mytdave

About

Username
mytdave
Joined
Visits
38
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
68
Badges
0
Posts
447
  • FBI director calls for restart of smartphone encryption debate

    Go away. You've lost all credibility.
    tallest skil
  • Nancy Pelosi expresses disappointment over Tim Cook's GOP fundraiser

    If Nancy Pelosi is upset, then you're definitely doing the right thing!
    buzdotsmetalcase
  • Intel splits on Atom after the mobile relevance of x86 whacked by Apple's Ax

    Good.  Now Intel can focus on Core M, i5 & i7.  I don't think a Core M will ever be viable in a smartphone - leave that segment to ARM, but it could be successful in tablets and ultra thin laptops, etc.
    duervo
  • Only months after launch, 'Disney Infinity' ditches support for Apple TV

    sog35 said:
    Strange move by Disney

    Glad I didn't buy it.  This may be a sign the AppleTV isn't doing to well for gaming. Apple needs to lift the limitation that all games need to work with the Siri remote. That really limits the types of games that can be made on the device.
    I really wonder how many people are using TV for games. My guess is not many. Serious gamers would be using a console or gaming PC and everyone else is probably just playing games on their iPad or iPhone. If Apple really wanted TV to be a gaming platform they would have made a controller for it and included it in the box. 
    Games is one of the primary reasons I bought one.  I like the games I've seen in the ATV store, although the lack of major/well known titles is pretty glaring.  I like the whole App/Store metaphor (just like iDevices) instead of predetermined "channels," although many of the streaming apps really suck, like the latest version of the Vevo app - it's so bad I just abandoned them and deleted the app.  

    At first I liked the idea of forcing the use of the Apple remote, but now having spent some time with it, games are terrible with it - a true game controller is really needed (glad I bought one).
    williamlondon
  • Apple, other tech companies decry North Carolina anti-LGBT law

    designr said:
    volcan said:
    ... Nobody ever complains if a dad takes his female child into the men's room or vise versa... 
    Now there you go using sense and reason. People working together to arrive at suitable solution rather than a specific solution being mandated from on high.
    Nobody complains about an adult taking their young child into the other gender's restroom, because it's not sexual.  Having a pervert/mentally ill person wander into the wrong restroom is.  The scenarios are completely different and you know it.

    Lorin: Liberty is defined quite well in the Constitution, particularly Amendments 1, 2 & 3.  No where does it include the "freedom" to use whatever bathroom you choose.  Liberty doesn't mean you can do whatever the hell you want to do.  Liberty also protects others from being subjected to perversion.
    tallest skilewtheckman