Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple QuickTime DRM Disables Video Editing Apps

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the what-is-this-uninstall-you-speak-of dept.

Upgrades 448

An anonymous reader writes "According to numerous posts on Apple's discussion forums (several threads of which have been deleted by Apple), as well as a number of popular video editing blogs, Apple's recent QT 7.4 update does more than just enable iTunes video rentals — it also disables Adobe's professional After Effects video editing software. Attempting to render video files after the update results in a DRM permissions error. Unfortunately, it is not possible to roll back to a previous version of QT without doing a full OSX reinstall. Previous QT updates have also been known to have severe issues with pro video editing apps."

cancel ×

448 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Does this suprise anyone? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22151882)

Come on mactards! Time to go on the defensive!

Re:Does this suprise anyone? (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22151910)

Oh man, he got us good. With a burn like that, what could i possibly do...

Re:Does this suprise anyone? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22152094)

You could do something real stupid, like reply to him.

The answer is quite simple actually: (4, Informative)

Qbertino (265505) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151886)

Don't use Quicktime.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (1)

allcar (1111567) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151892)

or After Effects.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (5, Funny)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151928)

or video.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22151898)

Better yet, don't use MacOS X.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (5, Funny)

edittard (805475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152194)

New slogan: It just doesn't work.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (2)

secondhand_Buddah (906643) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152444)

Or Better yet, go back to 35mm film and manual splicing...

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (4, Funny)

lucifig (255388) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151900)

No, that can't be it. Somehow we have to tie it back to Microsoft.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (4, Funny)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152220)

Don't use Quicktime on Windows!

Oh, wait...

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (5, Funny)

coop247 (974899) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152270)

I'll never buy another Sony product again. Rootkits, DRM, Blu-Ray, MinDisc, EVIL.

Oh, wait, this is Apple. Thats cool then, I like them.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (5, Informative)

arth1 (260657) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152514)

I'll never buy another Sony product again. Rootkits, DRM, Blu-Ray, MinDisc, EVIL.

Oh, wait, this is Apple. Thats cool then, I like them.

No, you're more correct than you think. Sony uses Quicktime for quite a few of their products, and it has bit customers hard. As an example, Sony CLIE Multimedia PDAs require Quicktime no newer than 6.5.2 to be installed on the desktop in order to convert movies that can be viewed on the CLIE. However, Sony PSP (Playstation Portable) requires Quicktime 7 or newer to be installed on the desktop.
Due to Apple's infinite wisdom, Quicktime is neither forwards nor backwards compatible with itself, and neither can you have both installed on the same OS. In other words, you can't convert movies that work on both devices without having two machines, dual boot or virtualization software -- in other words, more than one Windows license.

And if you install iTunes, it will silently replace Quicktime with a newer version, without even giving you an option. Which breaks video conversion with Sony Image Converter. Sony is aware of it, but from what I've heard, Apple demands that Sony ponies up extra licensing fees for all existing devices if Sony are to support the newer format produced by the Quicktime codec, and refuses to provide backwards compatibility (i.e. letting the newer encoder produce movies playable with the old decoder). That's quite unreasonable, but not unexpected from Apple.
Lock-in and paying extra for upgrades is S.O.P. for Apple. Why do people like them again?

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22152628)

because they are screwing sony...

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (1)

Poorcku (831174) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152140)

why is he modded as troll? it is an obvious solution.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22152304)

He's modded as Troll because QuickTime is the media layer foundation of video editing apps on OS X. As much as you might despise the QuickTime Player application (and with good reason), there's a whole lot more to QuickTime than just that. Simply "not using" it isn't an option.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22152446)

Well, for the developers of those applications "not using" would be an option. With the additional benefit that it would also work on something besides OSX...

kill microsoft (5, Funny)

alen (225700) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151890)

i say we call the AG in every state to complain how Microsoft is disabling other apps with their updates

oh, wait

Re:kill microsoft (4, Interesting)

BeanThere (28381) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152232)

Not sure if you were being sarcastic, but to be fair, Vista broke numerous major applications for me, and ended up costing me hundreds of dollars in other software upgrades --- although that's definitely not equivalent to this, I knew going in that there could be application compatibility problems. Usually I'm behind Apple but this sounds like crap, it's not clear to me if it's a bug (i.e. 'honest but huge mistake') or what they're trying to achieve otherwise.

As always (3, Informative)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151894)

Never upgrade a production box without first upgrading on a test system. And NEVER NEVER upgrade mid project. If you're an individual and not a post production facility, test the upgrade on a separate partition or physical volume.

Or wait until everyone else gets the kinks worked out.

This is all common sense, and it's really not that hard. But you'd be surprised at the number of otherwise intelligent people that do stupid shit like upgrading a key component in the middle of a project. And if you absolutely must, do it on a cloned volume with backed up data.

