thedarkhorse
Apr 12, 06:09 PM
http://twitter.com/#!/fcpsupermeet
There's supposed to be live updates on that twitter feed.
There's supposed to be live updates on that twitter feed.
Multimedia
Aug 17, 12:01 PM
when cs 3 comes out, which will be sometime in the spring of 2007 according to macworld magazine, the mac pro will be "hands down" the best machine across the board on "all" benchmarks concerning adobe software
let's hope we get cs 3 sooner rather than later in 2007 because i would hate to wait until late march
pc world, september issue, mentioned amd's plan for a quad core processor in 2007 and if that happens, some pc box will be faster than our best xeon powered machines...that is, he he, unless we get that quad core K8L amd with their 4x4 motherboard architecture which would enable a desktop to run two quads for a total of 8 amd cores (but the price of such a machine will debut at a very high price and probably won't directly compete with the mac pro)
but for now, apple has the best pro desktop machine dollar for dollar that i have seen and with cs 3 next year, it will be a designer's dream machine better than anything out there in its price range...at least for a few months ;)I think Apple will add a Dual Clovertown processor option to the Mac Pro BTO page as soon as they can get them. I'm thinking it will be about a $1k option - Minus Two Woodcrests Plus Two Clovertowns = about $1k I thiink.Um....that's why intel has quad core chips coming out...starting in *2006*
On the Xeon side, Clovertown, on the consumer side, Kentsfield. Sometime in the first half of 2007 I believe we'll see Tigerton, which will be an even more formidable quad core xeon, capable of more than 2 processor configurations- so if apple gets a 3 socket logic board, or a 4 socket one, we could have 12 or 16 cores.I'll settle for Dual Clovertown or perhaps a Quad Tigerton - if it's only $2k more - when Leopard ships on board next Spring. :)
So I'm thinking the Dual Clovertown OctoCore will cost about $4,000 plus ram and the Sixteen Core Tigerton Setup about $6,000 plus ram. Is that a fair guess?
let's hope we get cs 3 sooner rather than later in 2007 because i would hate to wait until late march
pc world, september issue, mentioned amd's plan for a quad core processor in 2007 and if that happens, some pc box will be faster than our best xeon powered machines...that is, he he, unless we get that quad core K8L amd with their 4x4 motherboard architecture which would enable a desktop to run two quads for a total of 8 amd cores (but the price of such a machine will debut at a very high price and probably won't directly compete with the mac pro)
but for now, apple has the best pro desktop machine dollar for dollar that i have seen and with cs 3 next year, it will be a designer's dream machine better than anything out there in its price range...at least for a few months ;)I think Apple will add a Dual Clovertown processor option to the Mac Pro BTO page as soon as they can get them. I'm thinking it will be about a $1k option - Minus Two Woodcrests Plus Two Clovertowns = about $1k I thiink.Um....that's why intel has quad core chips coming out...starting in *2006*
On the Xeon side, Clovertown, on the consumer side, Kentsfield. Sometime in the first half of 2007 I believe we'll see Tigerton, which will be an even more formidable quad core xeon, capable of more than 2 processor configurations- so if apple gets a 3 socket logic board, or a 4 socket one, we could have 12 or 16 cores.I'll settle for Dual Clovertown or perhaps a Quad Tigerton - if it's only $2k more - when Leopard ships on board next Spring. :)
So I'm thinking the Dual Clovertown OctoCore will cost about $4,000 plus ram and the Sixteen Core Tigerton Setup about $6,000 plus ram. Is that a fair guess?
SiliconAddict
Aug 5, 08:01 PM
*shrugs* I have no money so it not that big of a deal for me. It will be nice to know more about 10.5.
Zimmy68
Apr 7, 11:36 PM
If there is one indisputable fact of this world...
Those on message boards that say they hate Best Buy, are the first to grab the Sunday ad and visit the store at least weekly.
Bank on it.
Those on message boards that say they hate Best Buy, are the first to grab the Sunday ad and visit the store at least weekly.
Bank on it.
Amazing Iceman
Apr 6, 04:40 PM
...but people (in general) don't want tablets. They want iPads.
I would compare it to Christmas for me. My mother-in-law asked my wife what I wanted for Christmas. "Video games," was my wife's answer. No, I didn't want video games, I wanted Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood and/or Mass Effect 2.
LOL... sometimes you gotta be specific. I started to notice that many people call "an iPad" to all tablets and not necessarily to a real iPads.
