OS X Snow Leopard Tidbits: On Demand QuickTime 7 Installation [Archive]

MacRumors

Jun 30, 2009, 04:35 PM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/30/os-x-snow-leopard-tidbits-wwan-card-support-built-in-quicktime-7-installation/)

Since the release (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/26/apple-seeds-os-x-snow-leopard-build-10a394-to-developers/) of the OS X Snow Leopard Build 10A394 developer seed late last week, users have been digging through the new version looking for and documenting changes and additions.

The introduction of QuickTime X in Snow Leopard brings a streamlined interface (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/07/snow-leopard-quicktime-x-interface-and-other-changes/) lacking some of the functionality found in QuickTime 7. It has been reported that earlier Snow Leopard builds would prompt the user to install QuickTime 7 and automatically do so upon command when attempting to open a file supported only by QuickTime 7. The QuickTime 7 functionality, however, was reportedly incomplete in earlier builds. Build 10A394 now permits full installation of QuickTime 7 in this manner and offers the full suite of QuickTime 7 Pro features that currently require a separate paid license on Leopard and Tiger.

Article Link: OS X Snow Leopard Tidbits: WWAN Card Support Built-In, QuickTime 7 Installation (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/30/os-x-snow-leopard-tidbits-wwan-card-support-built-in-quicktime-7-installation/)

dagamer34

Jun 30, 2009, 04:39 PM

Wow, video is already gone.

chr1s60

Jun 30, 2009, 04:41 PM

Nice use of the Dock in that vid :) Kind of interesting about QuickTime.

Sky Blue

Jun 30, 2009, 04:51 PM

haha, what's up with the music in that video.

BJB Productions

Jun 30, 2009, 04:52 PM

haha, what's up with the music in that video.

Yeah, that is what I was thinking.

stainlessliquid

Jun 30, 2009, 04:52 PM

does flip4mac work with it now?

manu chao

Jun 30, 2009, 04:55 PM

Is QT 7 following the fate of iMovie 6?

elppa

Jun 30, 2009, 04:55 PM

I thought once installed it would open the file you were trying to open in Quicktime X. That would be a slicker way of handling it. The “Do you want to open the movie in Quicktime player ??” message maybe suggests a final update coming.

haha, what's up with the music in that video.

I think it's a new internet meme - Snow Leopard videos require a euro techno soundtrack.

Is QT 7 following the fate of iMovie 6?
In that it is being phased out for a newer, and ultimately better version?

iMovie '06 -> iMovie '08 (iMovie '06 offered concurrently)
iMovie '09 (better than both)

Quicktime 7 Player -> Quicktime X Player (Quicktime 7 Player offered concurrently)
Quicktime X Player 2 (better than both, possibly)

Both iMovie (the very first iApp) and especially Quicktime were probably in need of a rewrite. Remember - we can't see the code. We have no idea how hard it would be to add the kind of features Apple wants to add in the future to the existing codebases of either app.

Think Finder as well — rewritten from scratch. Why would Apple do that? Maybe because the kind of features Apple wants to add in the future wouldn't be easy to add to the codebase of the Leopard Finder. Of course you can't run two Finders simultaneously, so they just kept the UI and feature set pretty much the same.

Personally I think Apple's being really smart. I like this approach better than keeping hacking on functionality to already bloated, complex software. I think a bit of patience may result in rich rewards later. Software is a process, it's not like a book. It is never done. Yet sometimes there comes a time to step back and take stock.

I hope the same due dilligence is take with iTunes. I'd gladly forgoe a few features to have a really responsive, nicely polished Mac app. It beachballs way more than almost all Apple apps (and most third party apps) on my system.

Juo100

Jun 30, 2009, 05:03 PM

tyr2

Jun 30, 2009, 05:11 PM

Anyone know if MPEG2 support will still be a paid add-on in Snow Leopard?

