| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Apple Debuts QuickTime 6 Public Preview | |
|
||
| Time: 15:55 EST/20:55 GMT | News Source: ActiveWin.com | Posted By: Julien Jay | ||
Welcome to QuickTime 6, featuring MPEG-4, the next-generation of the most advanced digital media technology on the Internet. This latest release of Apple’s cutting-edge digital media software for both Mac and Windows-based computers delivers unparalleled quality for creating, playing and streaming audio and video content over the Internet. Here’s what’s new with QuickTime 6: MPEG-4 File Format (.mp4), MPEG-4 Video, AAC Audio, Instant-On, Skip Protection, Updated User Interface. The public preview version works with Windows 98, Windows Me, Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000 and Windows XP. Click the link below to start your download: | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 167 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:03:18 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 1401 (24.74.52.178) at 6/4/2002 4:25:26 PM |
|
So what??? All the good porn clips are in .avi or .mpg format This post was edited by chrishedlund on Tuesday, June 04, 2002 at 16:26. |
| #2 By 20 (24.243.51.87) at 6/4/2002 4:34:15 PM |
|
I wonder if this version will do like all the rest: After a few months, every time you open it, it'll be invisible. If you can guess where it is, you can manage to click it and drag it over the desktop leaving streaks of parts of the desktop. It's really cool.
Oh, but you can't play movies. You can listen to movies, but you can't watch them. Way to go Apple, great quality software. |
| #3 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/4/2002 5:06:12 PM |
| Quicktime is more than a LAME old format. It's actually a plugin architecture for any and all formats. The QT format is actually mpeg with proprietary compression and support for multimedia formats within the mpeg format like Flash et al. So I don't see how it could possibly be a "dinky-toy" format. |
| #4 By 6859 (204.71.100.215) at 6/4/2002 5:10:14 PM |
|
The only reason I had it was to view the Star Wars Episode II trailers, which required QuickTime 5 Pro.
Also notice that when QT6 Pro comes out, the QT5 Pro serial number you have won't work any more...great money making scheme there from Apple. |
| #5 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/4/2002 6:47:19 PM |
|
Anon, the main difference is that this is mpeg-4 instead of -2. It still includes -2 of course and many, many more formats--AAC audio, jpeg2000 is new too as well as a few other updates. Higher compression, higher quality, meant for data streams. Mpeg-4 is set to become the standard for streaming, interactive TV, and DV. Mpeg-2 is already the format for DVDs today. Of course, MS is posturing that they won't support a Mpeg-4 codec with Corona--so they are obviously trying to stop mpeg-4 from becoming as pervasive as it was clearly meant to become. It'll be interesting to see how Corona actually stacks up against Mpeg-4.
Also note that this includes a preview for Broadcaster which will allow anyone to create and serve live QT streams. This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, June 04, 2002 at 18:56. |
| #6 By 61 (65.185.24.205) at 6/4/2002 7:25:44 PM |
|
jerk, well, as far as streaming music goes, Corona has a bit of a problem. On my variable bit-rate files, for some reason, the stream just starts slowing down to the point where it just sounds like black rap (no offense to anyone, just the best way I can think to describe it at the moment)... and then if I stop it and re-start it, it starts up normal, and then slows down again... really wierd, and quite annoying.
It does, however, stream very well, even on my quite junky DSL connection (bad wiring). |
| #7 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/4/2002 7:39:23 PM |
| Thanks for the input CPUGuy. It seems to me like most people don't get how big a gamble MS is taking by going the Corona route rather than a QT/mpeg-4 solution. Go back a year or two and having your own media format for streaming instead of mpeg-2 and/or another standard is one thing, but now that mpeg-4 has quality and compression and streaming capabilities equal to or greater than -2, and it will be the standard for DV (recorders, iTV, DVDs) and many other services, it's a bit riskier to go with a proprietary format. |
| #8 By 1295 (216.84.210.100) at 6/4/2002 7:52:54 PM |
|
Sodajerk - Is there a feature list for MPEG-4 you could point me to. I've been real busy and my research is down a bit :)
I agree. If Corona doesn't have the streaming and compression of MPEG-4 then MS is taking a huge risk. I don't know what the feature list is with MPEG-4 but the Corona feature list is quite impressive. It makes you wonder if MS is not going the MPEG-4 route because they know they have it beat or if they are just gambling on the current market share. I personally would like to see Corona if the answer is they can beat the pants off of MPEG-4 but it doesn't really matter to me. Windows Media player will support both and I use WMP for my streaming anyway. To those who dog QT though... one thing to think about is the fact that all non-streamed movies are incredibly sexy in QT as compared to others. I will give Apple that... their format is incredible, bulky, but incredible. With that in mind though I'd like to see MS's format with the same rates as are in the movie previews. I wonder what the size would be and if they were just as clear. |
| #9 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/4/2002 7:53:02 PM |
|
#16 asf was based on mpeg-4... The format has been around for a while in various forms before final ratification of the patents and tech used--various new formats were created out of these pre-release versions of the standard. DivX in particular. I don't know how MS was working this, but I found it odd too that they touted capabilities for something pre-release--were they also paying pre-release licenses? Was it possible because no licensing was determined? Can MPEGLA sue DivX and others including MS? I don't know.
