Cougarcat
Mar 26, 01:55 PM
They would have to: otherwise MBA users wouldn't be able to upgrade.
No, they could go DVD or Mac App Store. I hope we get a USB version, but I don't think it'll happen.
No, they could go DVD or Mac App Store. I hope we get a USB version, but I don't think it'll happen.
Benjamins
Mar 31, 02:53 PM
What the heck are you talking about. Google is building upon the technology. Apple did a great job advancing the technology which pushed everyone else to do the same. Its called competition its been happening for years and in every industry.
so what Apple FAD are you talking about?
It's technology when it's Google.
It's a FAD when it's Apple?
What the **** are you talking about?
so what Apple FAD are you talking about?
It's technology when it's Google.
It's a FAD when it's Apple?
What the **** are you talking about?
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.
bommai
Apr 8, 07:15 AM
Quota? Are these guys idiots?
Best Buy isn't the only place to buy these... I've thought through the various marketing gimmicks, and really none apply here. Why would they do this...
May be they did not want to embarrass the Xoom too much :rolleyes:
Best Buy isn't the only place to buy these... I've thought through the various marketing gimmicks, and really none apply here. Why would they do this...
May be they did not want to embarrass the Xoom too much :rolleyes:
decimortis
Apr 6, 10:38 AM
I loves me my 11.6 ultimate and it hasn't let me down yet in the power department for my work with CS5, but of course, updated more faster, more shiny MBA's are always welcome. Can't say I'll upgrade but nice to see them progressing.
D.
D.
awesomebase
Mar 31, 07:16 PM
I would add I never understand the comparison of Smartphones running Android to smartphones running IOS.
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
From an engineering perspective and from a manufacturer's perspective, you're correct. But from an investment's perspective your argument doesn't work. Investors are concerned about Google's ability to profit from this and they compare "Platforms" to get an idea about where people are trending to. That is why despite BB growing, their stock is actually going to be in the trash in a couple of years if not sooner. Their "OS" is basically worthless... people don't value it as much as Android or iOS and as the phones that run those platforms continue to drop in price and become more capable, BB has no choice but to practically give their phones away to make their numbers (albeit at carrier-subsidized prices, but their prices and margins get severely eroded over time).
Just wanted to point that out... your logic is correct, just not applicable to all scenarios...
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
From an engineering perspective and from a manufacturer's perspective, you're correct. But from an investment's perspective your argument doesn't work. Investors are concerned about Google's ability to profit from this and they compare "Platforms" to get an idea about where people are trending to. That is why despite BB growing, their stock is actually going to be in the trash in a couple of years if not sooner. Their "OS" is basically worthless... people don't value it as much as Android or iOS and as the phones that run those platforms continue to drop in price and become more capable, BB has no choice but to practically give their phones away to make their numbers (albeit at carrier-subsidized prices, but their prices and margins get severely eroded over time).
Just wanted to point that out... your logic is correct, just not applicable to all scenarios...
AvSRoCkCO1067
Sep 18, 11:33 PM
I still think it's funny that everyone thinks these Macbook Pros are "long overdue" - when, exactly, did the FIRST Dell laptop with C2D ship? I thought it was supposed to be around tomorrow...but surely it couldn't have been before last Monday or so at the earliest.
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
appleguy123
Feb 28, 06:51 PM
inclusivism is not inherently good and that position holds no hatred or malice
They decided not to rehire him, so?
In what case is inclusionism not a good policy? Being consistent in our thinking and morality is a sign of a logical and sound mind.
I can not think of a single case where making arbitrary exceptions is a good practice.
They decided not to rehire him, so?
In what case is inclusionism not a good policy? Being consistent in our thinking and morality is a sign of a logical and sound mind.
I can not think of a single case where making arbitrary exceptions is a good practice.
orthodoc
Nov 28, 08:22 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Getting squeezed out of a revenue stream is just part of being in business. Either adapt or go away. Nothing entitles them to a portion of the iPod sales. They make their money off of the sale of the actual music they produce. Should they get a portion of each computer sold as well? After all, the computer is used to both download and play the music. Dumb argument.
