or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › A peek at Apple's new QuickTime X interface
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A peek at Apple's new QuickTime X interface - Page 2

post #41 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Or this?


Because those are likely what QuickTime X's interface will resemble (especially considering the bottom picture is of the iPhone's video interface, which QuickTime X is derived from).

Its code I presume, not simply it's UI. A touch UI will look different to a regular UI. Though it could be why we're heading in this direction; cause Apple's trying to help blur those lines so it can ease people in the tablet when they make it, and try to make a singular UI that makes sense in both environments.
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #42 of 149
If Apple is pushing the new QT to be mainly a player then controls over the video, like with DVD Player.app, does seem likely. Though I'd like to point out that DVD Player still had a separate, non-overlay Controller you enable if you choose.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

It's code I presume, not simply it's UI. A touch UI will look different to a regular UI. Though it could be why we're heading in this direction; cause Apple's trying to help blur those lines so it can ease people in the tablet when they make it, and try to make a singular UI that makes sense in both environments.

I agree that the big move with QT X is the underlying code, which Apple is pulling from the iPhone's efficient decoding, but I think Wobegon is correct in that Apple will use many of the overlays that are now present on the iPhone OS X's video viewer.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #43 of 149
These look quite good to me. less is more. I always wonder why with every video I watch I need to see that huge metallic control surface and that big round pause button - its annoying, get rid of it.

Also, these look quite visible to me and actually why not make full screen controls and regular controls more consistent. The real thing I like here though is that we finally get a button for full-screen - that has been needed for a long time.
post #44 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

Folks who like consistent UI across programs won't like this! Personally I see no reason why each program can't be unique, it certainly makes Expose work better. The learning curve argument doesn't hold much water because even Apple's non-standard interfaces are very intuitive.

Apple hasn't been very good about keeping their user interfaces consistent. But this brings it to be more consistent with the iTunes video playback window. In the recent past, the look, feel, controls and usability between QuickTime app, DVD Player and iTunes video playback differed a lot more from each other than I thought was justified. It's almost as if different companies developed each app. It looks like Snow Leopard finally unifies them a lot better than they did in the past.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

I think the idea of no controls (most of the time) is to emphasize the OS X idea that the menu bar represents a loaded program and the windows represent loaded document. If there are controls on a window you start to view it more as program than document.

I don't know if this really changes that much. Different media often means different means of accessing and controlling it.
post #45 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ireland View Post

It's code I presume, not simply it's UI. A touch UI will look different to a regular UI.

Ah, I should have said Snow Leopard's QuickTime X is derived from the iPhone's ultra efficient playback system, and that Apple, likewise, will probably standardize on a UI across platforms (likely inspired by the iPhone's video playback UI).
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #46 of 149
I use QT as my default audio player because I don't want every little thing added to the iTunes library. I wonder what it will look like when, say, an MP3 is being played.
post #47 of 149
Looks like the Windows Vista Aero theme with black transparency (assuming that it is... transparent). Anyway, the mock-up looks nice as it is as I do fancy Vista's Aero theme.
post #48 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I think it would be if it stayed on the screen but I don't think it will be that way, it will probably be like the floating controls when you play videos in iTunes, those auto hide when you're not doing anything with the controls.

I think it would be best if the three aqua control bubbles at top left appeared and faded, but without the actual bar appearing at all. Then we'd have the best of both worlds with the controls there when needed, but the full video in view at all times.

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply
post #49 of 149
I'd like the controls to match the layout of the Apple Remote and for this to be a design point across many other functions on the Mac. I really like sitting back and just cruising my Mac's content with the remote. And it's great for people who are less mobile and don't want to be sat up at a desk when they're meant to be relaxing.

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply

Many of the most important software concepts were invented in the 70s and forgotten in the 80s.

Reply
post #50 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Nah, this is better.

No, it's not. What if you're trying to look at something in the video but the controls get in the way? Say for example, something catches your eye and you pause the video to take a closer look. And all you end up with is a control bar in your way. Floating controls make the most sense in Full Screen.
post #51 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

No, it's not. What if you're trying to look at something in the video but the controls get in the way?

Then move the controls. They are draggable, you know.
post #52 of 149
I got a feeling Apple has lost it. It happens to most companies that get too big.

Apple's breaking HIGs all over the place. The biggest one being Safari 4. Now it's toying around with windowless GUIs with the titlebar and controls only appearing when the mouse is inside moving inside the video window. And it seems like Apple doesn't have a clue that there's a worldwide recession and instead of dropping prices, they're UPPING them.

