, but could not" did not appear.
Will at least the Playstation 3 be the highlight of the year and the direction for the future?
Let me remember you, that some of the key people at Apple left the company! In the posts there has been "monolithic kernel" and "NEXT" bashing.
Question: Did they improve the kernel?
Question: How much will the integration / interoperability be with Unix / Linux?
Question: Is there still a future for the Open Source community, or is Leopard just making OS X more proprietary?
Question: Are they continuing to water down their PRO Apps, intermingling it with the OS and making everything more childish?
Question: Is this OS 10.5 usable for a tablet PC? How strong are features like handwriting and speech recognition? (Remember, we are approaching 2010!)
Question: Will they still continue to make the UI more heterogeneous and disorganised, this mix of unmotivated 3D, lack of resolution independence, for every single task a separate application etc.
Question: Virtualisation is a standard for many OS's in the Unix world. A company that sells servers, should be comfortable with that.
Question: How efficient will the OS be, given the arrival of multi-core processors, e.g. quad etc.?
But as it seems, OS X still lives from the legacy, from the NEXT computer that quantum leap in computer history and meanwhile MS with Vista just improved a lot the feel and look, so as others also remarked it, the need to switch to Mac is not given for an everyday user.
Apple conveys to me the image of a company working on too many things at the same time, loosing focus, innovation and good people. Further since the Intel switch even the motivation to further push the design of the hardware did not happen, and the "products we wanted to build, but could not" did not appear.
Will at least the Playstation 3 be the highlight of the year and the direction for the future?
Rt&Dzine
Apr 27, 06:20 PM
The evangelical son of one of America's most famous evangelists says that President Barack Obama has allowed the Muslim Brotherhood to become part of the US government and influence administration decisions.
Accusations with absolutely no evidence. He should stick to his biblical schtick.
Accusations with absolutely no evidence. He should stick to his biblical schtick.
epitaphic
Aug 19, 09:06 AM
Can I rotate the 2nd display 90 degrees like I can in Windows?
Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Yes you can
;)
Short answer: Yes
Long answer: Yes you can
;)
treblah
Sep 18, 11:44 PM
1. It's Merom. Not Memrom, Menron, Memron or even L. Ron.
2. It won't be any cooler and it won't have greater battery life, period. Unless Apple has an amazing new design in store.
3. If you really, really, need a Merom, you should wait until the Santa Rosa platform so you don't complain that you got the inferior Merom. :rolleyes:
That is all.
2. It won't be any cooler and it won't have greater battery life, period. Unless Apple has an amazing new design in store.
3. If you really, really, need a Merom, you should wait until the Santa Rosa platform so you don't complain that you got the inferior Merom. :rolleyes:
That is all.
longofest
Aug 7, 03:33 PM
Hey nice to see osx will have system restore =D
heh... they give MS so much crap for photocopying, but if anything, this is more or less taking a page out of MS's book with System Restore. Granted, it looks like it will be better, but still, MS had this kind of thing first.
Not trolling, just pointing it out :)
*cough* TOP SECRET *cough* :rolleyes:
It would definitely appear as though rumors of a re-vamped Finder could have some merit...
heh... they give MS so much crap for photocopying, but if anything, this is more or less taking a page out of MS's book with System Restore. Granted, it looks like it will be better, but still, MS had this kind of thing first.
Not trolling, just pointing it out :)
*cough* TOP SECRET *cough* :rolleyes:
It would definitely appear as though rumors of a re-vamped Finder could have some merit...
drsmithy
Sep 14, 10:05 AM
On the server side.
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
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
epitaphic
Aug 18, 11:46 PM
So you think they put an extra processor in across the line just to be able to say they had a quad? Even the AnandTech article you used as a source showed here (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p=18) that PS took advantage of quad cores in Rosetta
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
Your points about latency and FSB are not separate negatives as you have made them. They are redundant theoretical concerns with implications of unclear practical significance.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
I am not worried. Everything anyone has come up with on this issue are taken from that same AnandTech article. Until I see more real-world testing, I will not be convinced. Also, I expect that more pro apps such as PS will be able to utilize quad cores in the near future, if they aren't already doing so. Finally, even if Conroe is faster, Woodcrest is fast enough for me ;).