Re:As always (5, Insightful)

Shadow-isoHunt (1014539) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151944)

You miss the point. Updating quicktime should *not* break adobe.

Re:As always (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22151988)

Nope, you missed the point.

Blindly upgrading is going to cause you pain.
Even if the actions of the upgrade aren't malicious (like they /might/ be here)

It's plain stupid and gonna make you look a n00b, of course, until you post on /. and everyone creates a whole mess out of it and you think you're important.

Re:As always (3, Informative)

Shadow-isoHunt (1014539) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152390)

Unless there is a reason to update. Quicktime has a horrible record of security. As of right now, see CVE-2008-0036, CVE-2008-0033, and CVE-2008-0032.

Re:As always (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152240)

Seriously. If I were Adobe, I'd be sending over my legal team.

Re:As always (2, Insightful)

hostyle (773991) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152286)

Sue first, ask questions later! Living the dream!

Re:As always (2, Funny)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152470)

I didn't say I'd sue, I'd send the lawyers over to Apple to make sure this gets resolved in a timely fashion so we don't have to resort to going to court. If they refuse to fix it, then well, maybe we'd have to go to court.

Re:As always (2, Informative)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152358)

You miss the point. Updating quicktime should *not* break adobe.
You don't understand software development, do you? Software, especially system software like QuickTime, is extremely complex to develop. A developer has to test their software updates against various popular configurations at the very least, and at best, you can test against several common configurations. You can't test every possible edge case -- there are just too many permutations. You'd never release.

After Effects is a professional video editing package from Adobe. Probably not even close to a majority of Apple's userbase is likely to have it on their machines. You can't expect a developer or even Apple to test against every package from every software house that develops for their platform. It would be quite impossible.

Your right that updating QuickTime shouldn't break other apps, but the posters' point was that since you can't expect Apple to test against every possible edge case, you have to ensure that when you update system-level software like QuickTime that you test those updates in your particular configuration before deploying. Especially on a production box (read: machine you use to make money.)

BTW--A great tool do that with is virtualization. Create a VM of your install and you can test new updates in the VM without harming anything. Just make a copy of the virtual disk. If it doesn't work, you restore from your backup with a simple copy. No muss, no fuss. Using a VM doesn't do well with some hardware-dependent apps, but at least you can test software interactions.

Re:As always (5, Insightful)

coats (1068) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152442)

You don't understand software development, do you?... You can't test every possible edge case

I am an environmental modeling software engineer with more than 20 years experience. Let me tell you: You damned well should engineer clean interfaces that can be properly tested. If Apple had done so, this kind of problem would not have occurred. What we are seeing with Apple here (and with DRM in general) is hacking, not engineering.

fwiw.

Re:As always (4, Insightful)

bkr1_2k (237627) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152462)

I would say most of your comment was valid if Adobe and Apple hadn't been in bed together for a long time. After Effects is, in fact, on a large portion of Apple's core user base. The newer users (like myself) are less likely to have it, though some of us do. I know of at least 15 people that have legitimate copies of it and none of them are professional video editors.

The other part of your comment makes sense, but is simply an unrealistic expectation for 95% of end-users. Yes there are people who would know how to use a VM to test new software before upgrading, but the simple fact is, they shouldn't have to. Apple fucked up. Now they should own up to it and simply fix the problem.

Re:As always (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22152506)

You don't understand software development, do you? Software, especially system software like QuickTime, is extremely complex to develop. A developer has to test their software updates...


Why are you making excuses? If this story were about Microsoft, there would be a chorus of Mac hipsters railing against them. I guess Mac breaks apps in a fashionable way.

Re:As always (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152668)

Why are you making excuses? If this story were about Microsoft, there would be a chorus of Mac hipsters railing against them. I guess Mac breaks apps in a fashionable way.
What advantage would Apple have in breaking a popular Adobe application written on their platform, especially when they don't have a competing product? (Say what you will about iMovie, but it is NOT a professional video editing tool nor was it ever intended to be.)

Microsoft can and has broken software [slashdot.org] on purpose.

Re:As always (5, Insightful)

Coopjust (872796) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152010)

Because every video editor has a test system? Not everyone has a non-production machine or the time/resources to test every update. That's Apple's job. And while you can't expect Apple to test compatibility with every OS X app, After Effects is a pretty major video app.

Can't Leopard have Automatic Updating turned on [apple.com] ?

Re:As always (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22152048)

I love you man, people like you make my tech support job much easier.

I'm serious.

When I can say "the answer is to restore from your backups".

YOU are the guy that say "ok, cool, just wanted to see if there was a workaround first". YOU are the one that is back in action less than an hour later instead of bitching about how Apple Quality control has gone down the shitter since last year.

Seriously, if I could give you a free computer I would.