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
Getting squeezed out of a revenue stream is just part of being in business. Either adapt or go away. Nothing entitles them to a portion of the iPod sales. They make their money off of the sale of the actual music they produce. Should they get a portion of each computer sold as well? After all, the computer is used to both download and play the music. Dumb argument.
mdelvecchio
Mar 31, 03:44 PM
Ditto. Gruber is as much a blow hard as anyone can possibly be. He's such an arrogant, self-absorbing prick of a human being, without an un-biased bone in his body. He is the epitome of Apple fanboy.
orly? what about when he criticizes apple? what is he then?
sounds like you have something personal against him. (either that, or youre a tool for getting so worked up over somebody you dont even know)
orly? what about when he criticizes apple? what is he then?
sounds like you have something personal against him. (either that, or youre a tool for getting so worked up over somebody you dont even know)
runninmac
Aug 17, 01:01 AM
This is a very dumb question but is Photoshop running under rosetta in this test?
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
Oh, please believe it is.
:eek:
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
Oh, please believe it is.
:eek:
BRLawyer
Aug 20, 05:34 AM
The only conclusion following the advent of the duo MacPro x Leopard is this: Microsoft Windows is dead.
farmboy
Apr 27, 10:51 AM
If locations are recorded AND time/date stamp - then how much time you spend in each location is tracked inherently. If you "log in" at one time here and then another 20 minutes later - there's a history of time spent. Maybe not foolproof... but to say that no information is there isn't accurate.
There are a myriad of ways to track you if someone really wants to, and it's been that way since last names became popular in the 13th century (and phone numbers, driver's licenses, SSNs, W-2s, passports, time cards, tax returns, mail box contents, garbage, written receipts, passenger lists, customer surveys, relatives, friends, credit cards, personal checks, street cams and literally a thousand more).
Information has always been out there, long before the iPhone/iPad and the Benign DB. It's the use that matters.
There are a myriad of ways to track you if someone really wants to, and it's been that way since last names became popular in the 13th century (and phone numbers, driver's licenses, SSNs, W-2s, passports, time cards, tax returns, mail box contents, garbage, written receipts, passenger lists, customer surveys, relatives, friends, credit cards, personal checks, street cams and literally a thousand more).
Information has always been out there, long before the iPhone/iPad and the Benign DB. It's the use that matters.
Moyank24
Mar 3, 10:28 PM
Being gay is not a sin, homosexual actions are a sin.
Eh...this is so 2000 years ago...
Luckily most of us that live in this century know better.
Eh...this is so 2000 years ago...
Luckily most of us that live in this century know better.
ART5000
Jul 20, 11:57 PM
ANy gurus on hand here..
is it possible that Apple will come out with dual woocrest then when kentfield hits the street, we could just buy the processor and snap out woody and snap in Kentfield.
IS THIS FEASIBLE:rolleyes:
is it possible that Apple will come out with dual woocrest then when kentfield hits the street, we could just buy the processor and snap out woody and snap in Kentfield.
IS THIS FEASIBLE:rolleyes:
wizard
Apr 6, 07:46 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Does anyone know if the IGP in these processors is underclocked compared to the variants used in the MacBook Pros?
That is a very good question!
It is likely that the GPU might be a bit slower. That simply because the rest of the chip is clocked slower. Frankly the GPU in Sandy Bridge is the only good reason to throw a little hate Intels way. That being said for many users a SB update to the AIRs will be huge and would make the platform viable for a wider range of users.
Does anyone know if the IGP in these processors is underclocked compared to the variants used in the MacBook Pros?
That is a very good question!
It is likely that the GPU might be a bit slower. That simply because the rest of the chip is clocked slower. Frankly the GPU in Sandy Bridge is the only good reason to throw a little hate Intels way. That being said for many users a SB update to the AIRs will be huge and would make the platform viable for a wider range of users.
dwero
Jun 9, 03:29 AM
When called #639*, I got the news that 16GB for $199 and 32GB for $299.