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
I think you misread that. They were comparing Core 2 Extreme (not Woodcrest) and Conroe to see whether the increased FSB of the former would make much difference.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
illegalprelude
Jul 14, 09:25 PM
im with the others, im not jumping on the ship till they offer me Blue-Ray. Till then, I got everything I need in my 1.6 :cool: :D
NY Guitarist
Apr 5, 08:14 PM
Interestingly this contradicts the information my friend on the design team hinted towards. I know the release is imminent so time will tell.
So are you saying that the apps will be broken up and sold individually?
So are you saying that the apps will be broken up and sold individually?
zelet
Aug 25, 04:02 PM
Another person who can never be satisfied.:rolleyes:
Are you telling me somebody who spent thousands of dollars on "premium" hardware doesn't have a right to be pissed when both systems he bought were DOA? That is stupid! Apple should have kissed his ass and gave him a new computer after the second major repair. He was nicer than I would have ever been. I would have gone to the Apple store and caused a HUGE scene in the middle of a busy Saturday about it.
Apple computers are expensive. They are worth it when they work (and they usually do) but when Apple makes a mistake they should correct it better than anybody.
Are you telling me somebody who spent thousands of dollars on "premium" hardware doesn't have a right to be pissed when both systems he bought were DOA? That is stupid! Apple should have kissed his ass and gave him a new computer after the second major repair. He was nicer than I would have ever been. I would have gone to the Apple store and caused a HUGE scene in the middle of a busy Saturday about it.
Apple computers are expensive. They are worth it when they work (and they usually do) but when Apple makes a mistake they should correct it better than anybody.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 05:34 PM
Time Machine won't mean much when the HD fails. Back that azz up!
Also a very good point, so I need a bigger main HD for my MacBookPro (the new Seagate 160GB becomes interesting) for Time Machine, but i still need to back the hole thing up to an external HD in case of a HD crash (I had 2 in the last 8 months!). So Tine Machine doesn't make Backups obsolete, I didn't even think of that up to now. Hmmm..
Also a very good point, so I need a bigger main HD for my MacBookPro (the new Seagate 160GB becomes interesting) for Time Machine, but i still need to back the hole thing up to an external HD in case of a HD crash (I had 2 in the last 8 months!). So Tine Machine doesn't make Backups obsolete, I didn't even think of that up to now. Hmmm..
tundrabuggy
Apr 19, 03:23 PM
I'm sure quite sure what Apple hopes to accomplish here. Every smart phone steals from every other one. I don't know if you can differentiate design "concepts". It's like suing someone because the chords for his blues song goes in a 1-4-5 pattern like yours does. It's just part of the genre.
Tony
Chord patterns are indeed part of the genre; however, when you also copy the melody and simply change the title AKA(George Harrison..."Here comes the sun"), then, you get the pants sued off of you.
Tony
Chord patterns are indeed part of the genre; however, when you also copy the melody and simply change the title AKA(George Harrison..."Here comes the sun"), then, you get the pants sued off of you.
Sydde
Mar 17, 01:04 PM
�Change� means nothing ... you don�t want to deal with the monetary/financial crisis in this country, you want to keep the system together for the benefit of the banks and the big corporations and the politicians...When you voted for 'change' in you really voted for more of the same.
As opposed to voting for breaking the system down for the benefit of banks and big corporations? We have seen the actions of neo-liberals like Scott Walker: if he gets his way, the whole state will belong to Cargill and Schneider and Bergstrom and Johnsonville, etc, with no government left to protect citizens and businesses from corporate interests. Paul is cut from the same cloth. Put him in the Whitehouse and there will be millions of people protesting full time in DC, because they will have nothing else to do with their time.