The reviews from people who actually bought the Xoom are mixed, but most of them claim that the quality of the Xoom is terrible when compared to the iPad and iPad2.
So far, I haven't seen any tablet that would gain my attention over the iPad.
I would compare it to Christmas for me. My mother-in-law asked my wife what I wanted for Christmas. "Video games," was my wife's answer. No, I didn't want video games, I wanted Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood and/or Mass Effect 2.
LOL... sometimes you gotta be specific. I started to notice that many people call "an iPad" to all tablets and not necessarily to a real iPads.
The reviews from people who actually bought the Xoom are mixed, but most of them claim that the quality of the Xoom is terrible when compared to the iPad and iPad2.
So far, I haven't seen any tablet that would gain my attention over the iPad.
boncellis
Aug 27, 10:19 PM
What about simply rational? It's easy to become excited at the prospect of shiny new merom macs ready to hit store shelves tomorrow or tuesday, but I think that's premature. The rational part of me, which has taken over the part of me that's flipping out excited, says we'll see them within three to four weeks. I know that's disappointing to a lot of people, but if you have read through these posts, and the macforums front page, I think it's easy to surmise that that will be the case.
...
But don't be fooled by my rational side too much. I've already bought a .mac account and a cool new backpack to house my MBP when it finally does ship. I'm about ready to jump out of my skin I'm so excited.:D
Kudos to those optimists, nothing wrong with that. There's nothing really wrong with irrationality in the forum either. ;)
...
But don't be fooled by my rational side too much. I've already bought a .mac account and a cool new backpack to house my MBP when it finally does ship. I'm about ready to jump out of my skin I'm so excited.:D
Kudos to those optimists, nothing wrong with that. There's nothing really wrong with irrationality in the forum either. ;)
leekohler
Mar 3, 12:04 PM
I goofed. I misinterpreted what Lee said about sodomy. He said that not all homosexuals engage in sodomy. I thought he thought homosexual sex was not sodomy. Unfortunately, too often, when I'm impulsive, I misinterpret what others write.
I don't look down on anyone here. I didn't look down on anyone here. I'm sorry I gave the impression that I did that. I'm sorry I've written insultingly, too. I didn't mean to do that.
Sadly, I sometimes do react emotionally when I should react rationally instead. And I do need to try harder to comprehend what others say.
Fair enough. Now let's move along. ;)
I don't look down on anyone here. I didn't look down on anyone here. I'm sorry I gave the impression that I did that. I'm sorry I've written insultingly, too. I didn't mean to do that.
Sadly, I sometimes do react emotionally when I should react rationally instead. And I do need to try harder to comprehend what others say.
Fair enough. Now let's move along. ;)
Multimedia
Aug 19, 12:33 PM
And I'm not convinced this is only an application problem. When I run Handbrake on the Quad G5 alone it uses just over two cores 203% @ about 100fps analysis (1st Pass of 2) speed. If I add a Toast encode while that is happening, Handbrake takes a huge hit down to below 150% @ 70-80 fps analysis while Toast can only use about 130% instead of more alone. So the Tiger OS X seems to have difficulty managing more than one multicore application's core usage allocation up to its maximum capability - IE Tiger is not so MultiCore Enabeled as it could be IE Leopard probably will be much moreso - let's hope that is one of its TOP SECRETS.
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better. Handbrake alone can analyze up to around 134fps while writing at about 107 fps using about 1.5-1.75 cores. So while not yet fully optimized for Mac Pro yet, it's already outperforming the Quad G5 significantly. Handbrake would appear to analyze files about 33% faster while writing them about 15% faster while using 1.5 to 1.75 cores. Quad G5 does analysis @ about 100fps and writes about 93 fps (2nd Pass) using up to about 2.2 cores.
Toast 7.1 UB uses Mac Pro cores much more than it does Quad cores - in the range of 280 - 310% IE about 3 cores compared to only about 1.5 cores on the Quad G5 as well as on the Dual Core G5. Unfortunately I didn't have encode times for each of the sample files I brought with me from the Quad so I don't know the real time how much faster that really amounts to. Running simultaneously on the Mac Pro, Toast would use over 2.5 cores while handbrake would use only one or less than one at best.
Together simultaneously on Mac Pro 2.66 it's
Toast/Handbrake
2.7 cores/1 core best
2.5 cores/.75 core worst
Handbrake during Toast is down to as few as 60fps but sometimes up to 100fps as well. Toast meanwhile is Still consuming up to almost 3 cores with Handbrake running at the same time. So Toast would appear to be much more optimized for the Mac Pro's MultiCores than it is for the Quad G5's Multicores. Same could be said for Handbrake - especially since it is not really fully Optimized for Mac Pro yet.