What remains however is that these formats developed over the last 2 or 3 years are no longer "true" mpeg-4 format since additions have been made to the tech. Compatibility may still result though. I suppose it depends on how close the files comply with the ISO standard. This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, June 04, 2002 at 20:00. |
| #10 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/4/2002 7:58:33 PM |
|
Hump, the download page has a decent feature list but it's a bit heavy on the marketing speak:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/preview/quicktime6/ This page details the mpeg-4 format features more specifically and links to numerous industry resources and groups, etc: http://www.apple.com/mpeg4/ |
| #11 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/4/2002 8:07:35 PM |
|
Humpty, the risk are even bigger, I think. This goes well beyond quality, speed, and size of the final format. With mpeg-4 you are talking about years of concerted research by the tech developers to pool the best technology... You are talking about a standard that has been lined up for years as an ISO standard, as a DV standard, as a streaming standard, as a replacement to the current standard of mpeg-2. You are talking about a format with a 1000+ Industry Forum... You are talking about a standard ratified by ISMA, which is definitely less meaningful than the previous items I've mentioned, but ISMA has over thirty members including Cisco, Sun, Phillips, Sony, Dolby Labs, National Semi, Kasenna, AOL, Lucent, SGI, Steaming21, and On2.
Even if Corona is slightly more impressive--it's hard to imagine that it can derail what was started even before Microsoft had a media format. ...especially if it is a Windows-only format (probably, certainly no promises yet) and MS doesn't support mpeg-4 throughout their software except as a codec for the player. This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, June 04, 2002 at 20:46. |
| #12 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/4/2002 9:06:24 PM |
| Actually your registration key will work with the preview release, just not with the final. Makes sense. It turns out this preview has very few codecs--it's clearly just intended to demonstrate the mpeg-4 capabilities. |
| #13 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 6/4/2002 9:11:53 PM |
|
Corona is not a Windows-only format (neither is the current Windows Media). MS has said that it will be cross-platform, and open to anyone that wants a license. The only thing is that if you buy Windows, the technology is included. You would have to license it for other platforms. This is in terms of developers/content providers. End-user access will probably work as it does currently.
One thing that could give MS an upper hand over MP4 besides the featureset of Corona is the MP4 licensing fees. I think MS said at the last trade show that they were supporting MP4, but only if its licensing was reasonable. Has the MPEG Group worked out a reasonable licensing scheme yet? (I guess they have judging by Apple's release of QT, although a preview.) This post was edited by n4cer on Tuesday, June 04, 2002 at 21:12. |
| #14 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/4/2002 9:31:55 PM |
|
enforcer, I wasn't saying win media was win only, but Microsoft has clearly stated that they have made no efforts to develop a non-Win player of Corona. Licensed, but non-source, players always suck--it 's similar to some of you bitching about WinQT--try it on a Mac and really appreciate QT. Licensing is fine, who wouldn't offer licenses? How else do you make money? It's a concern though. For example, I know using QT in Adobe apps will work crossplatform. So MS says they've gotten some software dev'ers to license Corona--but does that mean that they are essentially breaking my crossplatform graphics files since they haven't attempted to build any Mac support yet? If so, tsk, tsk.
The licensing hasn't been worked out yet actually although things must be relatively settled. There will be a usage fee for commercial implementations--that seems clear. Will that hold some up? Maybe. At the same time, will the cost of serving Corona be high? That's why people began leaving Real for Windows... Apple provides a complete mulitplatform serving environment for QT for FREE. |
| #15 By 3339 (64.175.43.233) at 6/4/2002 9:58:40 PM |
| Yeah, #1 was wrong, Moo. One warning though--this preview expires... if it expires before QT6 is released you could be fscked. (It happened before which is why I think this has a longer trial period, but still, beware.) The OS X version includes a Revert to QT5 app; does the win version have the equivalent? |
| #16 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 6/4/2002 10:14:35 PM |
|
No, but you could always set a restore point before installing.
One thing about QT6 (and I know this is just a Preview) is that it is very processor intensive, especially on mp4 content. This results in jumpy playback. Old QT streams still play ok, but the player app is still sluggish. This is on a P II 400 w/ 512MB RAM and Win XP Pro. I have not tried QT6 on my faster computers yet, but this same P II 400 has no problem with Windows Media, and less problems with QT5's player/content. |
| #17 By 20 (24.243.51.87) at 6/4/2002 11:00:05 PM |
|
Just for the record, I haven't spend the time to read the previous posts, but I just want to establish some facts in case anyone's confused.
