QuickTime 7 Pro to require paid upgrade, new Tiger builds seeded

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
QuickTime 7.0 Pro will Require Paid Upgrade



Along with Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" Apple will ship a major update to its QuickTime digital media software, labeled QuickTime 7.0.



Sources close to the development team say the 7.0 release will require "Pro" users to purchase a new license for the software, expected to cost $30. All license keys for versions of QuickTime 6 will be disabled in the new version, sources explained.



As previously reported, QuickTime 7 will also make it so previously free features—such as opening a new player window—require users to purchase a "Pro" license.



Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger build 8A393



In related news, Apple today seeded Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger build 8A393. The build comes just one week after the company provided developers with build 8A385.



Weighing in at just shy of 2279MB, the latest seed addresses several of the known issues pertaining to the previous build, including bugs associated with the Dock, iDisk synching, and Finder window titles.



However, sources said the new build has introduced a couple of new glitches, such as Spotlight's search menu malfunctioning and abnormalities with the 23-inch Cinema Display.



Apple Remote Desktop 2.2 Build 7C10



Earlier this week Apple seeded Apple Remote Desktop 2.2 Build 7C10, which will deliver "enhanced functionality and improved reliability."
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 100
    This isn't unreasonable, though I'm sure plenty of people will claim that it is. As I recall this has been standard policy for QT sellingness.



    What I want to know is, what makes QT7 such a 'major' upgrade? I mean, other than a new codec and some gimmicky full screen controls... feel free to correct me if I'm missing something obvious.
  • Reply 2 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally posted by [email protected]

    This isn't unreasonable, though I'm sure plenty of people will claim that it is. As I recall this has been standard policy for QT sellingness.



    What I want to know is, what makes QT7 such a 'major' upgrade? I mean, other than a new codec and some gimmicky full screen controls... feel free to correct me if I'm missing something obvious.




    Just guessing, but perhaps support for H.264? Pixlet? Given Steve's comment at MWSF, it seems reasonable to expect some sort of hi-def goodness.
  • Reply 3 of 100
    I believe it is a Cocoa app now.
  • Reply 4 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally posted by [email protected]

    This isn't unreasonable, though I'm sure plenty of people will claim that it is.



    i'll be the first to say it is reasonable. $30 is a small price to pay for such diverse functionality. the whole point of quicktime "pro" is that pros use it. if you make money using quicktime for video or whatever, $30 is nothing. another way of looking at it is that until quicktime 8 is released, let's say in 2 years, you're paying just over $1/month for quicktime 7. you probably pay more in text messaging fees on your cell.
  • Reply 5 of 100
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ipodandimac

    i'll be the first to say it is reasonable. $30 is a small price to pay for such diverse functionality. the whole point of quicktime "pro" is that pros use it. if you make money using quicktime for video or whatever, $30 is nothing. another way of looking at it is that until quicktime 8 is released, let's say in 2 years, you're paying just over $1/month for quicktime 7. you probably pay more in text messaging fees on your cell.



    um...last time i checked you didn't need to be a pro to want to open a new qt player window or to fucking save a movie or god forbid watch something full screen.



    30 dollars is a big price to pay on top of 129 for BASIC functionality.
  • Reply 6 of 100
    crees!crees! Posts: 501member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by applenut

    um...last time i checked you didn't need to be a pro to want to open a new qt player window or to fucking save a movie or god forbid watch something full screen.



    30 dollars is a big price to pay on top of 129 for BASIC functionality.




    I smell stingy.
  • Reply 7 of 100
    Quote:

    Originally posted by applenut

    um...last time i checked you didn't need to be a pro to want to open a new qt player window or to fucking save a movie or god forbid watch something full screen.



    30 dollars is a big price to pay on top of 129 for BASIC functionality.




    It seems the basic Quicktime should be able to at lease match Media Player and Real in capabilities. I understand that creation is a pro-feature I should pay for, but it seems that playback should be free. That would include viewing at full-screen. No wonder quicktime is loosing momentum.
  • Reply 8 of 100
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by applenut

    um...last time i checked you didn't need to be a pro to want to open a new qt player window or to fucking save a movie or god forbid watch something full screen.



    30 dollars is a big price to pay on top of 129 for BASIC functionality.




    AMEN!!!



    God knows only "pros" have 12 friends hovering around watching trailers in full screen to pick a flick to go to.



