Linux does the same thing. In the case of Linux/X11, it's because an accelerated video overlay is being used -- instead of writing to a framebuffer that's then rendered onto the screen, you coordinate with the video card to have it handle scaling, colorspace conversions and blitting of that data directly onto a memory-mapped portion of the display.
Then the screenshot tool runs and dumps the framebuffer, and finds no image where your DVD playback is happening, because there isn't anything in the framebuffer for that window.
It's not that clear cut. "Linux" has many options when it comes to rendering and overlaying video and many of them let you take screenshots. The experience can also be vastly altered by particular video card and driver combos.
Well why should you consider something like that when it's easier for the other commenters to just assume that it's some draconian company with horrible intentions?
Comments
Linux does the same thing. In the case of Linux/X11, it's because an accelerated video overlay is being used -- instead of writing to a framebuffer that's then rendered onto the screen, you coordinate with the video card to have it handle scaling, colorspace conversions and blitting of that data directly onto a memory-mapped portion of the display.
Then the screenshot tool runs and dumps the framebuffer, and finds no image where your DVD playback is happening, because there isn't anything in the framebuffer for that window.
Yeah not the case on OSX. Everything is sent as a texture to the GPU.
It's just that they'd be explicitly excluding that texture from being grabbed in a screencap.
It's not that clear cut. "Linux" has many options when it comes to rendering and overlaying video and many of them let you take screenshots. The experience can also be vastly altered by particular video card and driver combos.
Thanks for that. I (and I guess a lot of other commenters) hadn't considered that there might be a totally innocent explanation.
Come to think of it, I've noticed this behaviour in the past.
Well why should you consider something like that when it's easier for the other commenters to just assume that it's some draconian company with horrible intentions?