When I ran tests on the Mac Pro at the Apple Store last Saturday between Toast and/or Handbrake, their use of more cores alone and together was much better. Handbrake alone can analyze up to around 134fps while writing at about 107 fps using about 1.5-1.75 cores. So while not yet fully optimized for Mac Pro yet, it's already outperforming the Quad G5 significantly. Handbrake would appear to analyze files about 33% faster while writing them about 15% faster while using 1.5 to 1.75 cores. Quad G5 does analysis @ about 100fps and writes about 93 fps (2nd Pass) using up to about 2.2 cores.
Toast 7.1 UB uses Mac Pro cores much more than it does Quad cores - in the range of 280 - 310% IE about 3 cores compared to only about 1.5 cores on the Quad G5 as well as on the Dual Core G5. Unfortunately I didn't have encode times for each of the sample files I brought with me from the Quad so I don't know the real time how much faster that really amounts to. Running simultaneously on the Mac Pro, Toast would use over 2.5 cores while handbrake would use only one or less than one at best.
Together simultaneously on Mac Pro 2.66 it's
Toast/Handbrake
2.7 cores/1 core best
2.5 cores/.75 core worst
Handbrake during Toast is down to as few as 60fps but sometimes up to 100fps as well. Toast meanwhile is Still consuming up to almost 3 cores with Handbrake running at the same time. So Toast would appear to be much more optimized for the Mac Pro's MultiCores than it is for the Quad G5's Multicores. Same could be said for Handbrake - especially since it is not really fully Optimized for Mac Pro yet.
guzhogi
Jul 14, 04:00 PM
According to Appleinsider, the Mac Pro would have 2 4x and 1 8x PCIe slots. I see two problems with this. (1) All higher-end PC mobos out now have at least 1 16x slot, some have 2 for SLI/Crossfire. Why would Apple shoot itself in the foot like this? The Mac Pro is supposed to be a lot better than all other PCs. (2) Why only 3 slots? PCs have 6 or so (as did the Power Mac 9500 & 9600) with a few regular PCI slots. Why would Apple shoot itself in the foot like this? The Mac Pro is supposed to be a lot better than all other PCs. It would be nice to have 2 16x lanes for SLI and a few PCI slots for older expansion cards and cards that don't need the bandwidth of PCIe. Besides, this is supposed to be a Pro Mac, which means professional people would want to add a bunch of cards, not just 3. I'd expect a person working in something like movie production would want to have dual graphics cards, a fiber channel card to connect to an xServe RAID and maybe an M-Audio sound card for audio input. Since I don't work in movie production, I wouldn't know, but it would make sense.
aegisdesign
Sep 13, 12:35 PM
going out on a limb here and assuming you have a heavily cluttered desktop
Yes, I know. it takes me a couple of days to really clutter up my desktop whilst I'm working on a project and the desktop's the handiest place to stash stuff. I've also usually got 30-40 windows open too.
If I'm busy I don't have the time to de-clutter and get back teh snappy.
Yes, I know. it takes me a couple of days to really clutter up my desktop whilst I'm working on a project and the desktop's the handiest place to stash stuff. I've also usually got 30-40 windows open too.
If I'm busy I don't have the time to de-clutter and get back teh snappy.
MACRUS
Apr 7, 12:32 AM
Not again..
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
where did you get such a non existing info? Apple has not attend the NAB for years now.
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
not everyone will agree with you but I do. not that all the work I do needs to be on blu-ray but some does and because DVDSP has not seen a real update since 2005 I think. I just had to ditch it. along with the outdated apps. I got Adobe's Creative Suite.
NAB is for broadcast professionals - its doubtful there will be computer releases here.
where did you get such a non existing info? Apple has not attend the NAB for years now.
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
not everyone will agree with you but I do. not that all the work I do needs to be on blu-ray but some does and because DVDSP has not seen a real update since 2005 I think. I just had to ditch it. along with the outdated apps. I got Adobe's Creative Suite.
Super Dave
Aug 5, 06:38 PM
More speculation than rumour, but for Leopard I'd bet on:
-Resolution Independent UI http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
-Quartz 2D Extreme http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14
Honestly, I'm surprised they're not in the rumour roundup.
David :cool:
-Resolution Independent UI http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
-Quartz 2D Extreme http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14
Honestly, I'm surprised they're not in the rumour roundup.
