Apple QuickTime DRM Disables Video Editing Apps

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."

Comments

The answer is quite simple actually:

[Qbertino]

Don't use Quicktime.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[lucifig]

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

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[Ohreally_factor]

or video.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[edittard]

New slogan: It just doesn't work.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Don't use Quicktime on Windows!

Oh, wait...

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[coop247]

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:

[Anonymous Coward]

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:

[arth1]

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:

[Anonymous Coward]

because they are screwing sony...

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[Ken D]

And if you install iTunes, it will silently replace Quicktime with a newer version, without even giving you an option. Which is how my Quicktime Pro license went *poof* with no warning.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[MadnessASAP]

or computers.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[BronsCon]

I was really looking forward to using some of my 4 remaining mod points in this discussion and I truly do despise Sony (and I'm not too big a fan of Apple, either) but I can't resist the urge to straighten out this one misconception...

because they are screwing sony... no.

because they are screwing sony's customers...

Which is not a good reason to like a company. One company who habitually screws over another company which you don't like; ok, you can like them. I may not like Sony and if I do buy a Sony product it's because I've done my research and it is the product which best suits me, but they're not the one being screwed here.

When a company screws the customer, even if the customer is not their customer, it is a reason to begin to dislike them, as well. Especially if you're a stockholder. When a company spends time figuring out how to screw over not their competition, but their competition's customers, they're not too far off from figuring out how to screw their own customers. Let's face it, that's what this is about.

Which is why I will never own an Apple product.

Unless I see some changes.

People, wake up. This is the same game the US Government plays; but I won't go too far off-topic and get into that in this thread. Maybe tomorrow.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[BronsCon]

Yes. I just won't buy a CD or portable music player from them. I have a Sony alarm clock CD player that's in its 11th year of flawless service. I buy Sony batteries because I can get often them 2 for $1 and I've routinely had them last nearly (or more than) twice as long as Duracell or Energizer. I've got a Samsung video camera with a Sony CCD in it (very nice CCD, by the way) and now wish I had gotten the Sony cam, as Samsung used a shoddy interface to the CCD and the picture is intermittently very clear or very grainy depending on the mood of the camera; an issue that became known about this model, shortly after my warranty expired, which does not affect other cameras using the same CCD. I have a GSM phone with a 2MP Sony CCD in it, as well. The photos it takes surpass my Fuji 5.3MP in clarity. I'm looking into getting a Sony flat panel TV this year, as well.

Notice the types of products I'm talking about, here.

Wait a minute. Am I actually defending myself against a troll?

*repeats to himself* They're not real. They can't hurt you. You don't have to fight back. They're not real. They can't hurt you. You don't have to fight back. They're not real. They can't hurt you. You don't have to fight back.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[DittoBox]

Damn Luddites.

Get off my lawn!

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[Anonymous Coward]

This exactly why Apple is not an alternative to Windows. When OS suddenly locks you down and decided what you can or can not do, it does not belong to you anymore. Seems like the Linux is the only way to go if you want to have a control over your computer.

Re:The answer is quite simple actually:

[ady1]

We shouldn't have got off the trees in the first place.

kill microsoft

[alen]

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

[BeanThere]

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

[Ohreally_factor]

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

[Shadow-isoHunt]

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

Re:As always

[Coopjust]

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?

Re:As always

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[davecb]

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

[MrHanky]

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

[carou]

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

[ArsenneLupin]

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

[Shadow-isoHunt]

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

[coats]

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

[bkr1_2k]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

a) Why would you send the lawyers instead of getting a couple of engineers in your software group to talk to them first?
b) In what universe would Apple refuse to fix the problem?
c) In what court do you think Adobe have any right to sue Apple for making changes to it's own product?

Like the other poster said: sue first, ask questions later.

Re:As always

[Firehed]

Let's not forget that, at present time, there's no legal way to virtualize OS X in order to this exact type of testing. You can hack it together with an OSX86 install but that defeats the purpose anyways as you're no longer really replicating your original environment.

Re:As always

[jandrese]

I bet Apple did engineer proper interfaces for Quicktime, but then a requirement for DRM came along (which is a technical nightmare when you think about it, it's encryption where the person entitled to the content is also the one who must be blocked from accessing it) and Apple was forced to hack up the interface to support it.

Just look at the penalty you pay for on Vista to get all of the DRM. It's insane.