Apple is getting too smug...reminds me of the smugness it had back in the early 90s. I feel like when Steve Jobs is gone...Apple's going to go back making the same mistakes it did in the 90s.
post #53 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

No, it's not. What if you're trying to look at something in the video but the controls get in the way? Say for example, something catches your eye and you pause the video to take a closer look. And all you end up with is a control bar in your way. Floating controls make the most sense in Full Screen.

Start playing a video in iTunes, then hit the spacebar. The video pauses, but the controls remain invisible. I can't promise this is how QuickTime X will, but it seems logical to standardize on a look for video across all apps.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #54 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

I got a feeling Apple has lost it. It happens to most companies that get too big.

Oh yes, they're a little too successful while having a tiny fraction of the workforce Microsoft does, and industry leading customer satisfaction ratings to boot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Apple's breaking HIGs all over the place.

HIGs?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

The biggest one being Safari 4.

The only thing I'd change about Safari 4 is click-through. It is in beta, so that could very well be changed in the final version. In fact, just about everything is subject to change in a beta.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Now it's toying around with windowless GUIs with the titlebar and controls only appearing when the mouse is inside moving inside the video window.

That's...not...windowless. The video is a window. Perhaps you could say they're experimenting with borderless windows, but even then, a video has borders.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

And it seems like Apple doesn't have a clue that there's a worldwide recession and instead of dropping prices, they're UPPING them.

1) What does the recession have to do with QuickTime X? 2) How the hell are they upping prices? They dropped the price of the entry Mac Pro by $300. They dropped the price of a 24" iMac by $300, replacing the 20" model originally at that price point. They didn't raise the price of the Mac mini. They dropped the price of the entry MacBook last Fall to $999.

When have they upped the price of anything?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Apple is getting too smug...reminds me of the smugness it had back in the early 90s. I feel like when Steve Jobs is gone...Apple's going to go back making the same mistakes it did in the 90s.

Don't personify companies. It really hurts an argument. Maybe you should actually explain what you mean...rather than trolling.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #55 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

HIGs?

Human-Interface Guidelines.

Quote:
The only thing I'd change about Safari 4 is click-through. It is in beta, so that could very well be changed in the final version. In fact, just about everything is subject to change in a beta.

That's why I'm glad you don't design interfaces.


Quote:
That's...not...windowless. The video is a window. Perhaps you could say they're experimenting with borderless windows, but even then, a video has borders.

Windowless as in no window frames.

Quote:
1) What does the recession have to do with QuickTime X? 2) How the hell are they upping prices? They dropped the price of the entry Mac Pro by $300. They dropped the price of a 24" iMac by $300, replacing the 20" model originally at that price point. They didn't raise the price of the Mac mini. They dropped the price of the entry MacBook last Fall to $999.

When have they upped the price of anything?

The recession reference was a side not of other things Apple is doing wrong. They dropped the price of the entry Mac Pro but the bang for buck is not at all what it used to be before the new line up. So, Apple is essentially offering less for more.

Quote:
Don't personify companies. It really hurts an argument. Maybe you should actually explain what you mean...rather than trolling.

Does it really hurt an argument? Explain why personifying a company hurts an argument. Perhaps you should actually explain why it hurts an argument rather than troll back.

More Apple apologists like yourself is not what is needed.
post #56 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

That's why I'm glad you don't design interfaces.

Well you're right, your suggestions for how Safari 4 could be improved are so much better....oh right, you never provided any alternatives. In fact, you didn't even specify the qualms you had with Safari 4's UI. *clapping*

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Windowless as in no window frames.

What do you mean by that? The mockups show a frame around the window. The title bar is still at the top of the window, as always, it simply blends into the background when a video is playing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

The recession reference was a side not of other things Apple is doing wrong.

Thanks for the clarification.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

They dropped the price of the entry Mac Pro but the bang for buck is not at all what it used to be before the new line up. So, Apple is essentially offering less for more.

Examples?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Does it really hurt an argument? Explain why personifying a company hurts an argument. Perhaps you should actually explain why it hurts an argument rather than troll back.

So I have to explain myself, but you don't?

On it's face, personifying a company isn't bad I suppose. Not explaining those personifications is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

More Apple apologists like yourself is not what is needed.

