Code in watchOS 4.3.1 Hints at Upcoming Apple Watch Face Inspired by Rainbow Flag

[Fugabutacus]

He has explained several times exactly why he believes there can be heterosexual parades, and given examples of why heterosexuals have reason to celebrate.

You’re just going around in circles adjusting your question, as everything you had asked has been answered - which you cant have - so you adjust your question further. Lol

Heterosexuals can have their own parades - according to you - as there has been sufficient answers to your prerequisite conditions for a group to be able to have a parade and pride in their own achievements.

There’s quite a reading comprehension problem in this thread today isn’t there?

 

[WarHeadz]

The idea of a heterosexual pride parade is offensive for the same reason a parade celebrating whiteness is offensive. In both cases the intent is to stage a counter-parade so people who are homophobic or racist can hide behind the insincere excuse of, “if you can be proud, why can’t I?” The real motivation of such a counter parade would have little to do with celebrating the contributions of heterosexuality or whiteness, and everybody knows it.

But hey... if you’re going to stage a pride parade for heterosexual cisgender folks, I have one request: Please allow LGBTQ participants and guests who wish to celebrate in solidarity, and make them feel as welcome as I have felt attending gay pride events over the years as a straight man. I doubt that will be possible though, because the type of heterosexual people who would typically attend a heterosexual pride parade are going to be too homophobic to allow it.

@tshrimp im tagging you here because this explanation from sean000 is better than anything I was able to put into words. As much as you think you had some sort of silly point with your “straight pride” parade example...you didn’t.

 

[RedKite]

Lookin forward to this! Hope its a permanent addition
[doublepost=1527771792][/doublepost]

@tshrimp im tagging you here because this explanation from sean000 is better than anything I was able to put into words. As much as you think you had some sort of silly point with your “straight pride” parade example...you didn’t.

Oh good god.... please don’t tell me people are trying to get the “white pride”/“straight pride” thing again??

 

[VSG]

At first I wasn’t really blown away by the „Pride“-watch-face, but seeing how nicely the bands on the face align with the lines on the Pride-nylon-band, I think it really looks great!

Sad thing though, there are only two complications possible with the watch-face.
Best regards,
VSG

 

[trusso]

You really believe that the Mac Pro delay or discontinuation of the Airport lineup is because all of Apple has been developing this watch face? Come on.

No, no I don't. In fact, I don't recall saying anything to that effect.

I did say that the sort of people questioning what the big deal is about watch faces are also likely to be the ones lamenting the Airport discontinuation and Mac Pro. But I never said I believed one was the cause of the other (because I don't).

I'm not sure if you intentionally or accidentally misread my previous post. Unlike the Hatter and the March Hare, I generally mean what I say and say what I mean.

 

[friednoodles]

....

I thought it would be unmistakably clear that my analogy was a highly sarcastic joke, but I did add a "lol..." at the end just in case. Looks like it still flew right over some people, so I'll state it as directly as I can: I was suggesting that when people say gay people wearing rainbows are "shoving it into people's faces" or pushing an "agenda", that's as absurd as suggesting that Christians wearing crosses to show their faith are "shoving it into people's faces" or pushing an "agenda".

No one that I know of is offended by Christians wearing crosses around their necks or putting crosses on their churches or having religious holidays or singing carols, and so no one should be offended by gay people doing similar representative actions.

I support the idea that Christians should be able to wear crosses, and I support the idea that gay people should be able to wear rainbows. Anyone who is offended by either notion is far too sensitive and needs to grow up, but that's just my opinion.

 

[tshrimp]

There’s quite a reading comprehension problem in this thread today isn’t there?

Nah, His reading comprehension was perfect. @-BigMac- I am glad to see at least some do not do selective reading of my posts. I have never answered a question so many times with a person continuing to state I didn't. When in fact he never would answer my questions to him. This is one reason I enjoy PRSI. Got to love it.

 

[Raid]

I just want more flexibility on the watch faces. I'd love a square face with Roman numerals for occasional use or a Modular with 6 small complications (three in the middle vs one large one) for an app launchers. Or maybe Siri face with 3rd party plugins.