I'm assuming it will, but it would be nice if it was included :)

holbie

Jun 30, 2009, 05:14 PM

I suspected that this has been addressed before (and thanks to MRoogle (http://mroogle.edesignuk.com)), I now know it's not news (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7911244&postcount=27) to anyone here, but I wanted to share what I just posted on the comments for the YouTube video (in case it's pulled down).

"This is neat. When one opens a PPC app in Snow Leopard (and they haven't installed Rosetta yet) Software Update offers to download and install Rosetta.

This is very slick, and I look forward to Apple slimming down installs more, and letting users get components as needed."

There you go, now use MRoogle! :-)

lostfan916

Jun 30, 2009, 05:17 PM

There's also a new iPhone option in the Network Prefs Pane for tethering.

kristoffer4

Jun 30, 2009, 05:23 PM

does flip4mac work with it now?

I would also like to know this :)

BornAgainMac

Jun 30, 2009, 05:27 PM

Can't Quicktime X just replace the older Quicktime with the Pro features and include all it's Quicktime 7 goodness.

radiogorillaz

Jun 30, 2009, 05:29 PM

So half-way through the vid I had to jump up from my desk and do hand swirlies and bob my head to the music and while i was doing that I missed the significance of what they were showing and why it mattered.

my bad :(

swingerofbirch

Jun 30, 2009, 05:30 PM

Wkaemena

Jun 30, 2009, 05:37 PM

Most important would be to support the QTVR format even so the developers are running to Flash panoramas. There is a lot still outside which should run under 10 in the final version. Now it runs only "sometimes" but not in the player:mad:

nick9191

Jun 30, 2009, 05:40 PM

Seems like a lot of work for Apple to create this new on demand installer when they could just presumably add the functionality to Quicktime X.

I didn't know there was that much functionality in QuickTime that there was much to take out! What types of video formats can it now not handle?

Also anyone who has the SL preview, does QuickTime video recording using iSight use the GPU and not raise the fans to ridiculously high levels and high CPU temperatures on MacBooks now?
QuickTime Pro was quite a powerful application. Just to give you some idea on it's feature set http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCOmWjn7m-Q

QuickTime Pro also offered a lot of codecs that cost apple licensing fees. Rather than add to the cost of OS X, they made a pro version of QuickTime and charged to upgrade. Most of these nobody uses anymore and have been surpassed in favour of H.264.

It's better for Apple to offer QuickTime 7 and X concurrently, rather than delay QuickTime X for 2 years until they can complete the feature set, many of which few people use.

mdriftmeyer

Jun 30, 2009, 05:41 PM

I thought once installed it would open the file you were trying to open in Quicktime X. That would be a slicker way of handling it. The “Do you want to open the movie in Quicktime player ??” message maybe suggests a final update coming.

I think it's a new internet meme - Snow Leopard videos require a euro techno soundtrack.

In that it is being phased out for a newer, and ultimately better version?

iMovie '06 -> iMovie '08 (iMovie '06 offered concurrently)
iMovie '09 (better than both)

Quicktime 7 Player -> Quicktime X Player (Quicktime 7 Player offered concurrently)
Quicktime X Player 2 (better than both, possibly)

Both iMovie (the very first iApp) and especially Quicktime were probably in need of a rewrite. Remember - we can't see the code. We have no idea how hard it would be to add the kind of features Apple wants to add in the future to the existing codebases of either app.

Think Finder as well — rewritten from scratch. Why would Apple do that? Maybe because the kind of features Apple wants to add in the future wouldn't be easy to add to the codebase of the Leopard Finder. Of course you can't run two Finders simultaneously, so they just kept the UI and feature set pretty much the same.

Personally I think Apple's being really smart. I like this approach better than keeping hacking on functionality to already bloated, complex software. I think a bit of patience may result in rich rewards later. Software is a process, it's not like a book. It is never done. Yet sometimes there comes a time to step back and take stock.

I hope the same due dilligence is take with iTunes. I'd gladly forgoe a few features to have a really responsive, nicely polished Mac app. It beachballs way more than almost all Apple apps (and most third party apps) on my system.