Re:As always (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22152296)

they make your job easier because their having backups means that you having to actually do some work is not a situation that comes up very often. Tell me, are you really Wally [wikipedia.org] in disguise? Anyone can wipe & reinstall, good tech support gets you back on your feet without having to do that, or finds a way to extract everything you need to save from a crippled system before a wipe/reinstall.

You may also like to think about the fact that if everyone kept backups and never installed anything without testing it first you'd probably be out of a job.

Re:As always (3, Interesting)

davecb (6526) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152056)

That assumes that everyone is a sysadmin. I am, so the suggestion is usable, but what if I was an accountant? I get a mandatory training film on Sarbanes-Oxley that says "upgrade your quicktime", I click the icon, and my computer turns into a brick.

I'd claim the onus is on the distributor of quicktime, that they test their updates and certify that they have done due diligence to ensure that they are not shipping, for example, a rootkit.

And if they haven't, then let litigatious customers sue them into oblivion.

--dave

Re:As always (5, Funny)

ArsenneLupin (766289) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152278)

I get a mandatory training film on Sarbanes-Oxley that says "upgrade your quicktime", I click the icon, and my computer turns into a brick.
That's expected. Sarbanes-Oxley already turned your economy into a brick.

Re:As always (1)

acvh (120205) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152418)

"That assumes that everyone is a sysadmin. I am, so the suggestion is usable, but what if I was an accountant? I get a mandatory training film on Sarbanes-Oxley that says "upgrade your quicktime", I click the icon, and my computer turns into a brick."

Um, if you're an accountant then you aren't using After Effects to do video production work. Therefore you're computer isn't a brick. Even if you WERE making videos your computer isn't a brick, it just can't use After Effects to render quicktime movies.

The headline and summary for this one are worse than usual for Slashdot.

Re:As always (1)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152508)

I'm not assuming everyone is a sysadmin (c'mon, mac users?). Reread my post.

Maybe the problem is that I'm assuming that most users of Adobe AfterEffects are working professionals. The sorts that can't afford downtime on a project, so they wait until after the project is done before upgrading a major system component. As I said, this is simple stuff. Anyone who makes a living with AfterEffects or any other professional software should have learned this long ago. If you're a pro or a pro wannabe just learning this lesson, welcome to the real world.

Re:As always (5, Interesting)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152070)

It never ceases to amaze me how Apple fanboys are willing to blame everyone but Apple when Apple fucks up something. But oh no, Apple 'just works', and when they 'just stop working', it's always the user's or someone else's fault.

Hello. This is an update to a stable operating system, not some beta kernel module downloaded from Sourceforge.

Re:As always (2)

goldspider (445116) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152396)

Isn't that the truth!

Whenever a third-party Windows app turns up with a security hole, it's somehow because of Microsoft's inherantly insecure platform. On any other OS, it's the user's fault for not adequately researching/testing the app.

Not like this is a new phenomenon here on /. Is it some form of OS congnitive dissonance?

Re:As always (1)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152572)

Well, be amazed that software upgrades can fuck up your system, then. Do you think computers are magic boxes?

I said nothing one way or another as an Apple fanboi. I was writing as a film and video professional. Most of us know not to upgrade ANYTHING upon which our livelihoods depend until other braver souls test it first. If you didn't know this and now your project or deadline is FUBAR, it sucks to be you.

Re:As always (1)

bhima (46039) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152622)

I've been reading about this on the Apple forums. The vast majority of the comments put the blame squarely on Apple and have the expectation that Apple needs to fix this immediately.

So, I don't know where you came up with the ideas you've got or why you said what you said but you are clearly wrong.

Re:As always (1)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152150)

If you're an individual and not a post production facility, test the upgrade on a separate partition or physical volume.

If you're an individual and not a post production facility, what are the chances of you having an extra Mac lying around to test? I've gotten to the point where I just turn off the updates in Windows. Now I need to do that on the Mac, and wait for a Slashdot article to see if it's safe, or until something breaks. Bummer. Anybody got an old Avid machine with OS 9?

Re:As always (4, Funny)

carou (88501) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152276)

If you're an individual and not a post production facility, test the upgrade on a separate partition or physical volume.

If you're an individual and not a post production facility, what are the chances of you having an extra Mac lying around to test?

Good point, maybe instead you could perform your software testing on a separate partition or physical volume, or something.

Re:As always (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152518)

In other words, Apple/OS X "just works" and sucks just like all the other ones.

Just as bad as microsoft (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22151912)

Yet the apple fans cannot see it.

Re:Just as bad as microsoft (5, Insightful)

Travoltus (110240) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152072)

Perhaps they can't see it because Apple keeps deleting forum postings about it.

Re:Just as bad as microsoft (5, Insightful)

DXMikey (1053856) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152074)

We see and Winboi's can be just as bad - or worse. Its just that on Slashdot we like to jump to the most negative conclusion based on absolutely no evidence and take up space with 500 entry threads until someone posts a follow-up story that clarifies the issue. And no one in said 500 entry thread will have gotten it right in the first place - you and I included.

