Apple QuickTime DRM Disables Video Editing Apps 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."
Let me get this straight.. (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Isn't that, like, Illegal ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Two points... (Score:5, Interesting)
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:As always (Score:4, Interesting)
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 (Score:5, Interesting)
Hello. This is an update to a stable operating system, not some beta kernel module downloaded from Sourceforge.
The real problem? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:kill microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)
Conversion (Score:3, Interesting)
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).
Re:Just as bad as microsoft (Score:3, Interesting)
Is Quicktime part of iTunes nowaday ? (I don't use either)
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:5, Interesting)
It never ceases to amaze me (Score:3, Interesting)
"Just wait, the Apple Fanboys will blame this all on Microsoft"
"But all the fanboys said this was unpossible!"
"Ooh, the fanboys will be crying over this one!"
I've yet to actually see one of these fanboys.
Re:As always (Score:3, Interesting)
My accountant woks for a video production firm (;-))
Joking aside, if your vendor sends you an update and expects you to apply it, they have a duty to ensure that thay've made a good-faith effort to ensure that it isn't a root-kit or a brick-kit.
If they're not, they deserve public approbation and a sharp smack to the wallet (suppliers often don't have wrists).
--dave
Re:As always (Score:1, Interesting)
So your friends routinely go and shell out a thousand bucks on a piece of software they don't have much use for? Think they can send some of these random buckets of money my way?
This is a QA failure - typical (Score:5, Interesting)
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
Re:kill microsoft (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:And how did you resolve this? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Yay Apple (Score:3, Interesting)
They got OSX right (comparatively). And their expensive hardware is decent enough if price isn't a primary concern. I wish they'd improve their act in other areas because I'll probably be using their stuff for a long time. Unless some other company comes along and does notably better.
Cheers.
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:3, Interesting)
Both Sony Image Converter and Sony Media Manger require QuickTime 7, and any and all 3rd party programs I have seen that convert to AAC also require it.
If you want to view bigger WMV or MPEG-2 files eating more battery time at lower quality than AAC, you are of course free to do so. I prefer the smaller, better quality files myself. A typical 2 hour movie compresses to around 512 MB at quite good quality -- the equivalent size for MPEG-2 of similar quality is around 4 GB, plus a standard battery will likely run out before watching the entire movie.