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."
The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Get off my lawn!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:4, Funny)
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:5, Funny)
Don't use Quicktime on Windows!
Oh, wait...
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, wait, this is Apple. Thats cool then, I like them.
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:5, Informative)
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: (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Apple is evil. News at 11. (Score:5, Insightful)
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:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:4, Insightful)
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: (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (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 M
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Thought not. Shame, though.
Re:The answer is quite simple actually: (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
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.
Not only OS X, Quicktime Framework is layer of near all serious applications including Adobe/AVID functionality. Also Cameras/Video cams having mpeg4/h264 (e.g. HD consumer level) needs Quicktime to work fine with Windows as MSFT is still fantasizing about their ideal "everyone is using WMV/AVI and we are giving shit to OS X/Linux" World which basically FAILED.
Re:Informative? NOT (Score:5, Insightful)
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:Informative? NOT (Score:4, Insightful)
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 (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Informative? NOT (Score:4, Informative)
Some people have very short memories [technet.com].
kill microsoft (Score:5, Funny)
oh, wait
Re:kill microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
As always (Score:3, Informative)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I love how everyone is quick to smack Apple upside the chops on this - how do we know it wasn't Adobe that screwed up here by using the API incorrectly, and now they're getting bit on the ass?
Does this occur in other (non-Apple) apps that compress to QuickTime?
Please, before accusing others of fanboi-ism, be objective yourself. If Apple b0rked this, then they deserve the hit on the chin they're getting. If Adobe fucked up, the
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
as its currently presented I'm not feeling nearly enough rage.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Updating quicktime should *not* break adobe.
I agree with your "should not," but 15 years of pulling hair over Quicktime says reality wins. If you rely on QT to make money, e.g. video editing, your production machine is tied very closely to the version of the software you are running, and nearly every version of every app on your machine is determined by that, plus the main editing apps you rely on. It may mean that you are running a much older OS version than you want, or even older hardware. Anyone who relies on Digidesign to butter their bread kn
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:As always (Score:5, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
Just look at the penalty you pay for on Vista to get all of the DRM. It's insane.
Re:As always (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's a spaghetti mess in there, one of the worst APIs ever known to man. Apple have to re-write it from scratch to fix it, and the likelihood of that is as slim as the likelihood of more disasters like this happening is large.
Actually, they have done exactly what you suggest for Leopard, it's called QTKit [apple.com]. According to Apple, the old API is deprecated and all developers should use the new one on Mac OS X 10.5+.
A similar thing happened with AE 5 and Tiger (Score:3, Informative)
I don't trust Adobe or Apple to be in sync on this stuff.
Re:As always (Score:5, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Insightful)
The 8.0.2 Patch Doesn't Work (Score:3, Informative)
Looks more like an Apple screw-up than anything else right now.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Welcome to the Slashdot Universe.
We hate lawyers unless we want to sue a company we hate. We don't need any cause beyond hating the company.
In our universe, Apple intentionally sabotages it's own OS components. It's a business strategy called 'Cutting off your head, arms, and legs to spite your face.'
In our universe, the 5 people that wanted Ogg Vorbis support in iPods are the equivalent to both Adobe and the entire film and video industry.
Re:As always (Score:5, Insightful)
Can't Leopard have Automatic Updating turned on [apple.com]?
Re:As always (Score:5, Funny)
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 (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, Funny)
Re: (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:5, Interesting)
Hello. This is an update to a stable operating system, not some beta kernel module downloaded from Sourceforge.
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:As always (Score:5, Funny)
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.
Just as bad as microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just as bad as microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just as bad as microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just as bad as microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:3, Interesting)
Is Quicktime part of iTunes nowaday ? (I don't use either)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I swear, the Pope must *wish* he was Steve Jobs.
I'm confused (Score:5, Funny)
At the risk of being obvious... dtrace! (Score:5, Funny)
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! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm sorry, Dave; I can't let you do that.
--Happle
Yay Apple (Score:4, Insightful)
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
Apple is a bad company all round, their hardware always has defaults from fire hazard magsafe adapters through to discolourin
Re: (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 s
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's why we don't use Quicktime... (Score:5, Insightful)
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: (Score:2)
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... (Score:4, Informative)
I don't see the problem.. (Score:5, Funny)
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.
QT isn't (just) a media player (Score:5, Informative)
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.. (Score:5, Insightful)
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 (Score:5, Informative)
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.
downgrading, or cross-grading other apps (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Then Tell Apple to break it out.. (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Let me get this straight.. (Score:5, Informative)
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.. (Score:5, Funny)
vi ~/.quicktime/prefs
change
KillVideoEditors = yes
to
KillVideoEditors = no
Restart Quicktime.
Damn Macs, always so complicated.
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.
Apple doesn't always remove posts (Score:3, Informative)
But Apple doesn't always remove negative posts. Here is a huge thread on some major bugs in their Airport Extreme Base Station [apple.com], with over 20,000 views and 300+ replies. It has been around for a few months now.
People like to jump on Apple for removing posts, however their forum has some pretty clear rules on what is considered acceptable and what isn't. Usually deleted threads/posts are done so for a r
What has this got to do with DRM? (Score:4, Insightful)
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? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What has this got to do with DRM? (Score:4, Informative)
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 [apple.com]
Apple's finally done it (Score:5, Insightful)
I think they need to get back to "thinking different".
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I disagree. "Let's take the biggest selling points of our flagship product and break them!" is most definitely thinking very different to most established ideas.
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).
Apple does this all the time (Score:5, Informative)
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 (Score:5, Funny)
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 (Score:5, Informative)
A little confusing (Score:4, Funny)
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:Does this suprise anyone? (Score:5, Informative)