Re:Just as bad as microsoft (1)

Apiakun (589521) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152082)

Of course not! Quicktime disabled our vision.

Re:Just as bad as microsoft (5, Insightful)

Serengeti (48438) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152098)

If you're telling me that apple 'fanboys' are oblivious to their own problems, there must also be a term for what you are doing right now.

If you paid attention to any discussion about Leopard over the last few months, you'd see that there are a lot of Apple users (fans, even) that are unhappy with their Leopard experience. Well, so far anyways.

I don't think anyone who likes Apple would fight you on the argument that DRM is bad. Furthermore, that DRM is the cause of breaking legitimate programs is a pretty serious problem that only the most ignorant of Apple fanboys can dismiss.

And I don't think you'd argue me on the point that both sides of the table have ignorant schmucks on it.

Re:Just as bad as microsoft (2, Interesting)

Fred_A (10934) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152392)

I don't think anyone who likes Apple would fight you on the argument that DRM is bad. Furthermore, that DRM is the cause of breaking legitimate programs is a pretty serious problem that only the most ignorant of Apple fanboys can dismiss.
But wasn't every Mac user in the dTrace story saying that there wasn't an ounce of DRM in Mac OS except for iTunes ?
Is Quicktime part of iTunes nowaday ? (I don't use either)

Re:Just as bad as microsoft (1)

Goaway (82658) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152534)

QuickTime is a media playing framework. It's equivalent to DirectShow and such on Windows.

iTunes uses it to play things. On Windows, QuickTime is bundled with iTunes because iTunes is built on top of it.

As for DRM, I'm not sure how much of that code in iTunes and how much is in QuickTime, but some of the code is guaranteed to be in QuickTime. Perhaps most of it.

Re:Just as bad as microsoft (2, Insightful)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152430)

If you paid attention to any discussion about Leopard over the last few months, you'd see that there are a lot of Apple users (fans, even) that are unhappy with their Leopard experience. Well, so far anyways.
So the solution is that Windows (what Apples Marketroids call "PC") users who are unhappy with their experiences should get a Mac, but Apple users should be unhappy and continue to give Apple money.

I swear, the Pope must *wish* he was Steve Jobs.

Re:Just as bad as microsoft (0, Troll)

macshit (157376) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152100)

But that's the really scary thing: though Apple pulls stupid, short-sited, and user-hostile, stunts like this with some regularity, Microsoft is much, much, worse.

I'm confused (5, Funny)

Malevolent Tester (1201209) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151934)

Without kdawson's helpful comments, I can't make my mind up - was this elitist or egalitarian?

At the risk of being obvious... dtrace! (5, Funny)

davecb (6526) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151954)

Use the recent Dtrace-fix kernel module to get tracing working, and trace the offending program until you find the error. Then write a kenel module to fix that.

--dave

Re:At the risk of being obvious... dtrace! (5, Funny)

ricebowl (999467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152368)

Use the recent Dtrace-fix kernel module to get tracing working, and trace the offending program until you find the error. Then write a kenel module to fix that.

--dave

I'm sorry, Dave; I can't let you do that.

--Happle

Yay Apple (4, Insightful)

Nursie (632944) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151984)

Have there been enough examples of Apple bricking things, DRMing stuff and generally being total asshats for us to give up on the "Apple are enlightened, wonderful and friendly to techies" meme yet?

Apple make shiny things for fashion victims. Apple make good UIs. Apple seem to have a better security model than MS.

But it's time to admit that Apple are just as much coprporate MP/RI-AA whores as MS.

Re:Yay Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22152180)

amen to that brother!

Re:Yay Apple (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22152250)

To be honest they're not even that good. It's not as if MacOS and various Apple apps don't have their's fair share of security flaws. Prominently, Safari and iTunes have been fairly susceptible over the years. The only security benefits MacOS does have are the ones inherited from the underlying Unix architecture and certainly not from any innovation or competence in security at Apple.

Apple is a bad company all round, their hardware always has defaults from fire hazard magsafe adapters through to discolouring notebooks to easily scratched iPod screens to Safari on Windows being the buggiest piece of software released in the entire history of computing.

Their kit is appallingly expensive and feature lacking, and we keep being told it's the godlike interface that makes it so amazing, yet the iPhone is probably the most unusable phone in the in history of the universe for anyone wanting to send text messages (i.e. 99% of the population of Europe and Asia). MacOS is easy for things you're allowed to do but my god, just hope you don't need to do something like persistent static routes which is a mere one line command in Linux and Windows but has you hacking away at various startup scripts to do properly in MacOS. God at least most expensive manufacturers of items nowadays ensure their products are ethically produced to try and make you feel good about the purchase for some reason or another but it's not like you even get that with Apple's horrible non-green sweat shop produced crap.