All apps are being rewritten to fully leverage two finally modernized [read: no longer crippled for Carbon's sake] versions of Foundation Kit and AppKit.

Everyone will note the changes after Snow Leopard has arrived with the updates to the Reference Library:

https://developer.apple.com/referencelibrary/Cocoa/index.html

deconstruct60

Jun 30, 2009, 05:43 PM

Both iMovie (the very first iApp) and especially Quicktime were probably in need of a rewrite. Remember - we can't see the code. We have no idea how hard it would be to add the kind of features Apple wants to add in the future to the existing codebases of either app.

Think Finder as well — rewritten from scratch. Why would Apple do that? Maybe because the kind of features Apple wants to add in the future wouldn't be easy to add to the codebase of the Leopard Finder

Unless Apple is dropping Quicktime for Windows, Quicktime is different from the iApps in that it is "portable" across platforms. They probably are in need of refactor to support Vista/Win7 and Mac OS X 10.5/10.6 than the notion of the Finder rewrite.

iTunes is layered on Quicktime so can't see how Quicktime X stays Mac OS X only.

The veneer that is the GUI on top of Quicktime player/pro may be what has been changed more so than Quicktime itself.

str1f3

Jun 30, 2009, 05:44 PM

Is QT 7 following the fate of iMovie 6?

I hope not because QuickTime Pro was extremely useful. I just don't get why  would cripple features of QuickTime X. This was a great and useful product. Besides the interface and maybe playback efficiency, QuickTime looks as if it took a step backwards.

makkystyle

Jun 30, 2009, 05:50 PM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/30/os-x-snow-leopard-tidbits-wwan-card-support-built-in-quicktime-7-installation/)

Since the release (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/26/apple-seeds-os-x-snow-leopard-build-10a394-to-developers/) of the OS X Snow Leopard Build 10A394 developer seed late last week, users have been digging through the new version looking for and documenting changes and additions...

Article Link: OS X Snow Leopard Tidbits: WWAN Card Support Built-In, QuickTime 7 Installation (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/30/os-x-snow-leopard-tidbits-wwan-card-support-built-in-quicktime-7-installation/)

The article link still references the pulled information:

http://www.macrumors.com/2009/06/30/os-x-snow-leopard-tidbits-wwan-card-support-built-in-quicktime-7-installation/

Why was this (the portion about WWAN compatibility built in to the OS) cut from the article, this was the most interesting piece of info about SL I've seen yet. Apple legal contact you guys?

elppa

Jun 30, 2009, 06:08 PM

Unless Apple is dropping Quicktime for Windows, Quicktime is different from the iApps in that it is "portable" across platforms. They probably are in need of refactor to support Vista/Win7 and Mac OS X 10.5/10.6 than the notion of the Finder rewrite.
Apple probably apply similar methodologies across all the software they develop, regardless of whether it is cross platform or Mac only - This is why I was drawing the comparison between the approach with iMovie (where the previous (feature rich) version was offered alongside the new (cleaner) version) and Quicktime.

iTunes is layered on Quicktime so can't see how Quicktime X stays Mac OS X only.
I would be surprised if Apple doesn't have internal Quicktime X builds for Windows, there is just no need to release them. That's because whilst Quicktime on the Mac is needed for iLife, iWork, Pro Apps etc. Quicktime on Windows is only really needed for iTunes. So there's no need to say or do anything until a version of iTunes based on Quicktime X is available. When does Apple announce new versions of iTunes… September. When will Mac OS X Snow Leopard officialy ship… Septemebr. There's no reason at all why they won't do a simultaneous cross platform release.

I suspect at the media event in September we will see 64 bit Quicktime X for Windows, alongside a new iTunes for Mac and Windows which is based upon Quicktime X. If not in September then soon after.

The veneer that is the GUI on top of Quicktime player/pro may be what has been changed more so than Quicktime itself.
This far from the case, both from what I have read and been told. Quicktime X is a under the hood overhaul.