Yes, I'm an apologist because I questioned and/or pointed out the flaws in your flimsy argument.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #57 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Well you're right, you're suggestions for how Safari 4 could be improved are so much better....oh right, you never provided any alternatives. In fact, you didn't even specify the qualms you had with Safari 4's UI. *clapping*

Actually I did provide alternatives in the appropriate thread. Go read it. It's not my fault if you're too lazy. I'm not going to cut and paste the same alternative solutions over and over again every time some clown tells me to provide another solution.

Quote:
What do you mean by that? The mockups show a frame around the window. The title bar is still at the top of the window, as always, it simply blends into the background when a video is playing.

And thus the window becomes frameless.

Quote:
Thanks for the clarification. Examples?

Again, in the appropriate thread, I talk about how the low-end Mac Pro is poor value considering you could get an dual quad-core for the same price before the new line up.

Quote:
So I have to explain myself, but you don't?

I've explained myself before. All you have to do is use the search function.

Quote:
On it's face, personifying a company isn't bad I suppose. Not explaining those personifications is.


Yes, I'm an apologist because I questioned and/or pointed out the flaws in your flimsy argument.

I'm glad you at least admit to being an apologist. It's the first step to recovery.
post #58 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

No, it's not. What if you're trying to look at something in the video but the controls get in the way? Say for example, something catches your eye and you pause the video to take a closer look. And all you end up with is a control bar in your way. Floating controls make the most sense in Full Screen.

Seconded. Yes, it appears sometimes necessary to watch how the small scene detail evolves from frame to frame. It isn't that this task is frequent, yet it's reoccurring to someone who analyses evidence including videos. QTX clips that piece with its controls, and that's that.

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #59 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Actually I did provide alternatives in the appropriate thread. Go read it. It's not my fault if you're too lazy. I'm not going to cut and paste the same alternative solutions over and over again every time some clown tells me to provide another solution.

Quote:
Again, in the appropriate thread, I talk about how the low-end Mac Pro is poor value considering you could get an dual quad-core for the same price before the new line up.

Quote:
I've explained myself before. All you have to do is use the search function.

So you expect me to look around for your answers in separate threads because why? You're too lazy to type them here, or you can't remember them off the top of your head? You can't even be bothered to provide links to the posts your talking about?

These are your arguments. It's your job to back them up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

And thus the window becomes frameless.

The borders of the window frame the video being played. What is your point?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

I'm glad you at least admit to being an apologist. It's the first step to recovery.

I guess they don't have sarcasm in your world.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #60 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

So you expect me to look around for your answers in separate threads because why? You're too lazy to type them here, or you can't remember them off the top of your head? You can't even be bothered to provide links to the posts your talking about?

No, I can't be bothered to do any of that because you're being an ass. I don't go out of my way to be friendly to people like that.

Quote:
These are your arguments. It's your job to back them up.

And I did. It's up to you to find them.

Quote:
The borders of the window frame the video being played. What is your point?

I gotta admire your obtuseness. I know you know what I'm talking about but you're simply arguing for the sake of arguing. But for shits and giggles I will explain what I mean by windowless/frameless (considering it wasn't explained in any other thread):

There is no titlebar (the only part of the window frame that can be considered visible) when the cursor isn't within the displayed video. Why can't the titlebar be displayed all the time? Not having that information up all the time can be detrimental to productivity. The titlebar provides important information when the content of the window itself isn't informative enough.

We're all using a GUI OS for a reason. Imagine if all windows had titlebars that would fade away when the cursor isn't on it. Content without a title -- a bad idea in some cases.

Quote:
I guess they don't have sarcasm in your world.

post #61 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ensign Pulver View Post

Apple's new war on dedicated title bars continues, but this time even more egregiously than the Safari 4 beta.

A translucent title bar that obscures a portion of its window's contents? Completely braindead.

This is an artist's mockup, so take it with a grain of salt.

The deceptive title of this article might make you think that this stuff is official, but it's not.

I do have to agree with you about some of Apple's recent UI choices. As good as they are as making things pretty, different UIs across Leopard are still inconsistent and Apple can't seem to decide what UI methods are most user friendly.

Maybe it's better that Apple try this kind of stuff rather than being like Microsoft and not really changing much of anything.
post #62 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

Seconded. Yes, it appears sometimes necessary to watch how the small scene detail evolves from frame to frame. It isn't that this task is frequent, yet it's reoccurring to someone who analyses evidence including videos. QTX clips that piece with its controls, and that's that.

Yeah to me this is a job for a more professional player. Unfortunately it seems Apple won't be offering one beyond version 7.