There's really no reason to buy Apple kit, it's all round worse than standard PC kit bar one thing, it looks nice when it hasn't discoloured, scratched or died a cosmetic death to fingerprints on it's touch screen. That hardly seems a reasonable factor for purchasing something though unless you're a mindless fashion sheep.

Re:Yay Apple (2, Insightful)

bkr1_2k (237627) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152586)

Finally, someone who understands the good and the bad! I like Apple products, in general. I have used a Mac since OS X was released because I was tired of fighting firewire on my linux boxes. Over the last five years though, they have increasingly locked consumers out of functionality, starting most obviously with "breaking" (in my opinion) iTunes so it's basically just a useless front end for their store, which I don't really use. They make it difficult to burn bootable disks because it's a buried option under disk utility rather than an option in the standard disk burning utilities, and several other non-consumer friendly issues I've found.

I use Macs because they work more consistently and more cleanly, for me in general than a windows counterpart and i was just tired of using linux and getting almost what I wanted out of it.

For the most part Macs do "just work" and work well for most of the target market. What we all have to realize though is that Apple has a target market, and despite what they say it isn't the "power user", it's the teenage kids and the hipsters or the video/music editing market. With any company that has a target market like that, they're going to make decisions that aren't best for everyone, and generally are only best for the bottom line. They are no better and no worse than any other corporation, MS included. In the end, it's all about money for them. And honestly, it should be.

Could they still retain some good and try to buck the system, sure. In their own way, I'm sure they feel like they are, but all you have to do is look at google and see that after a certain point, it doesn't matter what your original intentions were, it's impossible to "do no evil" in all aspects of business. So Apple, like all other companies, make sacrifices. Usually those sacrifices come at our (the consumers) expense.

That's why we don't use Quicktime... (5, Insightful)

DXMikey (1053856) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151986)

We use VLC. Now if the Handbrake folks would get a clue and realize that 0.9.1 fuxxors (I haven't got to use that one for a while) .mkv files and stop blaming it on QT or VLC we'd be happier.

Mac - best damn video editing platform in the world.

Seriously - Apple in my experience pulls posts when their veracity can't be verified. Lord knows they keep plenty of very negative postings on their forums when the bug or whatever issue it is, is a known issue.

I'd stay tuned on this one - Apple has no reason to screw up 3rd party video editors and I certainly wouldn't build a conspiracy theory that its to boost their Video Rentals.

I bet this one is fixed pretty soon. I'll ante $0.25 on the bet.

Re:That's why we don't use Quicktime... (1)

ThinkingInBinary (899485) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152088)

0.9.1 fuxxors (I haven't got to use that one for a while) .mkv files

Lemme guess, seeking forward works, but seeking backward sends you back to the beginning of the file?

That happens with mplayer on Linux too. But clearly it's a bug in QuickTime, VLC, and mplayer, not HandBrake.

Re:That's why we don't use Quicktime... (1)

DXMikey (1053856) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152174)

I wish it were that simple. .mkv worked under 10.4.10 with the same version of VLC. They won't even play in MCE with the appropriate decoders anymore. HOWEVER - if the issue isn't with Handbrake and VLC hasn't updated versions in a while (eliminating both VLC and QT as culprits) I didn't mention that I'm using Leopard and in all seriousness have to hold 10.5.x responsible.

Ok - so the Handbrake team should clarify this, acknowledging it or dismissing it with facts to the contrary. But if you read the forums there I think its been shown that QT and VLC are likely not the issue. And they don't work in MPlayer under OS X either.

No biggie - .mkv hasn't exactly caught on yet. Right now its the only container that will allow H.264 Mpeg4 to play nice with AC-3 audio.

Re:That's why we don't use Quicktime... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22152646)

So you're using VLC to edit videos, add effects, and export the files out for disc authoring? It would help if people around here were aware that CREATING content is different from WATCHING or RIPPING content.

Re:That's why we don't use Quicktime... (3, Informative)

Ohreally_factor (593551) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152688)

Just to clarify: It's not the quicktime player that is the issue, it's the quicktime subsystem that is integral to AfterEffects and other pro video applications. Substituting VLC will not solve this. The issue really is much more serious. Bad fuck up on Apple's part. However, I don't think this is really going to bother most video professionals, because they will have waited to upgrade (to see what potential problems might crop up), or they're testing on non-production boxes.

Heath Ledger is dead (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22151992)

I guess he is having cowboy buttsex in hell.

Sodomy-eeeeee!

I don't see the problem.. (5, Funny)

stormguard2099 (1177733) | more than 6 years ago | (#22151998)

Renting and watching videos should be enough for anyone

Let me get this straight.. (5, Interesting)

cybrthng (22291) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152008)

Once you install quicktime updates on OSX you can't un-install them without re-installing the OS? WTF is all this hoopla about Windows Containing DRM/WMP11 crap but quicktime being worse? I mean WMP11/Vista DRM doesn't stop you from using Pro tools EVER. WMP11 is about 20 megs of code sitting around that can be replaced with another player.

