[Steve...O]

One thing that really annoys me about certain releases, including those from CBS/Paramount, is when the episodes do not have English subtitles. Even if the set does include closed captioning that does no good is the DVD player is progressive scan since captions don't transmit over a progressive signal. (From a visual standpoint I like the look of subs better also, but that's a personal preference.)

Does anyone know what the cost differential is between using captions vs subtitles? If the same data files are used to create both (may be a bad assumption) why wouldn't subtitles be a slam dunk to include as an option?

This may seem like a trival matter, and maybe it is, but I used subs for a variety of reasons. Sometimes to "hear" the program better and sometimes when I'm watching at night with the sound off as not wake my wife.

Just trying to get some insight on the business reason behind this.

[Shawn_Sm]

The only thing I can add is that I believe closed captioning receives federal funding.

[Jesse Skeen]

I assume that for TV shows the regular closed-captions are already done for broadcast, so it's easier to stick those on the DVD, though that doesn't explain Universal's refusal to use those as they always re-encode them as subtitles.

On the subject, it seems the caption signal doesn't go through on HDMI connections. Will there ever be a fix for that? When I finally upgrade my system I don't want to have to use the S-Video connection just to be able to see the captions.

[Brian^K]

Figure that there will never be a "fix" for that, because it is not considered by the industry to be a bug, but rather is a reflect of deliberate and purposeful design. There are different technologies for providing assistance for the hearing impaired for each class of distribution, and they each work very well within their designated realm.

If you're interested, I can put you in touch with some folks who I know are tilting at this particular windmill, in a no-doubt fruitless attempt to change reality.