I don't like the UI so much, but I'll wait to see what they decide to include in the final product. It seems like Apple is trying to make this their VLC player.

And let's cross our fingers for a great PC version. You know, that actually works.
post #63 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post

Yeah to me this is a job for a more professional player. Unfortunately it seems Apple won't be offering one beyond version 7.

Wasn't it always the source of Apple's particular pride to say: "Only one single version for everybody! You're always sure you get everything we promised!"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post

I don't like the UI so much, but I'll wait to see what they decide to include in the final product. It seems like Apple is trying to make this their VLC player.

Time will tell. I will in all probability survive too. Mockups can't tell me right out of here how I would feel that UI and what would be my way to accomplish what I would need to with this UI.

Quote:
Originally Posted by akhomerun View Post

And let's cross our fingers for a great PC version. You know, that actually works.

Hopeless, in my opinion. Never saw anything which worked flawlessly on PC.

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #64 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

No, I can't be bothered to do any of that because you're being an ass. I don't go out of my way to be friendly to people like that.

I guess it's easier to make personal attacks than to actually explain what you're talking about. If you can't take some prodding, you're going to have a hard time in these forums (and in life).

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

And I did. It's up to you to find them.

Keep telling yourself that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

I gotta admire your obtuseness.

Who's being an ass now? I ask for clarification, you insult me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

I know you know what I'm talking about but you're simply arguing for the sake of arguing.

Of course. I love nothing more than arguing with people I don't know for no reason. (That was sarcasm).

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

But for shits and giggles I will explain what I mean by windowless/frameless (considering it wasn't explained in any other thread):

Whoa, stop. Are you sure you want to back up your own statements!?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

There is no titlebar (the only part of the window frame that can be considered visible) when the cursor isn't within the displayed video. Why can't the titlebar be displayed all the time? Not having that information up all the time can be detrimental to productivity. The titlebar provides important information when the content of the window itself isn't informative enough.

Thank you for this. It means a lot to me when people explain their thoughts.

But unless you're one of the few testing out Snow Leopard, you're going off assumptions and even if they happened to be right at the moment, you could be wrong when Snow Leopard ships. I'm sure you're aware of this, just wanted to remind you (and that goes for me too).

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

We're all using a GUI OS for a reason. Imagine if all windows had titlebars that would fade away when the cursor isn't on it. Content without a title -- a bad idea in some cases.

That would be horrible if all window title bars in all applications faded away. But that's unlikely to be the case because it would make no sense. Having the title bar of QuickTime videos disappear makes sense because it's a distracting element. I'd guess you might bring up that that's what full-screen mode is for, but many videos are low resolution and look like crap in full-screen. I'm still on Tiger, but in Leopard (and presumably, Snow Leopard) using QuickLook is far more appealing than opening QuickTime.

I don't know how you wouldn't know what was playing; perhaps you'd forget the name, but you would know what it was. I could understand if the video was paused and the title bar disappeared, but we don't know if that happens or if it only fades away when video is playing. Right now in Safari 4, when .MOVs are paused, the playback controls are visible; they only disappear when the video is playing.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #65 of 149
Is this new Quicktime 64 bit? Seems like it would have to be at some level. I know a lot of 3D artists who work on 64 bit systems ho would really like to have a fully 64bit QT.
post #66 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

Since Quicktime X is a playback only tool it's not competing with legacy Quicktime 7.x for anything involving encoding, transcoding or anything else. This makes sure it's lightweight and should perform well. QTX came from the Quicktime stack on the iPhone.

How it relates to legacy QT is this.

Developers will write to QTkit which is like a cocoa based front end for dealing with media elemenst. QTkit will then parcel out the request to the appropriate tool. So if the request is for playing back a media element I suppose QTX will get the nod and if the if more robust features are being requested then legacy QT will be engaged.

It should all be transparent to the end user.

is a cocoa

http://developer.apple.com/documenta...Reference.html

http://developer.apple.com/documenta...uid/TP40001164
post #67 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Who's being an ass now? I ask for clarification, you insult me.

I said I admired your obtuseness.

You seem like you're having a bad day so I'll let you cool off.
post #68 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

I don't know how you wouldn't know what was playing; perhaps you'd forget the name, but you would know what it was. I could understand if the video was paused and the title bar disappeared, but we don't know if that happens or if it only fades away when video is playing. Right now in Safari 4, when .MOVs are paused, the playback controls are visible; they only disappear when the video is playing.