I'm dreaming bigger, I want Rey's light saber as the minute hand and Yoda's as the hour hand

 

[tshrimp]

I thought it would be unmistakably clear that my analogy was a highly sarcastic joke, but I did add a "lol..." at the end just in case. Looks like it still flew right over some people, so I'll state it as directly as I can: I was suggesting that when people say gay people wearing rainbows are "shoving it into people's faces" or pushing an "agenda", that's as absurd as suggesting that Christians wearing crosses to show their faith are "shoving it into people's faces" or pushing an "agenda".

No one that I know of is offended by Christians wearing crosses around their necks or putting crosses on their churches or having religious holidays or singing carols, and so no one should be offended by gay people doing similar representative actions.

I support the idea that Christians should be able to wear crosses, and I support the idea that gay people should be able to wear rainbows. Anyone who is offended by either notion is far too sensitive and needs to grow up, but that's just my opinion.

When I was a teacher at a middle school people (mainly the faculty) got offended at a shirt one of the students wore. It was just a plain black t-shirt with a large cross on it. He was sent home to change (with the school using the "separation of church and state argument). The same day another controversial shirt was worn. It was of Calvin with both his hands out flipping the bird. That one was found okay, and the student could continue to wear.
[doublepost=1527786084][/doublepost]

I'm dreaming bigger, I want Rey's light saber as the minute hand and Yoda's as the hour hand

I do not have an Apple watch, instead I have an Android watch with my iPhone. It works just fine for what I need. Messages, emails, reject calls, etc. Cost and styling was my main reasons ( I like round watches personally). From what I am understanding there are no watch faces available other than what Apple is providing?

If that is the case then I am very happy I got the Android as there are so many downloadable watch faces. I have hundreds at this point. My main complaint on the watch faces is the most recent iPhone app update removed the ability to set the watch face from the phone itself. I now have to use the watch to do it. Much harder to cycle through all the options.

I would be the first to download your proposed watch face. Sounds great.

 

[Raid]

From what I am understanding there are no watch faces available other than what Apple is providing?

Essentially yes, there's an option to have your own images up on the watch face but no option to design your own watch face, and the colour choices are limited. I'm not too upset about that, but yes I would like the opportunity to play around a bit with my apple watch like that.

 

[Fugabutacus]

Nah, His reading comprehension was perfect. @-BigMac- I am glad to see at least some do not do selective reading of my posts. I have never answered a question so many times with a person continuing to state I didn't. When in fact he never would answer my questions to him. This is one reason I enjoy PRSI. Got to love it.

You can repeat all you want that you’ve answered my question; you haven’t. And I don’t think you’re dumb enough to just be misunderstanding me; you’re simply choosing to twist and dodge words because otherwise your argument and your viewpoint fall apart.

 

[friednoodles]

When I was a teacher at a middle school people (mainly the faculty) got offended at a shirt one of the students wore. It was just a plain black t-shirt with a large cross on it.

This is a great example. If people are offended by that, they're far too sensitive (again, just my opinion...).

Meanwhile, back to the original topic, I welcome any new faces for the Watch, and it will be interesting to see if Apple does announce new abilities for faces in watchOS 5. I certainly hope they do. The original faces have only received minor updates and would benefit greatly from some extra flexibility (like selecting a separate color for the complications on the Color face, for example, or being able to add a complication to Solar). Even if they don't allow fully custom third party faces (I can imagine some of the reasons they'd be against that), maybe there's a trade-off to be had in allowing developers more direct access to Apple-built faces via new types of interactive complications on new face types. I'm thinking in the same way that apps on iOS can hook into widgets, or present custom interactive views for notifications, for example. That seems like a more Apple-like way of doing it, where they still get to control part of the experience.

 

[tshrimp]

Essentially yes, there's an option to have your own images up on the watch face but no option to design your own watch face, and the colour choices are limited. I'm not too upset about that, but yes I would like the opportunity to play around a bit with my apple watch like that.

It looks like Apple may come out with a round watch. Still not sure that is the styling I like . I have a Gen 2 version of these that cost me $120. Would love for Apple to make something similar.

 

[MDF314159265]

To answer your question why Apple doesn’t promote every single cause...because they don’t have to. This is a company that has been historically supportive of LGBT rights, now has a gay CEO, a huge proportion of LGBT employees, and avid brand loyalty amongst the LGBT community. This is their cause of choice.