Re:As always

[director_mr]

Seeing as a huge core Apple user base is video editors who use After Effects, saying that it was so "extremely complex to develop" Quicktime in such a way that it wouldn't break After Effects is just plain silly. QuickTime breaking a common application that drives Apple's bottom line on their high-end equipment is not an edge case. Yes, I know not to update software mid-project, but Apple should know better than this as well. Oh, and virtualizing you computer so that you can test software interactions on your apple computer in a video production environment is just silly. Thats more work than a simple install and if it doesn't work, roll your computer back to an earlier date. I'd love you to try to virtualize video editing. In a production environment, video editors don't have that kind of time.

Re:As always

[Altus]

your assuming Adobe was using the interfaces properly in the first place. Its quite possible to get away with using APIs incorrectly in one version of software and have it break in the next version.

Just as bad as microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet the apple fans cannot see it.

Re:Just as bad as microsoft

[Travoltus]

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

Re:Just as bad as microsoft

[DXMikey]

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

[Serengeti]

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.

I'm confused

[Malevolent Tester]

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

At the risk of being obvious... dtrace!

[davecb]

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!

[ricebowl]

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

[Nursie]

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

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

That's why we don't use Quicktime...

[DXMikey]

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...

[Ohreally_factor]

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.

I don't see the problem..

[stormguard2099]

Renting and watching videos should be enough for anyone

Let me get this straight..

[cybrthng]

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.

Re:Let me get this straight..

[0100010001010011]

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/
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..

[Fred_A]

I had hoped it would be something like

vi ~/.quicktime/prefs

change
KillVideoEditors = yes
to
KillVideoEditors = no

Restart Quicktime.

Damn Macs, always so complicated. ;)

Isn't that, like, Illegal ?

[UberHoser]

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

Two points...

[Aphrika]

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.

QT isn't (just) a media player

[RJabelman]

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

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.

What has this got to do with DRM?

[carou]

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?

[mh1997]

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.

Re:What has this got to do with DRM?

[Anonymous Coward]

Okay, 60 seconds reading the referenced link in the articles would show that it is NOT a permissions problem that can be fixed with CHMOD. The files in question will open fine with the iTunes player but not with QT.
I see the Apple happy moderators choose the more convenient and not the real "insightful" route of modding you up in defense of Apple instead of actually reading about the problem. Moderator thinking, "Oh this person must be right, there is no way Apple could have messed this up."

http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1342677&start=30&tstart=0

Then Tell Apple to break it out..

[cybrthng]

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.

Re:Then Tell Apple to break it out..

[Ohreally_factor]

You're missing the point. There's this thing called the Quicktime Player. That's not at issue here.

What is at issue is this other thing called Quicktime. It's a technology that provides video services for OS X and applications. Applications such as AfterEffects, Final Cut Pro, etc. and iTunes. A change in this subsystem to support a new feature in iTunes has fucked up support for AfterEffects. Apple fucked up, no doubt about it. But the sky isn't falling and this is not even comparable to MS embedding a browser in their OS to kill Netscape. Not even close.

Apple's finally done it

[DoofusOfDeath]

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".

Apple does this all the time

[Stele]

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.

Re:Apple does this all the time

[Mikey-San]

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.

So the last time you installed software that was known not to be production-level, it was not production-level?

Holy. Shit.

It is possible to roll back

[blootsvoets]

Full discussion on http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1342677&start=30&tstart=0, which makes the summary quite lame. The fact that subtitles also broke with QT 7.4 does say something though..

It's not vendor lockin

[alexhmit01]

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.

A little confusing

[pat mcguire]

This whole "QT" thing bewilders me. I don't know whether to mindlessly flame Apple or KDE...

This is a QA failure - typical

[Ralph Spoilsport]

and someone is getting his butt chewed by his supervisor. I used to work at Apple testing video stuff, so I know (I got my butt chewed a few times).

Apple has extensive testing, and QT is one of the more extensively tested systems. All the major programs are in a test matrix. It doesn't take THAT much effort to do a basic run on say, a dozen or so major apps - an afternoon is all it takes, really.

A minimal test matrix would be a grid with check boxes and comments.