David :cool:
studiomusic
Nov 29, 12:08 PM
Does she appear on emusic?
Why yes, she does!
Got a few people from the SLC here I see...
Why yes, she does!
Got a few people from the SLC here I see...
heisetax
Jul 14, 08:24 PM
Doh! Well, again IMHO, it is my preference to have only one optical drive built in. I could always add an external later.
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
OutThere
Apr 27, 01:29 PM
Don't jack up America for those of us who love it for what it was founded on.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I don't know about you, but I love America because it was founded on stolen native land. Just makes me so proud of my forefathers, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I don't know about you, but I love America because it was founded on stolen native land. Just makes me so proud of my forefathers, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
wizz0bang
Jul 20, 09:57 AM
Bring on the multi-core GPUs! :)
kdarling
Apr 6, 03:01 PM
But he then said after how well it would work on the phone, they put the tablet project on the shelf and focused on the phone as it was more important. Which means it was a tablet and no just a touch screen device in the beginning.
Sure, it could've been a full tablet. It just didn't have iOS, is my point.
People misremember a lot. You know how it goes: a story always gets better as time goes by :)
For example, in the later tablet version we are told that seeing kinetic scrolling on the demo made him want for Apple to build a touch phone:
“I had this idea about having a glass display, a multitouch display you could type on with your fingers. I asked our folks: could we come up with a multitouch display that we could type on? And six months later, they came back with this prototype display. And I gave it to one of our really brilliant UI guys and he called me back a few weeks later and had intertial scrolling working and I thought, ‘my God, we can build a phone with this!’ So we put the tablet on the shelf… and we went to work on the iPhone.”
Yet, years before in one of the first iPhone articles in we were told that kinetic scrolling came later on:
"At one point, Mr. Jobs got a call from one of the iPhone engineers with an idea: Why not allow iPhone users to navigate through both song collections and contacts stored on the device by simply flicking their fingers up and down across the surface of the touch-screen? The engineer gave Mr. Jobs a demonstration of the technology, and the Apple chief executive signed off on it immediately, according to a person familiar with the process."
I'd love one day for a definitive history to come out, so we can know the full timing, and also credit those unsung engineers who actually invented it all.
Sure, it could've been a full tablet. It just didn't have iOS, is my point.
People misremember a lot. You know how it goes: a story always gets better as time goes by :)
For example, in the later tablet version we are told that seeing kinetic scrolling on the demo made him want for Apple to build a touch phone:
“I had this idea about having a glass display, a multitouch display you could type on with your fingers. I asked our folks: could we come up with a multitouch display that we could type on? And six months later, they came back with this prototype display. And I gave it to one of our really brilliant UI guys and he called me back a few weeks later and had intertial scrolling working and I thought, ‘my God, we can build a phone with this!’ So we put the tablet on the shelf… and we went to work on the iPhone.”
Yet, years before in one of the first iPhone articles in we were told that kinetic scrolling came later on:
"At one point, Mr. Jobs got a call from one of the iPhone engineers with an idea: Why not allow iPhone users to navigate through both song collections and contacts stored on the device by simply flicking their fingers up and down across the surface of the touch-screen? The engineer gave Mr. Jobs a demonstration of the technology, and the Apple chief executive signed off on it immediately, according to a person familiar with the process."
I'd love one day for a definitive history to come out, so we can know the full timing, and also credit those unsung engineers who actually invented it all.
bonehead
Nov 29, 03:23 AM
Wil universal get what they want?.. Apple is not totally powerless in this potential negotiation but i doubt steve has the power to laugh in their faces. Apple does not make music, it sells it. A seller can hardly laugh in the face of the producer of goods (or the gatekeeper of those goods). Want proof?.. walmart vs apple. Apple makes ipods.. Walmart refused to deal with apple the way apple wanted.. guess who lost in that battle.. walmart of course.. they are merely a seller, apple is the gatekeeper of ipods. The same is with the music studios.. apple is a seller, music companies are the gatekeepers. They can dictate who can and can't sell their music and while every corporation is motivated by profits.. they can always take their music and go home. Sure they lose but so does apple or they can make their music exclusively available only on microsoft service. You might not buy the music but you aren't 300 miliion americans. I gurantee apple does not want to be sitting by idly watching microsoft steal a market they grew. Naw, steve is not laughing in anyone's face.
Any record company is free to make their music exclusively available on a service that is incompatible with 75% of the mp3 players owned by those 300 million Americans but I don't think many will.