In-n-out burger prints bible verses on soda cups, you don’t see gay people complaining about their “agenda” and demanding to be represented with rainbow flags on the cups.

Apples to oranges... Apple makes products you wear/have in your pocket/use daily. In-n-out puts bible verses on cups and trays you throw away (after eating all those delicious fries). Apple is worldwide. In-n-out is in... like 15 states on the west coast? You don't have to eat In-N-Out and you'll be fine, but if you want a good computer, a good phone, or a good smartwatch (or other good Apple things), you buy Apple. And yes, you do see/hear/read about people complaining about In-n-out (and chick-fil-a) all the time. Again, you simply choose not to eat there, whereas it's not so simple with products we use daily.

For the record, I know they don't have to and I'm not complaining - it was merely a suggestion. Can one not wish for some variety?

 

[tshrimp]

Apples to oranges... Apple makes products you wear/have in your pocket/use daily. In-n-out puts bible verses on cups and trays you throw away (after eating all those delicious fries). Apple is worldwide. In-n-out is in... like 15 states on the west coast? You don't have to eat In-N-Out and you'll be fine, but if you want a good computer, a good phone, or a good smartwatch (or other good Apple things), you buy Apple. And yes, you do see/hear/read about people complaining about In-n-out (and chick-fil-a) all the time. Again, you simply choose not to eat there, whereas it's not so simple with products we use daily.

For the record, I know they don't have to and I'm not complaining - it was merely a suggestion. Can one not wish for some variety?

Arrrgggg. Now I want me some In-N-Out Burger. Darn you

 

[Fugabutacus]

I’m on mobile and scrolling quickly so I think I could have missed some posts, sorry if I missed your answer, @tshrimp can you link/quote where you explain why lincoln’s Heterosexuality disadvantaged him? I think that’s the crux of the debate so I think it’s an important part of the pride debate to focus on and i don’t want to miss anything out.

 

[trusso]

Can we all agree that taking "offense" at something, as the phrase is commonly used nowadays, does not generally mean one's sensibilities have truly been offended? Rather, it seems to be code for "I don't like you or your point-of-view, so I'd like to try and exercise my power over you by playing the victim card." Ironically, this sort of narcissistic behavior (from any party) might rightly be called an offense against logic and fair debate; but it seems that there are no depths to which most people will not sink in order to enjoy a little schadenfreude.

 

[CarlJ]

No one that I know of is offended by Christians wearing crosses around their necks or putting crosses on their churches or having religious holidays or singing carols, and so no one should be offended by gay people doing similar representative actions.

There's one point where your analogy falls down. I've never met a gay person who was trying to recruit people over to their team (conservative types try to scare their followers by telling them such activity is rampant - it isn't), while, on the other hand, the Christian church not only actively tries to recruit people to be new members of their group, they have a centuries-long history of going to other lands and forcing people to become members of their group.

 

[Black Tiger]

No, no I don't. In fact, I don't recall saying anything to that effect.

I did say that the sort of people questioning what the big deal is about watch faces are also likely to be the ones lamenting the Airport discontinuation and Mac Pro. But I never said I believed one was the cause of the other (because I don't).

I'm not sure if you intentionally or accidentally misread my previous post. Unlike the Hatter and the March Hare, I generally mean what I say and say what I mean.

Haha I may have misread. It is the internet. Am I suppose to be reading for understanding? Lol. In any case, I think we agree that Apple can release new watch faces and be also progressing on other projects.
[doublepost=1527835387][/doublepost]

Can we all agree that taking "offense" at something, as the phrase is commonly used nowadays, does not generally mean one's sensibilities have truly been offended? Rather, it seems to be code for "I don't like you or your point-of-view, so I'd like to try and exercise my power over you by playing the victim card." Ironically, this sort of narcissistic behavior (from any party) might rightly be called an offense against logic and fair debate; but it seems that there are no depths to which most people will not sink in order to enjoy a little schadenfreude.