DsurioN

Jun 30, 2009, 06:15 PM

This is kinda off-topic, but would anyone happen to have the 20th century voyage screensaver shown in the video? The file is MIA on the developer's site.
:D

seashellz

Jun 30, 2009, 06:26 PM

QT Pro included? Not bad-even thought ive never figured out what it does better than the basic
adding QT MPEG 2 would be really nice

Nicky G

Jun 30, 2009, 06:28 PM

Jethryn Freyman

Jun 30, 2009, 06:37 PM

What formats are opened by QT7 that aren't read by QTX?

TheWarIsNotOver

Jun 30, 2009, 06:38 PM

Good to know that they are not adding 3G network to the MacBook, hehe, I just bought a new one xD

cg0def

Jun 30, 2009, 06:39 PM

Can someone specifically reference or list the "missing" features that might require a Quicktime 7 install? I care much less about basic edit functions, and more about codecs that might no longer be available for playback or export in a "standard" install of Quicktime X, versus 7 Pro. Thanks in advance!

.qtz is the first format that I see that cannot be played with QTX. All the standard video formats work just fine and with perian installed you can play pretty much everything you can think of.

Porco

Jun 30, 2009, 06:40 PM

Am I the only QuickTime user who, upon reading this story about QuickTime X and QuickTime 7 became slightly bamboozled by the numerous mentions of QuickTime so frequently in one paragraph, and so had to re-read the story about QuickTime X in Snow Leopard and its relationship to QuickTime 7 about 7 times until I finally understood what the paragraph with all the mentions about QuickTime in it actually meant at all?

(sorry, it's very hot, I think my brain has fried)

elppa

Jun 30, 2009, 06:41 PM

Jayomat

Jun 30, 2009, 06:41 PM

hmmm... i have no idea what this is all about, but i cannot image to leave VLC. most of the "incredible" UI improvements have been standard for VLC for ages.... well not exactly the same but, for example, i don't see the disappearing bars beeing that revolutionary. why would i want to watch a full-length-movie in window-mode? i wouldn't, so how do i benefit from something i already have in fullscreen....

don't take it to serious, the improvements are nice, but VLC just plays EVERYTHING.

NinjaHERO

Jun 30, 2009, 07:49 PM

We just keep inching closer and closer to September. Can't wait for SL

yonis

Jun 30, 2009, 07:50 PM

This is kinda off-topic, but would anyone happen to have the 20th century voyage screensaver shown in the video? The file is MIA on the developer's site.
:D
You can get it here: http://www.zugakousaku.com/index.php?ref=works-20th-osx--en

skellener

Jun 30, 2009, 07:55 PM

Please - for all that is holy in this world - please still have the "frame counter" built into the QT Player!!!!!

It took over a decade for Apple to finally include it (not the timecode counter - the frame counter!!) If it's gone that will majorly suck for all of us that use QT in production. :(

raf66

Jun 30, 2009, 08:49 PM

Yeah, I cracked up at the music in that vid. It made me think of Conan "Vroom Vroom Get the Potty Stotted" O'Brien.

Chase R

Jun 30, 2009, 09:22 PM

Why can't they just add more functionality to QT X? So far QT X seems like a bust to me...

It better be able to handle MKVs!

ibjoshua

Jun 30, 2009, 09:32 PM

Why can't they just add more functionality to QT X? So far QT X seems like a bust to me...

It better be able to handle MKVs!
As far as I'm aware, no one has yet seen a "QuickTime X Pro" -- but there must be one coming.

deconstruct60

Jun 30, 2009, 09:41 PM

I would be surprised if Apple doesn't have internal Quicktime X builds for Windows, there is just no need to release them. That's because whilst Quicktime on the Mac is needed for iLife, iWork, Pro Apps etc. Quicktime on Windows is only really needed for iTunes. So there's no need to say or do anything until a version of iTunes based on Quicktime X is available. When does Apple announce new versions of iTunes… September. When will Mac OS X Snow Leopard officialy ship… Septemebr. There's no reason at all why they won't do a simultaneous cross platform release.