    Cropping, setting in/out points, rendering yada, yada that is pro, but new windows? and full screen?



    looks like a trip to warz/irc for a crack or key 5 minutes after an update...
  • Reply 9 of 100
    Count me in the "it's totally reasonable" category. The only concern is that the timing could be better...within six months many people will have felt the need (or strong desire) to buy iLife 05, Tiger and QuickTime 7 Pro...so I could see some poeple having an issue, but for me it's all totally worth it...even if it's just for h.264. What I'm really hoping for though is HE-AAC.
  • Reply 10 of 100
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by crees!

    I smell stingy.



    I smell an apologist.
  • Reply 11 of 100
    I think it's horseshit. And I won't cry when QT gets dominated by Real and MS because Apple didn't want to include basic fucking features in its player.



    I don't care how many buzzwords QT has associated with it. I know how awesome QT7 will be but the average joe won't know. And the average joe will only be looking to view things fullscreen and other basic features that come free with Media Player and RealPlayer.



    Cassanova needs to be slapped if he's calling the shots for QT pricing. Slapped. Hard. By Jobs.



    Sad thing is, with the new Cocoa QT APIs, anyone can build a fullscreen player with zero lines of code. Apple actually had to add lines to *prevent* the player from going fullscreen if the user isn't a registered QT user.
  • Reply 12 of 100
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    Hm, all I smell is childish tactlessness.



    I get the feeling that the standalone QT player over the long term will basically disappear from the landscape as apps that make use of the framework and with more complete and specific functions take over the consumer space. IMO, Apple should just make a dedicated QT Pro/editing app instead of this slightly weird strictly menu-driven thing shoehorned into the player app. At the same time, they are being wankers for not giving users full-screen and multi-window abilities in the default player. The whole QT "Pro" thing seems like confused marketing -- is it for authors? Is it premium service but without premium content? It should be cleared up. The old pro model circa 1996 isn't really viable any more.
  • Reply 13 of 100
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Like I said: go to warz or IRC, get a key, be done and have fun



    "shrug"





    But it is a f+++ing rip off for QT 6 keyholders, you cannot even use qt6 in tiger, you cannot install an older version of an OS component.



    This is not like final cut or iLife 04, those can move, you have paid for them, you can use them.



    I personaly think it is time to turn the tables on apple, a class action law suit, for just strait up fuicking the customers
  • Reply 14 of 100
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,805member
    As I have said repeatedly, Quicktime Pro should be free with a .Mac subscription.



    That would generate much more for Apple over the long term.
  • Reply 15 of 100
    I'd be willing to buy a bundle of Tiger + QTPro7 for, say, $15 or $20 more than Tiger alone. I think that would be a reasonable option.
  • Reply 16 of 100
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,276member
    I realize Apple has to pay licensing fees for codecs and other tech but come'on. Limiting the player just looks stupid and the nag screen has to go.
  • Reply 17 of 100
    applenutapplenut Posts: 5,768member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    I realize Apple has to pay licensing fees for codecs and other tech but come'on. Limiting the player just looks stupid and the nag screen has to go.



    it looks reaaaally stupid. they are only hurting themselves. the problem is too many mac users just accept what they are given. the few times that the mac community has actually "spoken up" about a stupid/move decision, Apple has actually listened.



    I have no problem paying for "pro features". I have been a QT pro buyer before. But when they started taking that away with each upgrade and started limiting basic playback I stopped paying.



    I refuse to pay 30 dollars so I can have two movies open at once, view them full screen, and save a movie i am viewing. This is basic functionality for a media player.
  • Reply 18 of 100
    This is nothing new that you need a new Pro key to Quicktime when there are a full upgrade like QT 5->6 .



    And that new QT Pro keys are bundled when there are upgrades to DVD Studio Pro or Final Cut Pro that you have to pay for to get (you get new documentation etc).



  • Reply 19 of 100
    yeah the main issue here is full screen.

    which makes apple look bad when people use QT on their PCs

    and annoys us when we use it on our Macs

    there are ways to get around the limitation without paying, sure

    but you shouldn't have to put out the effort

    i mean how much to they even make off of QT pro?

    does it even add to their bottom line in any significant way?
  • Reply 20 of 100
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    That's not so much the issue. The issue is that they're apparently making some currently free features into pro features. If there's an explanation, I'm not seeing it. Maybe iTunes will supplant QT Player as the primary media interface for consumers?



    Oh, to be a fly on the wall in Cupertino...
Sign In or Register to comment.