I would also call it fake outrage. What concerns me is when trivial matters “outrage” people and ultimately devalue the phrase and its intent. But outrage is appropriate for overtly racist/bigoted statements and views, and the lgbtq community continues to face discrimination in obvious and less obvious ways. Consider the homophobic landlord who refuses to rent to a gay couple. Even where such discrimination is illegal, studies have shown that landlords often lie and say that apartments are “rented” in order to discriminate without overtly discriminating. If there is a “gay agenda” it is to achieve acceptance to the point where pride flags and parades are relics of the past and that all individuals can live their lives with dignity regardless of who they find attractive.

 

[bandrews]

Personally I don’t care about the sin part that much. What it is, that sexual activity between two men at least, is unhealthy and carries disease risks for themselves, possible damage of the rectrum area etc.
Those things are undoubtedly true.
How can a logical adult person be ok with these risks?

Ummm... sorry, could you just point out to me how this has anything to do with my reply to you?

Why do straight people ALWAYS bring it back to gay sex between men? Like this is all being gay is about. I've been with a guy 12 years - married 2. Our week is filled with arguments about not emptying pockets before putting trousers in the laundry, discussions about what to cook for supper, planning holidays, paying bills, watching TV, renovating our house, oh, and working full time jobs. So sex, if we've even got the energy at the end of the day, consists of a teeny tiny fraction of our relationship. SOOOO sinful.

SO, your post:

It’s only the law that can protect gay people actually from physical harm. And of course the education from home and school that harming physically another human being for their beliefs or sexual orientation is immoral and plain bad.

My post:

And when you're brought up in a country/state where parents believe homosexuality is wrong and that gays should either be cured/locked up/killed and the schools won't even mention homosexuality except to say its a sin (but are happy enough to say the universe was created about 3000 years ago), where's this education going to come from?

So you say kids need to be educated about not bullying other kids for their sexual orientation yet go on to peddle the same tropes used by homophobes over an over again. You know what else can be harmful to your health:

pollution
cars
alcohol
smoking
guns
contact sports
wild animals
anything

yet logical adult persons all over the world are ok with these risks.
[doublepost=1527841219][/doublepost]

Deleted my long response as I can tell this is going nowhere...

But will just say...If you think Lincoln, Armstrong, and the Wright Brothers did not face adversity then I would recommend going back and read up on these people. Also, if you think a parade needs a cause that overcame adversity, then you have a lot of work ahead of you fighting to get rid of many fun parades that already exist. I see your double standard, even if you do not. Have your parade, and let other have theirs if they want to. It is all good

Except they didn't face adversity just for being straight. Nobody ever got fired/locked up/beaten up/murdered/executed just for being straight. As in that being the ONLY reason.

You are right in saying there are many fun parades that exist. That's great. Everyone loves a fun parade. But I'm unclear as to why straight people feel the need to have a "Pride" event? If it is purely celebratory and inclusive (and remember, gay pride marches allow straight allies on marches too as well as religious groups) then sure, I'm all for it. If however it is used as a discriminatory platform for straight vs gay, "gay is wrong", "god hates fags" type affair, then it starts to resemble a nazi rally.

 

[lec0rsaire]

Can we have something celebrating heterosexuals too and not discriminate?

What for? When have heterosexuals been oppressed and even killed just because of their sexual preferences? When have heterosexuals been denied any civil rights?
While the LGBTQ community has come a long way, there still is a large segment of the population that thinks they shouldn’t have equal rights. Pride is not allowing about accepting who they are but celebrating who they are as well.

 

[Hedwigg]

Personally I don’t care about the sin part that much. What it is, that sexual activity between two men at least, is unhealthy and carries disease risks for themselves, possible damage of the rectrum area etc.
Those things are undoubtedly true.
How can a logical adult person be ok with these risks?

This is the funniest thing I've read all week. I can explain, in great detail, how all of what you just wrote is completely misguided and incorrect. It's just a matter of whether or not you want to HEAR all the details.

 

[tshrimp]

......

You are right in saying there are many fun parades that exist. That's great. Everyone loves a fun parade. But I'm unclear as to why straight people feel the need to have a "Pride" event? If it is purely celebratory and inclusive (and remember, gay pride marches allow straight allies on marches too as well as religious groups) then sure, I'm all for it. If however it is used as a discriminatory platform for straight vs gay, "gay is wrong", "god hates fags" type affair, then it starts to resemble a nazi rally.