What flawed in the process here is that there are external releases for the Mac OS X stuff. Limited distribution, but it is external. For Windows they have to release on XP , Vista, and Windows 7. No known beta tests? Just ship on the same time frame as the stuff that has been beta tested for last year or so.

Maybe Apple has some NDA that is working better for Windows than it is for Mac OS X. (e.g., using a diverse Microsoft testing lab). However, totally off the radar scope and then surprise, it is on the market.... usually doesn't lead to low defect software.

If refactoring Quicktime get rid of the portions of Carbon that made it a pain to port that would make some sense that the internals changed. The forerunner of Cocoa was Yellowbox ( Next/Openstep libraries) which was multiplatform.

For standard audio/video formats it would make more sense to hand that off to OS services so can be dispatched to more effective decoders (e.g., standard video decoding which may go to CPU/GPU/etc. depending upon what hardware is present. ). Opens a question if QT is needed on Windows long term.

Guru Evi

Jun 30, 2009, 10:49 PM

As far as I'm aware, no one has yet seen a "QuickTime X Pro" -- but there must be one coming.

There will be no QuickTime X Pro - Apple is discontinuing the Pro version (at least for now). The good thing is that certain features (like export features) and new features (HTTP streaming and stream saving) are going to be available for everyone without that 'trialware' tag begging you to buy Pro. The bad thing is that certain low-used features (like the cut/copy/paste editing) will be removed in favor of the more simpler trimming feature.

The more advanced QuickTime options have been implemented by other (better) tools in the same price range or alternatively by programs from the iLife suite.

I heard this from a source within Apple close to the QuickTime team.

twoodcc

Jun 30, 2009, 11:35 PM

good. i'll have to play around more with quicktime

joro

Jun 30, 2009, 11:42 PM

I would also like to know this :)

Me Three (Flip4Mac Compatibility)!

iMaggot

Jul 1, 2009, 12:10 AM

Can't Quicktime X just replace the older Quicktime with the Pro features and include all it's Quicktime 7 goodness.

Agreed

ttech10

Jul 1, 2009, 02:12 AM

does flip4mac work with it now?

I'm pretty sure Flip4Mac has always worked with it.

I've been using it since I installed Snow Leopard a few days after WWDC.

Ironduke

Jul 1, 2009, 02:21 AM

There will be no QuickTime X Pro - Apple is discontinuing the Pro version (at least for now). The good thing is that certain features (like export features) and new features (HTTP streaming and stream saving) are going to be available for everyone without that 'trialware' tag begging you to buy Pro. The bad thing is that certain low-used features (like the cut/copy/paste editing) will be removed in favor of the more simpler trimming feature.

The more advanced QuickTime options have been implemented by other (better) tools in the same price range or alternatively by programs from the iLife suite.

I heard this from a source within Apple close to the QuickTime team.

Yep iMovie 09 now does all that QuickTime Pro does and then some, QTP is a waste of resources now, all apple needs from it is to be a slick player, which QTX definately is.

SeaFox

Jul 1, 2009, 03:24 AM

QuickTime Pro licenses were $30 IIRC. Looks like Snow Leapord just paid for itself. :p

elppa

Jul 1, 2009, 04:11 AM

Maybe Apple has some NDA that is working better for Windows than it is for Mac OS X. (e.g., using a diverse Microsoft testing lab). However, totally off the radar scope and then surprise, it is on the market.... usually doesn't lead to low defect software.

True, but this has been Apple's not unknown for doing this though.

ibjoshua

Jul 1, 2009, 05:26 AM

There will be no QuickTime X Pro - Apple is discontinuing the Pro version (at least for now). The good thing is that certain features (like export features) and new features (HTTP streaming and stream saving) are going to be available for everyone without that 'trialware' tag begging you to buy Pro. The bad thing is that certain low-used features (like the cut/copy/paste editing) will be removed in favor of the more simpler trimming feature.