That's suck
That's suck
ergle2
Sep 15, 12:50 PM
More pedantic details for those who are interested... :)
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
LethalWolfe
Apr 10, 02:21 AM
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
The other presenters just had to toss months of planning out the window and scramble to reschedule events w/less than a weeks notice during the industry's biggest annual convention. Hopefully the members of the audience that signed up to see the original line-up will be able to make it to all the reschedule events and, on top of that, everyone going to the SuperMeet has now paid money for tickets to what is nothing more than an Apple PR event.
Dick move by Apple but all will be forgiven as long as they release the holy grail of editing on Tuesday. If they preview 'iMovie Pro' lord help them...
He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
To be fair to Mark (the head of Post at Bunim/Murray) there really isn't anything he could say due to the NDA. Just because what he saw of the new FCP might not lead him to believe it would work in Bunim/Murray's current workflow doesn't mean it might not be awesome for someone else's work flow. It was a tough spot for Mark to be in and I'm not exactly sure why he even kicked off the meeting with "I was there, but don't ask me about it because I'm under NDA". He could've never even have brought it up and it wouldn't have altered the course of the conversation at all.
Lethal
The other presenters just had to toss months of planning out the window and scramble to reschedule events w/less than a weeks notice during the industry's biggest annual convention. Hopefully the members of the audience that signed up to see the original line-up will be able to make it to all the reschedule events and, on top of that, everyone going to the SuperMeet has now paid money for tickets to what is nothing more than an Apple PR event.
Dick move by Apple but all will be forgiven as long as they release the holy grail of editing on Tuesday. If they preview 'iMovie Pro' lord help them...
He is asked if he will update his editing studio's workflow to the new Final Cut, and he basically danced around the question, pleaded the 5th, and made it pretty clear that he is holding back some reservations about how the industry will adapt to the changes.
To be fair to Mark (the head of Post at Bunim/Murray) there really isn't anything he could say due to the NDA. Just because what he saw of the new FCP might not lead him to believe it would work in Bunim/Murray's current workflow doesn't mean it might not be awesome for someone else's work flow. It was a tough spot for Mark to be in and I'm not exactly sure why he even kicked off the meeting with "I was there, but don't ask me about it because I'm under NDA". He could've never even have brought it up and it wouldn't have altered the course of the conversation at all.
Lethal
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 3, 02:56 PM
I'm think i'm a 15 A-spec, and i just started B-spec to save up money for the Ferrari and Lambo races in the Pro series. I've only done a few spec events, but i've got all gold in B and A licenses as well as 9/10 gold (one silver) in I-C license.
I find the license tests to be more fun now that they arent mandatory. They seem easier too. In GT4 it was work just to pass some of them, but in GT5 i find that i always get silver or bronze on my first attempt. Gold is a bit of work sometimes though.
I find the license tests to be more fun now that they arent mandatory. They seem easier too. In GT4 it was work just to pass some of them, but in GT5 i find that i always get silver or bronze on my first attempt. Gold is a bit of work sometimes though.
addicted44
Mar 26, 01:15 AM
About the only thing that I find disappointing about this release is the lack of a new filesystem.
I am disappointed about this too. But I am not surprised. Apple's next filesystem was going to be ZFS. But Sun being purchased by Oracle has probably killed any chance of that happening.
The newer Linux FS'es are just not stable enough at the point (or don't do things Apple has somehow managed to bake into HFS+, like the snapshots, and things like directory Hard Links, etc). I don't see Apple moving to any version of ReiserFS or ext#, so I think we are stuck with HFS+ and extensions/improvements of it, until the ZFS situation gets clearer.
I am disappointed about this too. But I am not surprised. Apple's next filesystem was going to be ZFS. But Sun being purchased by Oracle has probably killed any chance of that happening.