Being a windows user another thing i can't stand is the stupid Apple Updater. No matter how you tell the program you don't want the f&**(@ installed it tries to update itself any chance it gets even if you just watch a quicktime.

I don't want iTunes, don't want Quicktime, don't want a broken browser and i certainly wouldn't support an OS that meant upgrades to a media player could potentially break your purchased apps functionality with the only recourse being a re-install. Thats so WIN NT 4 which is so TEN YEARS AGO.

QT isn't (just) a media player (5, Informative)

RJabelman (550626) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152076)

Quicktime is in fact Mac OS's Audio and Video subsystem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quicktime#QuickTime_framework [wikipedia.org]

It's much more likely that updates to the underlying API are what's breaking After Effects etc, than updates to the media player bit.

Then Tell Apple to break it out.. (5, Insightful)

cybrthng (22291) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152182)

More the reason to support my argument and then some. We have foreign nations struggling to file suit against MS because of the ties that WMP has into Windows yet your sitting here telling me "QT is more then a media player" that it ties into the subsystem of OSX and once its there, you can't do anything about it except re-install?

Poor design if you ask me and thats a hell of a lot more vendor lockin than what MS does.

I'm not defending MS either, just trying to understand wtf is going on. I was about to give OSX the light of day but it doesn't seem to be any more practical than upgrading to Vista.

It's not vendor lockin (5, Informative)

alexhmit01 (104757) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152532)

Quicktime is Apple's underlying media subsystem. It's not bolted on. The Quicktime Player is bolted on to wrap the functions and play videos. The Quicktime Pro program that they sell enables editing. There is no lock-in, because anyone can provide a media layer, and anyone can access Quicktime. Even Realbasic Apps can bundle Quicktime and do whatever they want. You could write your own media player with it's own DRM and send content to Quicktime (although hackers would grab the unencrypted layer inside of Quicktime).

There should be a way to roll-back the Quicktime update, because the Package should limit changes to the Quicktime Framework and Quicktime Player apps, but I don't know that there isn't Quicktime code everywhere. It should still exist, but it's not a media player, and it's not vendor lockin.

MS gets nailed for Vendor lock-in for bundling not core programs and not letting them be removed. On a Mac, if I don't want Safari, Quicktime Player, iTunes, etc., I just drag the Application to the trash and I never see it again. I still have the underlying OS Components of WebKit (I think that it's an OS Level Framework now) and Quicktime, but I don't have the applications. Microsoft REFUSED to allow the deletion of IE/WMP, and when forced by the courts to provide a version without them, removed the underlying OS components to break Windows.

That's why MS's bundling behavior was problematic, and Apples not so much. Apple lets you remove applications you want without hosing the OS. MS refused to let you remove the application without removing the OS Components, and you NEED media capability even if you don't want WMP, and you NEED the HTML component, because many applications use it once you make it a standard OS Component.

Re:Then Tell Apple to break it out.. (1)

Goaway (82658) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152608)

More the reason to support my argument and then some. We have foreign nations struggling to file suit against MS because of the ties that WMP has into Windows yet your sitting here telling me "QT is more then a media player" that it ties into the subsystem of OSX and once its there, you can't do anything about it except re-install?
There's no "once it's there". It's always there, it's part of the OS, just like DirectShow is on Windows. The QuickTime Player is just a lightweight GUI built on top of the QuickTime libraries, much like the pre-v7.0 Windows Media Players. Updating QuickTime does not mean updating the player, it's an OS update. Very few systems that I know of have much support for downgrading OS components once they're updated other than re-installing the OS.

Re:QT isn't (just) a media player (1)

bhtooefr (649901) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152280)

But DirectShow (the core of Windows Media Player) is the Windows media subsystem, too.

To further that (1)

phorm (591458) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152434)

Quick to OSX is somewhat akin to what Internet Explorer is/was to Windows. It has in some cases deep ties with the OS, and modifying it therefore can change the behavior of the OS or other apps.

Re:Let me get this straight.. (1)

Doctor_Jest (688315) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152156)

No, WMP11 may not stop you from using pro tools, but the Vista approved DRM infested video drivers WILL.

Seriously... stop using apple software... it's obvious you hate it.. :)

Re:Let me get this straight.. (5, Informative)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152334)

Actually. Yes you can. It's not as simple as a quick "Roll Back this install" but by no means is it as impossible to revert as some programs in XP.

Step 1: Download 7.3.1 for what ever version of OSX you're using. http://www.apple.com/support/downloads/ [apple.com]
Step 2: Copy the installer package to the desktop.
Step 3: Right click and "Show Package Contents", open "Contents"
Step 4: Open "QuickTime_Leopard.dist" in a text editor (Not sure what it is called in other versions.
Step 5: Scroll down to "newerQuickTimePresent()" (All Apple pre and postflight scripts are just that, scripts. You can write them in bash, perl, ruby, python, php, etc.)
Step 6: Change "return false" to "return true". Or Comment it out, etc
Step 7: Install.