Actually, this part was probably the only portion of your post worth replying to...

The argument you're using -- "I don't know how you wouldn't know what was playing" -- could be used in any context.

I'd be very surprised if people shared your opinion that the titlebar is distracting enough to warrant removing. If the titlebar is distracting, then the rest of the shit on your screen must be driving you up the walls.

Begone, webegon.
post #69 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

I said I admired your obtuseness.

You seem like you're having a bad day so I'll let you cool off.

I try to reason out your vague statements, you call me an obtuse ass. Who's really having the bad day?

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Actually, this part was probably the only portion of your post worth replying to...

The argument you're using -- "I don't know how you wouldn't know what was playing" -- could be used in any context.

I'd be very surprised if people shared your opinion that the titlebar is distracting enough to warrant removing.

The. Titlebar. Has. Not. Been. Removed.

It simply fades into the video, likely only when the video is playing. There's a big difference. If the titlebar was removed, that most certainly would be a big mistake. You wouldn't be able to move windows around!

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

If the titlebar is distracting, then the rest of the shit on your screen must be driving you up the walls.

I was not making a big point about it, sheesh. It's a minor change you've made a mountain out of.

When watching a video, I don't need to be reminded of its name while I'm watching it. I opened the video, I know what it's name is and more importantly, what it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Begone, webegon.

Grow up.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #70 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amorya View Post

I
Well, I'm not a visual consistency nazi (although I am a vehement supporter of consistency of behaviour), but I don't like this new interface. Why would I want the controls covering the video when there is space below? In full screen, that's another matter, as there's nowhere else for them to go...

Amorya

They could have the controls on the bottem, except when it goes fullscreen. It's not a big deal to program that in.

But that full screen problem is one that really bothers me, as I mentioned already. The covering of the video isn't a big deal. It's only there when you need them, and then, you're not looking at the video when you're making most changes anyway, except for color, etc. It's actually easier to make those adjustments when the controls are on the video, as you don't have to look back and forth as you make the adjustments.

Everything is going to heads up displays these days. This is no different.
post #71 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Apple hasn't been very good about keeping their user interfaces consistent. But this brings it to be more consistent with the iTunes video playback window. In the recent past, the look, feel, controls and usability between QuickTime app, DVD Player and iTunes video playback differed a lot more from each other than I thought was justified. It's almost as if different companies developed each app. It looks like Snow Leopard finally unifies them a lot better than they did in the past.



I don't know if this really changes that much. Different media often means different means of accessing and controlling it.

Apple, like every other company, experiments with the UI. They have to. Nothing is static.

I don't want them to change every program and the OS over all at once. What if it's a bomb? Try one program at a time. If people really don't like it, or it doesn't work, then they can go to something else.

It's a lot of work researching, and re-programming UI's.
post #72 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by caliminius View Post

No, it's not. What if you're trying to look at something in the video but the controls get in the way? Say for example, something catches your eye and you pause the video to take a closer look. And all you end up with is a control bar in your way. Floating controls make the most sense in Full Screen.

As chabig has already said, drag them away. I would leave then at the bottom of the video, there's rarely anything of interest at the bottom.
post #73 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Actually I did provide alternatives in the appropriate thread. Go read it. It's not my fault if you're too lazy. I'm not going to cut and paste the same alternative solutions over and over again every time some clown tells me to provide another solution.

Cut the name calling.


Quote:
And thus the window becomes frameless.



Again, in the appropriate thread, I talk about how the low-end Mac Pro is poor value considering you could get an dual quad-core for the same price before the new line up.



I've explained myself before. All you have to do is use the search function.



I'm glad you at least admit to being an apologist. It's the first step to recovery.

Kim, you can't expect people to read every single thread to find statements that as far as they know, you MAY have made, or you may NOT have made. If you have an argument in any thread, you have to present it to people you're talking to.
post #74 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

Seconded. Yes, it appears sometimes necessary to watch how the small scene detail evolves from frame to frame. It isn't that this task is frequent, yet it's reoccurring to someone who analyses evidence including videos. QTX clips that piece with its controls, and that's that.

If you're analyzing evidence, I hope you would be using a professional program that's designed expressly for that purpose, rather that a basic free consumer app.
post #75 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

No, I can't be bothered to do any of that because you're being an ass. I don't go out of my way to be friendly to people like that.

That's not helping.
post #76 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

If you're analyzing evidence, I hope you would be using a professional program that's designed expressly for that purpose, rather that a basic free consumer app.

