In many countries, everything is dubbed. In many countries everything is subtitled. Duh. Some people here seem to think that Americans will only go for a dubbed movie and that subtitles put them off. This is bunk. The first major motion picture in many many many years to be dubbed for American audiences was 'Life is Beautiful' AFTER it had already made a gajillion dollars in its subtitled release. It flopped. Go to your video store and find a dubbed foreign movie. Aside from 'Life is Beautiful', you won't be able to. The only exception is for people who cannot read, ie 'children' not 'rednecks'. Non-english kids' movies are the only class that are ever dubbed in the US and Canada. Ok ok, Anime too but that is a niche and we're talking about major motion pictures; the kind you see in a gigaplex. You will NEVER - mark my words - see Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon dubbed into English. I absolutely guarantee it.
Having said that, I saw the director being interviewed on TV and he said that they use a very strange dialect in the film which the actors had to be TAUGHT and that there may even be CHINESE SUBTITLES for showings in China.
Hi. You're wrong too. Microsoft has quit with the dll codecs. They are, from now on, all ActiveX DirectShow filters (still technically dlls but completely different APIs) which don't work like you're saying. There are no wrappers for those ones. Too bad. Bye for now.
wired is not for real nerds. it died that death years ago - along with the 'geek page'. for slashdot to collabbbbberate widdem further deepens its karmic debt. smarten up, losers, before someone comes along and makes a commodore out of youse.
the cultural age gap is closing fast in north america. 20 somethings are acting like teenagers and teenagers are acting like adults. teenagers are growing up fast and then don't ever want to fully grow up.
1. I don't know. All I know is that he has enough repute to be linked to on slashdot, which should mean something.
2. Yes. I spoke a little too quickly and it came out a little ambiguous. They optimized the decoder. It's possible that the optimizations, or even just a simple retargeted compile could cause difference in the raw output to the encoder. This would cause, of course, the output file to change. Same thing would be true if Tom was right and they actually had retargeted/optimized the encoder, which they didn't. Such an encoder could very well produce different output. So Tom's assertion that the output file would be "obviously" identical is clueless. Since Tom has said that the output files were identical, we can unsafely assume that the intel'ized decoders didn't actually cause any difference in the intermediate data. Of course, given his display of stupidity, I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't even do a checksum. I'm not an AVI expert, but I wouldn't be surprised if the filesizes came out identical due to padding or hard bitrate limits on the encoder. All issues which never appear to even have crossed his mind.
Slashdot Mirror
Having said that, I saw the director being interviewed on TV and he said that they use a very strange dialect in the film which the actors had to be TAUGHT and that there may even be CHINESE SUBTITLES for showings in China.
slashdot really fucking sucks
Exactically.
Hi. You're wrong too. Microsoft has quit with the dll codecs. They are, from now on, all ActiveX DirectShow filters (still technically dlls but completely different APIs) which don't work like you're saying. There are no wrappers for those ones. Too bad. Bye for now.
wired is not for real nerds. it died that death years ago - along with the 'geek page'. for slashdot to collabbbbberate widdem further deepens its karmic debt. smarten up, losers, before someone comes along and makes a commodore out of youse.
the cultural age gap is closing fast in north america. 20 somethings are acting like teenagers and teenagers are acting like adults. teenagers are growing up fast and then don't ever want to fully grow up.
I can't believe I ever enjoyed this place. If this were a magazine I'd ask you to discontinue my subscription.
seeya, suckers.
2. Yes. I spoke a little too quickly and it came out a little ambiguous. They optimized the decoder. It's possible that the optimizations, or even just a simple retargeted compile could cause difference in the raw output to the encoder. This would cause, of course, the output file to change. Same thing would be true if Tom was right and they actually had retargeted/optimized the encoder, which they didn't. Such an encoder could very well produce different output. So Tom's assertion that the output file would be "obviously" identical is clueless. Since Tom has said that the output files were identical, we can unsafely assume that the intel'ized decoders didn't actually cause any difference in the intermediate data. Of course, given his display of stupidity, I wouldn't be surprised if he didn't even do a checksum. I'm not an AVI expert, but I wouldn't be surprised if the filesizes came out identical due to padding or hard bitrate limits on the encoder. All issues which never appear to even have crossed his mind.
Or seem to be relevant to slashdot moderators.