FCP
open (Y/N) open new project (Y/N) open old project (Y/N) capture video (Y/N) process video (Y/N) export to tape (Y/N) export to QT file (Y/N)

iMovie
open (Y/N) open new project (Y/N) open old project (Y/N) capture video (Y/N) process video (Y/N) export to tape (Y/N) export to QT file (Y/N)

Premiere
open (Y/N) open new project (Y/N) open old project (Y/N) capture video (Y/N) process video (Y/N) export to tape (Y/N) export to QT file (Y/N)

After Effects
open (Y/N) open new project (Y/N) open old project (Y/N) capture video (Y/N) process video (Y/N) export to tape (Y/N) export to QT file (Y/N)

iDVD
open (Y/N) open new project (Y/N) open old project (Y/N) capture video (Y/N) process video (Y/N) export to tape (Y/N) export to QT file (Y/N)

DVD SP
open (Y/N) open new project (Y/N) open old project (Y/N) capture video (Y/N) process video (Y/N) export to tape (Y/N) export to QT file (Y/N)

etc. It isn't fucking rocket science, and a single failure on ANY of that is/should be enough to delay the project. I can't imagine someone in QT QA signed off knowing 7.4 would break Adobe AE. While QT does have a prod schedule, it's not like it's tied to NAB like FCP, or the Dev conferences like other apple apps and systems. And it's not like it's some huge number of man hours to fix it. Apple has a software library FILLED to the gunnels with all the minty goodness and this kind of testing is something they do. My guess is someone fucked up and either check AE as working without testing it, or its simply didn't get tested in some imaginary rush to get the latest rev out the door. Either way, some flunky's going to get a lot of heat.

RS

A similar thing happened with AE 5 and Tiger

[StreetStealth]

I learned this lesson well in 2005 when I gleefully preordered and upgraded to Tiger only to find out that After Effects 5's non-standard use of Quicktime APIs resulted in highly unstable audio with the new version of QT that came with the OS. Just scrubbing video back and forth inside the app would produce Quicktime errors, and the only way to get a complete render was to render without audio and add the soundtrack in afterward.

I don't trust Adobe or Apple to be in sync on this stuff.

Re:It never ceases to amaze me

[MrHanky]

Well, you could just read the comment I replied to, for instance.

Re:Informative? NOT

[Mister Whirly]

"Windows Media player is garbage in comparison across the board and still has the same type DRM."

You may have a point but, the WMP updates have never borked your Windows system to the point where you need to re-install the OS to get functionality that it broke working again. Funnily enough, "it just works".


Can you see the new Mac/PC commercial?

PC:"Hi. I'm a PC."
MAC:"Hi I'm a Mac I'm a Mac I'm a Mac I'm a Mac"
PC:"Gee Mac, looks like your video is stuck in a loop"
MAC:"I know. I installed an update to Quicktime and now I can't edit videos anymore!"

Re:Does this suprise anyone?

[MacColossus]

Looks like most of the issues are fixed by this released today. http://www.adobe.com/support/documentation/en/aftereffects/Adobe_After_Effects_CS3_8_0_2_Read_Me.pdf

Re:Informative? NOT

[Mister Whirly]

"have any IE updates every borked your Windows system?"

No, I have never had any IE update remove basic functionality from the OS that the only remedy was re-installing the OS. IE can be rolled back to previous versions simply by uninstalling the updates. I have had updates from MS that have broken things before, sure - but never to the point where and entire re-installation of Windows was necessary, and that was my point.

Re:Informative? NOT

[Mister Whirly]

You have a choice on the Microsoft updates also. You can either - automatically download and install the updates, download the updates and choose when/which ones to install, inform you that updates are available but do not download automatically, or do nothing. The choice is up to the user to set it the way they want it to work. There is no such thing as a MS update that automatically installs if you specifically tell it not to. So counter to your belief, there is a choice whether or not updates are automatically installed, and they user has control over that choice.

Apple is evil. News at 11.

[Jesus_666]

Seriously, is there anyone who's surprised at this? I own a MacBook Pro, but I don't have any illusions about Apple not being a bunch of scumbags. I mean, look at their rich tradition of suing rumor sites. Apple is evil, but they make good stuff. I might as well go and buy from another manufacturer, who is evil as well, but then I don't have a cleaner conscience and I don't get to use OS X.

Of course you can build your own computer, but you still support a good bunch of evil companies because someone needs to manufacture the parts you're building with. If you don't want to support evil corporations you need to abandon pretty much everything our society is about.

Yeah, our society is somewhat broken.

Re:Informative? NOT

[NMerriam]

The choice is up to the user to set it the way they want it to work. There is no such thing as a MS update that automatically installs

Some people have very short memories.