Any record company is free to make their music exclusively available on a service that is incompatible with 75% of the mp3 players owned by those 300 million Americans but I don't think many will.
Burnsey
Apr 27, 09:23 PM
Technically he is eligible to be president even if he wasn't born in the US:
http://blogs.forbes.com/danielfreedman/2011/04/12/romney-to-trump-obama-doesnt-need-a-birth-certificate/
Not sure why this is such a big issue, the country is facing huge problems and you people need to work together and solve them. Set these distractions aside or you'll miss what's really going on.
http://blogs.forbes.com/danielfreedman/2011/04/12/romney-to-trump-obama-doesnt-need-a-birth-certificate/
Not sure why this is such a big issue, the country is facing huge problems and you people need to work together and solve them. Set these distractions aside or you'll miss what's really going on.
starflyer
Apr 6, 01:41 PM
Oh yeah, well just wait until people find out iOS is a closed system and the Xoom uses Android which is open....
oh nevermind :D
oh nevermind :D
matticus008
Nov 29, 06:30 AM
It goes to court and the 'Pirate' successfully argues that he/she has already compensated UMG by buying the iPod/Zune. The judge agrees and piracy of Universal music becomes legal so long as it's for the 'UMG taxed' iPod or Zune.
Only if all the lawyers and judges in the room are asleep at the wheel, and even then only if that mass narcolepsy extends to all appellate and supreme courts above that one for the several months it would take to shut down any of the major labels.
It would be an interesting case, and yes, it is possible.
So is teleporation, but I'm not camping out in any lines.
Only if all the lawyers and judges in the room are asleep at the wheel, and even then only if that mass narcolepsy extends to all appellate and supreme courts above that one for the several months it would take to shut down any of the major labels.
It would be an interesting case, and yes, it is possible.
So is teleporation, but I'm not camping out in any lines.
chrono1081
Mar 31, 03:46 PM
Let the Apple fanboys begin patting each other on the back, and taking something and running wild with it.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
Why does everyone start with the "Apple Fanboy!" BS? Its not necessary. You realize this is MacRumors right where if you say something nice about Apple you're a fanboy but you can insult Apple all day and be labeled as giving a fair opinion.
By the end of this thread, it'll be impossible to decipher what the original story was about.
Why does everyone start with the "Apple Fanboy!" BS? Its not necessary. You realize this is MacRumors right where if you say something nice about Apple you're a fanboy but you can insult Apple all day and be labeled as giving a fair opinion.
Cameront9
Aug 7, 06:35 PM
I am not hearing impaired, but I often watch TV and movies with the closed captioning on. I cannot really say what about it makes it more enjoyable to me--no one has ever understood why I do it, maybe it has to do with how I process information (I do have trouble listening in lecture classes, maybe a learning disability etc.), but my point is to say that I am also interested in getting closed captioning on iTunes shows.
I wrote to Apple on the feedback part of their web-site about this. I was wondering if you might know better what the law is about closed captioning. I always assumed it was required for network television shows. Is it not for network shows that appear online?
Anyhow, it's functionality I would definitely like to see.
Online is a grey area because it's new...
I'm not completely familiar with Closed Captioning laws. I believe all new TVs are required to have a Closed-Captioning decoder, and I think that all Network shows (and maybe cable-based, too) have to be captioned.
A quick Google gives this:
http://www.captions.org/caplaw.cfm
Which explains in more detail...
Regardless, I have seen a number of hearing-impaired users comment on the issue before. It would be so simple to implement, after all...
I wrote to Apple on the feedback part of their web-site about this. I was wondering if you might know better what the law is about closed captioning. I always assumed it was required for network television shows. Is it not for network shows that appear online?
Anyhow, it's functionality I would definitely like to see.
Online is a grey area because it's new...
I'm not completely familiar with Closed Captioning laws. I believe all new TVs are required to have a Closed-Captioning decoder, and I think that all Network shows (and maybe cable-based, too) have to be captioned.
A quick Google gives this:
http://www.captions.org/caplaw.cfm
Which explains in more detail...
Regardless, I have seen a number of hearing-impaired users comment on the issue before. It would be so simple to implement, after all...
Tones2
Apr 11, 02:08 PM
LOL at all of the people saying it's a big mistake and bad move on Apple's part. They know what they are doing. Why would they do something that would hurt their iPhone sales?!
No. I think people are just saying it's a stupid rumor.
Tony
No. I think people are just saying it's a stupid rumor.
Tony