The more advanced QuickTime options have been implemented by other (better) tools in the same price range or alternatively by programs from the iLife suite.

I heard this from a source within Apple close to the QuickTime team.

Even more reason to hang on to a copy of QT Pro 7 then eh. I use those functions quite often.

DELLsFan

Jul 1, 2009, 06:44 AM

I hope this new version of QT is everything it's been hyped up to be. It looks cool.

Mac21ND

Jul 1, 2009, 07:47 AM

DISCO! DISCO! DISCO!

(sorry, had to).

amorya

Jul 1, 2009, 08:02 AM

.qtz is the first format that I see that cannot be played with QTX. All the standard video formats work just fine and with perian installed you can play pretty much everything you can think of.

Perian can only be used with Quicktime 7, not with Quicktime X. There is currently no API in Quicktime X for third party codecs.

SydneyDev

Jul 1, 2009, 08:04 AM

Doing complete rewrite is almost never a good idea. New developers see something that looks old and bloated to them and convince management to rewrite it, only to find those features are there for a reason, and now with th e cut down version they have suddenly lost their lead on the competition.

Ideally they should have stuck with Quicktime 7 and refactored in the best parts of the QT X code. But too late for that now, so why not include 7 on the OS disk, even if hidden? Why force people to download it. This is not a cool piece of convenience, but Apple wasting people's bandwidth for no good reason.

amorya

Jul 1, 2009, 08:04 AM

I'm pretty sure Flip4Mac has always worked with it.

I've been using it since I installed Snow Leopard a few days after WWDC.

The only video format supported by Quicktime X currently is H264. All others use Quicktime 7's engine, which is still there and supported.

Mr. Wonderful

Jul 1, 2009, 08:46 AM

The only video format supported by Quicktime X currently is H264. All others use Quicktime 7's engine, which is still there and supported.
Yeah, I have a feeling there will be a lot less of a need to download QT7 by the time the GM build of Snow Leopard gets released.

DsurioN

Jul 1, 2009, 02:01 PM

You can get it here: http://www.zugakousaku.com/index.php?ref=works-20th-osx--en

Ah thanks a lot man, I looked everywhere else :P

fef714

Jul 1, 2009, 08:15 PM

iMovie '06 -> iMovie '08 (iMovie '06 offered concurrently)
iMovie '09 (better than both)

Quicktime 7 Player -> Quicktime X Player (Quicktime 7 Player offered concurrently)
Quicktime X Player 2 (better than both, possibly)

:mad: OMG, NO NO NO NO NO NOOOOO, iMovie '09 is NOT better then iMovie HD 6.
It may be better then '08, but not '06.

The thing that was lost in the new iMovie was not so much features or effects, but the intuitive timeline, and the whole UI.

iMovie '09 still features that awful scrubber thing. It works in iPhoto, but not iMovie.

I'm still kinda mad about this. :mad: Although I use FCE anyway, so why should I care. :p

Sorry about my rant, but I believe that the new iMovie is one of the few things that Apple has completely botched.

I cannot think of another Apple screwup... Unless you count the Rokr as Apple :rolleyes:

fef714

Jul 1, 2009, 08:21 PM

Ah thanks a lot man, I looked everywhere else :P

Okay, what is that? I just went to the site and was like WHAT!?!?
:o

iAlexG

Jul 1, 2009, 09:16 PM

Cant wait for snow leopard!!! Quicktime X should be good

dariusperkins

Jul 2, 2009, 08:51 AM

:mad: OMG, NO NO NO NO NO NOOOOO, iMovie '09 is NOT better then iMovie HD 6....
...I believe that the new iMovie is one of the few things that Apple has completely botched.

Too right. I'm a certified pro in Final Cut, use Avid, and teach kids iMovie.

The new version, whilst providing an 'easy in' to video editing for some, teaches a different paradigm of editing than industry practice. The interface is horrible, fine-tuned edits difficult to access, and it's generally a dogturd piece of duplo software that isn't fit to edit the .3GPs off a telephone.