Re:Let me get this straight.. (4, Funny)

Fred_A (10934) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152480)

I had hoped it would be something like

vi ~/.quicktime/prefs

change
KillVideoEditors = yes
to
KillVideoEditors = no

Restart Quicktime.

Damn Macs, always so complicated. ;)

Re:Let me get this straight.. (2, Funny)

Upphew (676261) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152352)

Being a windows user another thing i can't stand is the stupid Apple Updater. No matter how you tell the program you don't want the f&**(@ installed it tries to update itself any chance it gets even if you just watch a quicktime.

Hear! Hear! And that damn process can't be killed. And it takes all cpu time it can get. Almost cooked my balls with laptop!

Re:Let me get this straight.. (1)

MrNemesis (587188) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152490)

WMP itself might only be 20MB of code, but that'll mostly be the GUI. The nuts'n'bolts of WMP lies inside DirectX, namely DirectShow, which is the accelerated API that codecs use for displaying moving images. Ever notice how when WMP b0rks playing videos they generally won't work in MPC or PowerDVD or any of the other DShow-based players either, yet will work with VLC or mPlayer (which have self-contained codec libs)?

In essence, they're all multimedia frameworks - DirectShow, Quicktime, GStreamer to name but three. The GUI that lies on top of them is largely irrelevant. They'll all take a specific input at one end, decode it into an internal format and let it pass through a bunch of common filters, until it ends up on your screen (or through your speakers in the case of audio frameworks). That way you only need to code most things once, and you just need a H.264 > DShow codec instead of an H.264 > NotDShow + nine million filters that are already part of every other NotDShow codec.

Not trying to absolve them here; if this is true, then Apple are idiots for letting this pass through testing and I pity anyone this lands on. But the crux of the matter is that multimedia frameworks are fecking complicated, more so when "defective by design" philosophy is applied. I don't know how much AfterEffects relies on the QT framework (there are loads of audio and video editing apps that eschew OS-specific frameworks in lieu of ones that might be faster, or more royalty free, or more customisable, etc), but it's obvious that something essential to it does.

Re:Let me get this straight.. (1)

leehwtsohg (618675) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152600)

Because you can't abuse a monopoly you don't have.

Not that apple is any less evil, its just slightly more legal, and won't help them as much.

Isn't that, like, Illegal ? (3, Interesting)

UberHoser (868520) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152018)

Not trying to me a smacktard here, but if it purposely goes out and wacks another app, can't Adobe sue ?

it is in Minnesota (1)

swschrad (312009) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152188)

if Adobe has offices there, and a user there complains, they can take it to state court.

2 years in cooking school at Lino Lakes and $5000 is the shot for each offense.

Re:Isn't that, like, Illegal ? (1)

Goaway (82658) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152636)

Maybe. That's not really relevant since it's not like this was done purposely.

Re:Isn't that, like, Illegal ? (1)

z0idberg (888892) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152650)

I would make that "never attribute to malice..." quote but I would have to punch myself in the nuts because that is waaaaay overused around here.

Two points... (5, Interesting)

Aphrika (756248) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152038)

Firstly, fair enough not being to uninstall an update to a product, but surely you'd expect to be able to fix the problem by uninstalling QuickTime? Is this problem caused by Apple virtually integrating it into the OS on Macs?

Secondly, I've never been happy with the way Apple seem to always deny issues by removing forum posts. This isn't the first time it's happened. I'd like to see them acknowledging their mistake and issuing a fix, rather than sweeping it under the carpet and pretending it doesn't exist.

Re:Two points... (1)

Goaway (82658) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152664)

QuickTime is OS X's media playing framework. You can't uninstall it just like you can't uninstall DirectShow on Windows.

And even if you could uninstall it, that would mean your video editing up would certainly not work, since it's using QuickTime to do its work for it.

The real problem? (2, Interesting)

Foolicious (895952) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152118)

Is the problem with, as some forum postings have suggested, the upgrade now checking for DRM on all .MOVs every 10 minutes which fubars the render of any MOVs? Or is it something else? The initial info makes it seem like any and ALL renders would fail; however, if it's only impacting certain formats, it may not impact every composition/project, etc. on which you're working. And I hate rendering anyways.

Re:The real problem? (1)

maxair_mike (1154515) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152256)

In addition, wouldn't you be using Premier Pro for video editing, and After Effects for special FX, custom transitions, and text FX? Of course, I've never been able to get After Effects to work properly on both my XP machine at home or on my MBP, at least for the trial version, thus why I haven't bought the full version.