Indeed, I do. iMovie was always enough to get that done. So was QT Player oftenly. I'm not paid for that analysis, you know, so I would look for some professional s/w, only if that offered by Apple (Ok, QT Player is free, is iMovie? ) failed irreparably.

Ok, Ok, I know the probability of those QTX's controls would prevent me from achieving my analysis is negligible...

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #77 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

Indeed, I do. iMovie was always enough to get that done. So was QT Player oftenly. I'm not paid for that analysis, you know, so I would look for some professional s/w, only if that offered by Apple (Ok, QT Player is free, is iMovie? ) failed irreparably.

Ok, Ok, I know the probability of those QTX's controls would prevent me from achieving my analysis is negligible...

Here in NYC, the police department uses software that logs the individual in when opening the program. It also logs all frames looked at, and for how long. It automatically saves every move made while using the program. For forensic purposes, notes can be typed in any any time, and tied to any area of video, or audio, which can be kept together, or stripped out. any changes made to any frame for diagnostic purposes, using filters is kept permanently. Even voice commenting can be made and linked to anything needed. There are many more features besides those.

When you mean "examining evidence" therefor, what do you actually mean? Just looking at some bits here and there? Here at least, legally, there must be a tightly tied trail. The original must be unimpaired, while work is done on portions used for evidence, used with the unaltered portions.
post #78 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Here in NYC, the police department uses software that logs the individual in when opening the program. It also logs all frames looked at, and for how long. It automatically saves every move made while using the program. For forensic purposes, notes can be typed in any any time, and tied to any area of video, or audio, which can be kept together, or stripped out. any changes made to any frame for diagnostic purposes, using filters is kept permanently. Even voice commenting can be made and linked to anything needed. There are many more features besides those.

Khm... What can I say? Ok, I tried to compete with dedicated authorities in the field of investigation. Not unsuccessfully, I dare say. Never did with NYPD! But I'm not used to lose before game, you know

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

When you mean "examining evidence" therefor, what do you actually mean? Just looking at some bits here and there? Here at least, legally, there must be a tightly tied trail. The original must be unimpaired, while work is done on portions used for evidence, used with the unaltered portions.

Yes, looking at some bits here and there. I'm not even a humble precinct, you know I'm just interested a bit in digging some pieces of history, plane crashes, for instance. No, I have no access to accurate and exhausting evidence. My evidence is oftenly noisy cctv footage being available publicly. You actually have to find the plane ghost there first and only then drag controls.

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply

We mean Apple no harm.

People are lovers, basically. -- Engadget livebloggers at the iPad mini event.

Reply
post #79 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivan.rnn01 View Post

Khm... What can I say? Ok, I tried to compete with dedicated authorities in the field of investigation. Not unsuccessfully, I dare say. Never did with NYPD! But I'm not used to lose before game, you know


Yes, looking at some bits here and there. I'm not even a humble precinct, you know I'm just interested a bit in digging some pieces of history, plane crashes, for instance. No, I have no access to accurate and exhausting evidence. My evidence is oftenly noisy cctv footage being available publicly. You actually have to find the plane ghost there first and only then drag controls.

I get it.

You know, that noisy cctv footage is a large part of what they work with as well.

It's too bad that we can't have happen in reality, what happens on these mystery Tv shows. Magnifying a noisy SD, or sometimes a 1/2SD cctv video to supersharp footage, with well beyond 1080p's detail is humorous, but not when the show depends on that for the resolution (sic) of the story.
post #80 of 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

Actually, this part was probably the only portion of your post worth replying to...

The argument you're using -- "I don't know how you wouldn't know what was playing" -- could be used in any context.

I'd be very surprised if people shared your opinion that the titlebar is distracting enough to warrant removing. If the titlebar is distracting, then the rest of the shit on your screen must be driving you up the walls.

Begone, webegon.

I don't mean to get involved in this hilarious nerd-fight. It has been a humorous read.

I do have to interject an opinion: I watch a lot of video on my Macsparticularly the Mini attached to my TV. I am constantly doing whatever I can to remove distracting UI elements while watching videos. Usually this entails using fullscreen mode, but a video window that transformed into a clean video box upon mouse-out or mouse-stop sounds awesome!

And, to be fair, a lot of the time the rest of the 'shit on my screen' is driving me up the walls. Maybe I'm just a neat freak. My bad.

nothing to see here

Reply

nothing to see here

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › A peek at Apple's new QuickTime X interface