texfla

About

Username
texfla
Joined
Visits
10
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
55
Badges
0
Posts
13

Reactions

40Like0Dislike3Informative

  • Satechi releases pair of Bluetooth remotes for Mac & iPad

    texflatexfla
    linkman said:
    texfla said:
    Now if only they'd make one for the AppleTV. With real buttons for fast forward and reverse. Ya know...like a useable one...made for human sized hands...

    You can use a different remote with it as long it's a reasonably recent model (something like gen 2 or later). Pick nearly any IR remote of your liking and have the Apple TV learn it. I understand the hate some of the ATV remotes get but I don't understand why people don't opt for a different remote if they don't like it.
    Your point is completely valid for many users but the problem is that the IR remotes aren't as functional when line of sight is blocked. Mounting behind a TV or in a media closet is easier with bluetooth or RF remotes. There are solutions for IR routing over cat 6 and other methods but they add expense, complexity, and often underperform. I use a harmony remote with a IR repeater in a main TV area, for example, but the controller is expensive, oversized, and overcomplicated for other rooms.

    Additionally, there is a potential functionality upside to using a remote made by the same company as the AppleTV...if they would only make a version that incorporated more of the feedback from so many disgruntled users. The general ask seems pretty straightforward...a little larger with explicit skip and FF/Rewind buttons. 

    To be clear...I think your point is perfectly valid for some users, just not all of us.
    elijahg

  • Satechi releases pair of Bluetooth remotes for Mac & iPad

    texflatexfla
    Now if only they'd make one for the AppleTV. With real buttons for fast forward and reverse. Ya know...like a useable one...made for human sized hands...

    gregoriusmITGUYINSDralphieelijahg

  • DOJ keeps 80-year-old music licensing rules affecting Apple Music intact

    texflatexfla
    They also left several-hundred-year-old rules against murder and theft intact...as well as the constitution. The article appears to imply that the age of the rules is an inherent negative. There are lots of old laws that are good and new laws that are crummy that have been put in place by both parties.

    Licensing rules and laws shouldn't be judged as good or bad based on their age or by which party is in power when they're implemented.

    They're good or bad based on their effectiveness in creating a fair balance between the rights of content creators and the interests of the consumers that they're willing to sell to. The middle men are unimportant except in the context how the rules impact their ability to add value to creators and consumers.

    So...ignoring the age of the laws and the particular administration making the decision...what are the actual merits of keeping the existing rules vs scrapping them?
    larryjwmattinozradarthekatmike1muthuk_vanalingambeowulfschmidtcornchipwatto_cobra

  • Apple reportedly drags its feet when dealing with chronic China labor law offenders

    texflatexfla
    Fred257 said:
    Do the right thing Apple!!!  Bad bad bad!!
    What exactly is “the right thing”?
    radarthekatlkruppSpamSandwichGeorgeBMac

  • Epic Games brings 'Fortnite' fight with Apple to Australia's courts

    texflatexfla
    If you try in enough places, eventually some court might cave to these arguments.

    So the issue is now about Fortnight wanting to seek fair access and competition...does that apply to in-app purchases within their games? Will they be allowing other people unaffiliated with Epic to sell add ons/expansions/etc directly within their game environment? You know...so they don't "foreclose" competition within their games?

    The problems with arguing on principle is that, by definition, principles apply universally (or should, I'd think).
    anomeBeatssvanstromjahbladeh2p