QuickTime .MOV + Toshiba + Vista = BSOD 392
Question Guy writes "Apple QuickTime is involved in a troubling problem that doesn't seem to be addressed by any of the major software and hardware manufacturers involved. On Toshiba machines, such as the Protege Tablet M400s, with Windows Vista installed, opening a locally stored QuickTime .MOV causes instant bluescreen. All other video functions seem to be working in other video playback types — even streaming .MOVs work — and there is little to no 'buzz' on the Net that might push any of the parties to investigate or to play nice together (Microsoft for Vista, Intel for the GMA945 chipset, Toshiba for their custom tablet software, Apple for QuickTime). Help, anyone?"
I think you answered your question already. (Score:5, Interesting)
No shock - Vista's #1 goal is DRM. Not usability. (Score:5, Interesting)
I think (i do not know - so back off, i'm guessing) that there is some kind of problem with Vista and video... at least, i'm seeing a trend.
Considering the amount of work Microsoft put into preventing people from playing (assumedly pirated) video, I don't think its much of a strech to believe that its much harder for developers to make video playback software. I know that i read a very long article that talked about video card compliance and every 30ms being polled by the OS or some such bullshit, but i don't recall the link. But it was quite long, very extensive, and seemed to me that Vista's goal was not to provide a system which would foster video content creation - but rather, just the opposite.
its rather sad, actually. Microsoft/Adobe and MS/AVID had the makings of at least pitiful competition for Apple/Apple & Apple/Avid... (Apple/Adobe? Yeah, not so much any more after NAB). I actually LIKE competition, because it means that Apple and their developers actually have to work to make better products.
With all of the pain that's obivously involved with working HD video (which inclueds VIEWING IT) on Vista, there won't be much competition. If Vista is a shitty at video work as its looking to be, i suspect that Apple will be able to kick back on the beach with a mai-tai and not have to evern try... i mean, HD playback is 100% zero effort (assuming you aren't trying to do it on a PowerBook 520c) in Mac OS X - there's no DRM invovled whatsoever (except for BR and HDDVDs).... and the video cards Just Work(TM), and Quicktime just works, and VLC just works and DIVX just works.... etc.
sucks to have your workflow based upon a product that is EOL in 7 months (Windows XP + ___________). Personally, i don't care. I've long stopped caring about the abuse people that use Windows for video work put themselves thru... sure, Windows did some things faster back in the day, but all of that is totally gone now, isn't it?
Now, its all about the OS.
Suggestions (Score:2, Interesting)
Then try using media player classic to open the file. Quicktime alternative is a freeware quicktime codec, and will let you watch quicktime movies in an application of your choice. See also: http://www.free-codecs.com/download/Real_Alternat
There is no need to be tied to realplayer or quicktime on windows.
Re:Certainly not Apple's fault (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:No shock - Vista's #1 goal is DRM. Not usabilit (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Title error... (Score:2, Interesting)
If you're particularly literal-minded and you think Apple's answer to the tablet PC would be, as in the PC world, a desktop computer crammed into slab format, then yeah, Apple wouldn't do that. Fortunately.
All of our work machines have this problem... (Score:4, Interesting)
Any attempt to watch a Quicktime file from a local drive results in problems (usually an instant bluescreen, but sometimes general breakage -- taskbar not responding, apps not closing when ordered, menus not responding, that sort of thing).
Viewing a movie that exists elsewhere on the network is fine. Viewing a movie from the Internet still breaks things, presumably because it's still getting cached to the local drive.
They're not brand-name computers, but they were all put together by the same place, presumably with similar specs. Nobody's dug into it too deeply, we've just gotten used to moving all *.mov files to a network drive before viewing.
oh i beg to differ.. (Score:3, Interesting)
back in the day (circa 2002) i was working with a cruddy old machine and wanted to watch some divx on it.. but wmp kept stuttering.. so i installed quicktime and used it.. it used 20% less resources and its dependability was the first of many factors which got me to switch to mac.
that said, quicktime 7 was a major step down from 6.x because they broke the caching (making it stutter even on osX), but that has nothing to do with the platform it runs on.
Reminds me of Toshiba + Symantec products.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Had never seen that before with this software combination on any laptop except some Toshibas at work back in the day.
Nearest KB article I could find on Symantec was 2003112516321112, but it's only available via Google cache at http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:FBy7QXRHzIIJ:
Nothing new for me (Score:2, Interesting)
I've never understood the reason why Quicktime needs to be installed in the system tray anyway. I play movies with it from time to time, I don't use it otherwise, and I doubt many do.
Re:Title error... (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe from MS's perspective it *is* more secure for the OS to crash... rather than the driver get a buffer overrun leading to priviledge escalation...
Re:Quicktime + SCSI = BSOD (Score:2, Interesting)
There would also be horrible audio/video synching issues while only reading from SCSI disks.
So whatever quicktime is doing to render audio and video, it has/had an obvious issues with SCSI disks.
Re:I think you answered your question already. (Score:3, Interesting)
Not Toshiba - Just Vista (Score:2, Interesting)
Of course, the other way to bluescreen my system is to install nvidia drivers. So perhaps its nvidia and not apple?
In any case, Vista has been a terrible experience, and seeing as I'm in charge of the IT department at my company we have canceled our plans to upgrade anytime soon. Perhaps after sp1. We rely heavily on MS applications as we consult for other companies that use MS apps so going to Linux or Mac is not an option. But we'll stay with XP for as long as possible. In fact, as an admin I've loved XP. The improvement from 95 to 98 to 2000 and then XP and the improvement from NT 4 to Server 2000 & 2003 had really gotten my hopes up that Microsoft would deliver on Vista.
Unfortunately, they FUBAR'ed it.
Re:I think you answered your question already. (Score:2, Interesting)
There are many other well-known applications that will BSOD Vista. Locally stored
Don't worry kids. You'll still be able to play your games on XP, for a short while.
If "Windows" is the answer, you're asking the wrong question!
Re:I think you answered your question already. (Score:2, Interesting)
Caused by SATA drivers? (Score:3, Interesting)
Moving the mov file to any drive not using that controller and it played perfectly.
From the 1210sa, an instant unrecoverable lock would occur. maybe 5% of mov's I tried wouldn't lock the drive, but those that did it was a definite and 100% repeatable problem, irrespective of player used, or quicktime version.
I reported it to Adaptec several times, as it was fixed and then broken again with different releases, but never acknowledged.
Changed to a Promise controller instead.
Re:FreeBSD (Score:3, Interesting)
All joking aside, it's a basic forkbomb. Quite a few unixes and clones (clearly not FreeBSD) will just keep on generating processes until such time as the process table fills up, which takes a fraction of a second. And once the process table is full, no more processes can be started - you can't even log in because even if the logon process is running, once it's authenticated you it will try and execute your shell and fail.
Someone upthread executed it with a ulimit - yes, that will prevent it from making your system unusable but that's a piece of userland configuration. The point I was making is that unless userland is appropriately configured (something which is omitted surprisingly often), it's quite easy to render a computer next to useless without crashing it as such, even from userland.