Paul wants to shut down government. All that would be left is the few peace officers needed to protect business from millions of poor people. That is the neo-liberal utopia, as envisioned by Alisa Rosenbaum. This kind of policy has clearly been shown to be a recipe for potentially violent revolution:In his Brief History of Neoliberalism, the eminent social geographer David Harvey outlined "a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterised by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade." Neoliberal states guarantee, by force if necessary, the "proper functioning" of markets; where markets do not exist (for example, in the use of land, water, education, health care, social security, or environmental pollution), then the state should create them.
Guaranteeing the sanctity of markets is supposed to be the limit of legitimate state functions, and state interventions should always be subordinate to markets. All human behavior, and not just the production of goods and services, can be reduced to market transactions.
The only people for whom Egyptian neoliberalism worked "by the book" were the most vulnerable members of society, and their experience with neoliberalism was not a pretty picture. Organised labor was fiercely suppressed. The public education and the health care systems were gutted by a combination of neglect and privatization. Much of the population suffered stagnant or falling wages relative to inflation. Official unemployment was estimated at approximately 9.4% last year (and much higher for the youth who spearheaded the January 25th Revolution), and about 20% of the population is said to live below a poverty line defined as $2 per day per person.
For the wealthy, the rules were very different. Egypt did not so much shrink its public sector, as neoliberal doctrine would have it, as it reallocated public resources for the benefit of a small and already affluent elite. Privatization provided windfalls for politically well-connected individuals who could purchase state-owned assets for much less than their market value, or monopolise rents from such diverse sources as tourism and foreign aid. Huge proportions of the profits made by companies that supplied basic construction materials like steel and cement came from government contracts, a proportion of which in turn were related to aid from foreign governments.source (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/02/201122414315249621.html)
Except, Americans are not likely to wait 30 years before fighting back.
As opposed to voting for breaking the system down for the benefit of banks and big corporations? We have seen the actions of neo-liberals like Scott Walker: if he gets his way, the whole state will belong to Cargill and Schneider and Bergstrom and Johnsonville, etc, with no government left to protect citizens and businesses from corporate interests. Paul is cut from the same cloth. Put him in the Whitehouse and there will be millions of people protesting full time in DC, because they will have nothing else to do with their time.
Paul wants to shut down government. All that would be left is the few peace officers needed to protect business from millions of poor people. That is the neo-liberal utopia, as envisioned by Alisa Rosenbaum. This kind of policy has clearly been shown to be a recipe for potentially violent revolution:In his Brief History of Neoliberalism, the eminent social geographer David Harvey outlined "a theory of political economic practices that proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterised by strong private property rights, free markets, and free trade." Neoliberal states guarantee, by force if necessary, the "proper functioning" of markets; where markets do not exist (for example, in the use of land, water, education, health care, social security, or environmental pollution), then the state should create them.
Guaranteeing the sanctity of markets is supposed to be the limit of legitimate state functions, and state interventions should always be subordinate to markets. All human behavior, and not just the production of goods and services, can be reduced to market transactions.
The only people for whom Egyptian neoliberalism worked "by the book" were the most vulnerable members of society, and their experience with neoliberalism was not a pretty picture. Organised labor was fiercely suppressed. The public education and the health care systems were gutted by a combination of neglect and privatization. Much of the population suffered stagnant or falling wages relative to inflation. Official unemployment was estimated at approximately 9.4% last year (and much higher for the youth who spearheaded the January 25th Revolution), and about 20% of the population is said to live below a poverty line defined as $2 per day per person.
For the wealthy, the rules were very different. Egypt did not so much shrink its public sector, as neoliberal doctrine would have it, as it reallocated public resources for the benefit of a small and already affluent elite. Privatization provided windfalls for politically well-connected individuals who could purchase state-owned assets for much less than their market value, or monopolise rents from such diverse sources as tourism and foreign aid. Huge proportions of the profits made by companies that supplied basic construction materials like steel and cement came from government contracts, a proportion of which in turn were related to aid from foreign governments.source (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/02/201122414315249621.html)
Except, Americans are not likely to wait 30 years before fighting back.