The newer Linux FS'es are just not stable enough at the point (or don't do things Apple has somehow managed to bake into HFS+, like the snapshots, and things like directory Hard Links, etc). I don't see Apple moving to any version of ReiserFS or ext#, so I think we are stuck with HFS+ and extensions/improvements of it, until the ZFS situation gets clearer.
drsmithy
Sep 13, 08:41 PM
Mac OS X distributes threads and processes across cores/CPUs to optimize performance already. (Subject to some limitations, as noted already.)
[...]
(Note: I keep specifying 'Mac' here. There is a reason. Windows isn't as good at multithreading/processing yet...)
Uh, no. Windows NT is better at multithreading - and particularly multiprocessor scheduling - largely because it's been doing it for a lot longer and on a lot more powerful hardware. NT was running on quad-processor machines a decade ago.
Prior to 10.4, OS X had roughly the same level of SMP support Windows NT had back around the 1993 - 95 timeframe, with Windows NT 3.x.
The improvements in 10.4 start to put it in the ballpark of NT 4.0, ca. 1996.
10.5 will probably put it on par with Windows 2000, maybe XP.
[...]
(Note: I keep specifying 'Mac' here. There is a reason. Windows isn't as good at multithreading/processing yet...)
Uh, no. Windows NT is better at multithreading - and particularly multiprocessor scheduling - largely because it's been doing it for a lot longer and on a lot more powerful hardware. NT was running on quad-processor machines a decade ago.
Prior to 10.4, OS X had roughly the same level of SMP support Windows NT had back around the 1993 - 95 timeframe, with Windows NT 3.x.
The improvements in 10.4 start to put it in the ballpark of NT 4.0, ca. 1996.
10.5 will probably put it on par with Windows 2000, maybe XP.
Homy
Jul 20, 11:44 AM
eight cores + Tiger = Octopussy?!?:p
Macaroony
Mar 1, 05:06 PM
CaoCao, where do you think civilization came from? A religious tribe in the desert? Most political and social structures come from the ancient Greek and Roman civilizations. All the Catholic Church contributed to society was bigotry and discrimination. Now tell me who's retrograde. :confused:
Now about your argument about a gay man being able to marry a woman -well of course he can do so but he'd much rather prefer to marry a man, which in many states and countries is still illegal, hence he'd want to get the right to do so.
Seriously, do I have to spell it out for you?
Marriage is a contract and has nothing to do with the blessed love between two people. It's a legally binding agreement between two people and the state that allow for merging assets and facilitation of taxes, insurance, etc. Back in the day, marriage was only used to merge two families for financial, social and stately gain. Most of the time, the marriage was arranged and the two people involved hardly knew or even loved each other through most of their marriage.
We can get all legal about the laws of marriage, but then again it is simply a law and - if most countries support the separation of church and state - not to be bound to religious doctrine.
This is where civil rights come in, a topic that seems to fly by your head due to your clinging to said religious doctrine. If it weren't for civil rights, women wouldn't be able to vote, if it weren't for civil rights, black people would still be slaves, and if it weren't for civil rights, gays would be killed without anyone batting an eye.
This is is what equality is all about.
Now about your argument about a gay man being able to marry a woman -well of course he can do so but he'd much rather prefer to marry a man, which in many states and countries is still illegal, hence he'd want to get the right to do so.
Seriously, do I have to spell it out for you?
Marriage is a contract and has nothing to do with the blessed love between two people. It's a legally binding agreement between two people and the state that allow for merging assets and facilitation of taxes, insurance, etc. Back in the day, marriage was only used to merge two families for financial, social and stately gain. Most of the time, the marriage was arranged and the two people involved hardly knew or even loved each other through most of their marriage.
We can get all legal about the laws of marriage, but then again it is simply a law and - if most countries support the separation of church and state - not to be bound to religious doctrine.
This is where civil rights come in, a topic that seems to fly by your head due to your clinging to said religious doctrine. If it weren't for civil rights, women wouldn't be able to vote, if it weren't for civil rights, black people would still be slaves, and if it weren't for civil rights, gays would be killed without anyone batting an eye.
This is is what equality is all about.