Why not let them if they want it? Why would you care? Do you really want to squash their rights in the name of yours? As for your first example. There is nothing "discriminatory" with someone thinking or stating that homosexuality is wrong. It is an opinion. And, we as a free society, have the privilege of of believing and stating what we like. It may offend some, but I do not remember there being anything about the ability to go through life without ever being offended.

As for the person who states "God hates fags" needs to read their bible. It states the opposite. God may not like the actions, but loves the person. That is very clear. You can love someone without loving their beliefs or actions. Thank God for this, as my wife would have left me long ago if that was not the case .

FYI...I am not the one who brought up the straight parade, but did point out the double standard on the post afterward, so kind of got pulled in . I am pro Traditional Family, but that does not mean I would take away someones right for a parade because I don't agree with them.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Why not let them if they want it? Why would you care? Do you really want to squash their rights in the name of yours? As for your first example. There is nothing "discriminatory" with someone thinking or stating that homosexuality is wrong. It is an opinion. And, we as a free society, have the privilege of of believing and stating what we like. It may offend some, but I do not remember there being anything about the ability to go through life without ever being offended.

As for the person who states "God hates fags" needs to read their bible. It states the opposite. God may not like the actions, but loves the person. That is very clear. You can love someone without loving their beliefs or actions. Thank God for this, as my wife would have left me long ago if that was not the case .

FYI...I am not the one who brought up the straight parade, but did point out the double standard on the post afterward, so kind of got pulled in . I am pro Traditional Family, but that does not mean I would take away someones right for a parade because I don't agree with them.

What is currently stopping people having a ‘straight parade’ in your free society btw? It’s all well pointing out double standards etc but is there legislation stopping heterosexual people like you and me dancing through the streets and having a great time because we are straight?

Personally I don’t see the need as I’ve never been judged for being straight. I’ve never had somebody look at me sourly and say oh you’re married to a woman, oh I don’t agree with that. I’ve never had a female colleague say ‘oh you’re straight, well as long as you don’t try it on with me and try and have sex with me because isn’t that what all straight people are like?’.. I think gay people face a lot of stigma and it’s great to remind society they are just normal people like us.

 

[CarlJ]

What is currently stopping people having a ‘straight parade’ in your free society btw? It’s all well pointing out double standards etc but is there legislation stopping heterosexual people like you and me dancing through the streets and having a great time because we are straight?

Such celebrations of heterosexuality are going on all the time, they just don't call them, "Heterosexual Pride Parade", they call them things like, "Mardi Gras" and "Spring Break".

If they want to have a "Straight Pride Parade" that's called that, with banners and such, let them. To the extent that such a flame pulls in hateful homophobic moths, we will call them out on it.

When we have military / veteran's parades, it is in recognition of the service they have done for the country (facing adversity, risking their lives), in line with the theme of the parade. When we have Gay Pride parades, it is in recognition of the fact that they have "outed themselves" even though it means putting themselves at risk of ridicule, discrimination, and even violence and death, at the hands of hateful and bigoted people. Gays and Lesbians are proud of taking that stand, and we are proud of them for taking that stand. It is not that they're saying "homosexuality is better and we're proud of that", the pride is because they faced adversity - and the thing they have done to be proud of is intrinsically tied to the theme of the parade.

If you have a "straight pride" parade, what adversity have straight people faced because of being straight? (Answers like, "well, Abe Lincoln is straight, and he did brave and good things" entirely miss the point, because his straightness had nothing to do with his good deeds, and furthermore he did not face adversity because of his straightness while doing those good deeds - you wouldn't be celebrating his straightness, only his good deeds, so it'd be a "good deed pride parade", not a "straight pride parade".)

Now, if you want to simply have a celebratory "we're happy we're straight" parade, sure, go have fun (there are, indeed, many parades put on simply for fun or spectacle - the Doo Dah Parade has always been a favorite). But understand that if you call it a "Straight Pride" parade, to make it a contrast to the many Gay Pride parades, you're missing the point being made by the word, "pride". And amongst the attendees, you will probably get bunch a lot of people who are there not because they like straight people so much, but because they dislike gay people so much.