Damn! (1)

thatskinnyguy (1129515) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152120)

Can't make a video in After Effects. So while I'm waiting for the bug fix, why not rent a movie from iTunes?

OH MY GOD!!! It's full of DRM!!! Run for your lives!!

What has this got to do with DRM? (4, Insightful)

carou (88501) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152166)

All the error message says is "You do not have permission to open this file" - you know, like file permissions, like chmod. It could just be that Quicktime has accidentally set the wrong flags on a temporary file.

There are a lot of people very quick to jump on the bandwagon, saying "DRM this" and "Defective By Design that" but I see nothing to suggest this has anything to do with DRM. Even less to suggest this was a deliberate move by Apple. (And even then, the headline "Disables Video Editing Apps" is sensationalist - only one application seems to be affected).

So what remains as fact: Apple have a introduced a bug in an update to a shared library - so what? It's hardly the first time this has happened, on any OS. And maybe not even that - perhaps it's even possible that QuickTime is correct, and the change has just exposed a latent bug in AfterEffects? We just don't have the data to make a judgment, so perhaps everyone could calm down and stop acting like Apple is chained to Hollywood and making the sky fall in.

Re:What has this got to do with DRM? (1)

DXMikey (1053856) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152272)

This should mod up to a "5". Most intelligently written post on the subject so far.

Except mine, of course. ;)

Re:What has this got to do with DRM? (5, Funny)

mh1997 (1065630) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152312)

So what remains as fact: Apple have a introduced a bug in an update to a shared library - so what? It's hardly the first time this has happened, on any OS. And maybe not even that - perhaps it's even possible that QuickTime is correct, and the change has just exposed a latent bug in AfterEffects? We just don't have the data to make a judgment, so perhaps everyone could calm down and stop acting like Apple is chained to Hollywood and making the sky fall in.
I agree - so what? What's the big deal with this, it's not like anyone expected something from Apple to just work.

Apple's finally done it (5, Insightful)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152190)

They took the two main selling points of a Mac: (1) "it just works", and (2) it being a great platform for creative work, and sacrificed *both* of those things on the altar of DRM.

I think they need to get back to "thinking different".

Re:Apple's finally done it (1)

ThaReetLad (538112) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152404)

A colleague of mine recently discovered a CD image of an old windows 3.11 drive, which had word for windows 2 on it. He put the CD in his Vista box and double clicked on Word and it just ran. That's binary software from 1989 running unmodified on the latest OS. How much mac or linux software could make the same claim? "It just works"? Don't make me laugh.

KDawson hates Apple (2, Informative)

stewbacca (1033764) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152198)

The article states this is in QT 7.4. My computer just popped up with the 7.6 update. Does anyone care to investigate why the two quick updates, or should we just leave this paranoid story on here because it's cool to rip on Apple?

Re:KDawson hates Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22152234)

I'd go with the "rip on Apple" option. It is -so- cool.

Conversion (2, Interesting)

debrain (29228) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152244)

Notwithstanding contractual consent by the person installing the program, this sounds like conversion [wikipedia.org] : the unwanted and intentional interference with another's goods. In this case, a Mac owner is 1. unable to use the programs they otherwise would be able to use, having installed the upgrade to Quicktime; and 2. unable to undo the harm caused by the installation of the program without the time intensive and expensive reinstallation of the operating system.

Even though it is technically given by the click-through agreement, I believe consent is tenuous; intentionally and willfully misleading individuals about the value of the upgrade (or tying [wikipedia.org] DRM to the upgrade's necessity, such as the constant bombardment of news that generates fear over security holes) undermines a person's ability to consent - there is a fundamental mistake in the formation of the contract: Quicktime upgrades should not break other software. This is especially true if you are a developer.

One would imagine some legal remedy to this. The facts as I have just read them indicate a behaviour that is grossly unfair to consumers, nigh an appalling disregard for the preferences and rights of ones' own customers.

All that being said, I'm certain this will be remedied soon, or customers will flock to alternatives (or form the incentive for others to create alternatives).

Apple does this all the time (4, Informative)

Stele (9443) | more than 6 years ago | (#22152320)

Apple is notorious for stuff like this. They have all sorts of shared components (like QuickTime, FxPlug, etc) that they update independently from each other. I develop for Final Cut Pro and Motion, and the last time I installed a beta for them, they installed a component which broke QuickTime. Now I can't launch the QuickTime player, iTunes, iMovie, or any other app that relies on certain QuickTime codecs, without them crashing immediately. Recent updates to QuickTime haven't fixed the problem either. And of course you can't uninstall anything without reinstalling the OS. Look around - there are plenty of people asking for the "Quicktime deinstaller" which does exist but has its own problems.

Between stuff like this and having to essentially port my code every time they release a new version of OS X, and the constant switching between processor architectures, APIs, UI design requirements, etc. all I can say is it REALLY sucks being a Mac developer.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>