As someone who has spent more time than I care to admit working in the guts of AVI, MOV, MPG, and other formats, I can say the following things: The base quicktime movie format (MOV) is simple and is very similar to the AVI framework. As you all know, it's the codec that makes the difference in playback. Apple has a few basic codecs as does Microsoft and they all suck. MS recently released the MPEG2v4 codec which is very good as well. I don't think Apple makes any decent codecs themselves. Sorensen is a 3rd party codec mainly for Quicktime and is very good. Quicktime has decent streaming. I believe WMA is better, however I haven't looked at QT 6 yet. Before QT6 (e.g. 4 and 5), the streaming was kinda hacked. the MOV format wasn't really originally designed for streaming, so streaming .MOV files didn't work all that great. From what I read back in the 5 days about what 6 was going to do was introduce a new streaming format (similar to WMA for MS, as opposed to MS using AVI to stream). QT4 and 5 are good streaming multi-media platforms. They aren't the best video platform, but they do other things well. For example, they have the best support for the SMIL spec (even better than Real who pioneered the spec) which allows you to combine timed events, flash, graphics, sound, video, and everything in the Player viewing area. It's pretty cool, not many people take advantage of that technology in Real or Quicktime. MS opted to go with HTML+TIME and use the web browser as the media platform. I can't blame them really, SMIL is just glorified XML, and Real and Quicktime basically wrote a platform from scratch to basically do all the stuff a web browser does. HTML+TIME makes more sense and has more functionality, IMHO, but it's harder for Artsy Apple cappucino-drinking types to get their head around it. SMIL is very simple and straight forward. So, I hope Apple has, with QT6 built a better streaming platform and framework. Now, Apple's client software (the Quicktime.exe app we all know and hate) is a complete pile of garbage. While it handles video and SMIL better than Real, that's still not saying much. It's still a flaming pile of un-installable garbage. QT4 and QT5 both suffered from the invisibility bug and, upon "uninstalling" it, I found the uninstaller merely removed the shortcuts in the Start Menu. All DLLs, registry entries, files on the HD remained. Upon performing a complete QT enema on my machine and reinstalling did I fix the invisibility bug... for 3 days before it would start again. Hopefully, Apple fired their entire software department and hired in all the new guys who built MacOSX and QT 6 and both will be quality pieces of software. I somehow doubt that, but I'm willing to give Apple the benefit of the doubt for the 4 millionth time. |
| #18 By 3653 (65.190.70.73) at 6/4/2002 11:08:13 PM |
|
sodajerk, i don't see MS' move as very risky... they just don't see the need to pay for the mpeg4 licensing. That's their perogative.
And on the topic of QuickTime... the earlier poster is right... its only needed for Star Wars Trailers... although I ended up getting some off Kazaa that were .mpg And QuickTime has, what, 5% of the market? Or less? |
| #19 By 3339 (67.116.254.25) at 6/4/2002 11:26:32 PM |
|
Marketshare of what, mooresa? Players? yeah, probably less than 5% in usage... Paid Players? More than MS [people REAL-ly pay for Real too, huh?] Content? certainly less than 5%, QT is not meant to have a de facto format... Video Production Studio Hardware and Software? 75% Trailer Production and Music Video Studios? 92% Hardware (Cameras still and video) Compatibility and Licensing? 95% Graphics/Video Software Compatibility and Licensing? 98% OEM Licensing? 30% ( I presume MS basically rights this off into Win licensing)
daz, your emphasis on .mov and SMIL, and completely not mentioning mpeg, shows how little you know about QuickTime. (A quick little hint would be that .mov pre-existed mpeg-1's ratification; and you can do alot more with QT through scripting, and more easily, than you can with SMIL and Flash combined, and Flash is much more frequently used in QT than SMIL.) Also, you do understand that the best codecs are the most expensive ones, right? ...or they don't even make it out of the lab or studio. Apple happens to license a very good one, develop its own, and license many, many more codecs and formats, and provides a well-established (over ten years old) and open framework for plugging in whatever codec your cheap ass can scrounge up, or develop yourself, or PAY for. What a concept. This post was edited by sodajerk on Tuesday, June 04, 2002 at 23:40. |
| #20 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 6/5/2002 7:02:29 AM |
|
#36: "#34 erm....hit ctrl+m. Present movie full screen. That was hard wasn't it? The option has been there from 4 onwards"
Only in the Pro version. You have to pay to get full screen. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- After testing on two other machines (AMD 800MHz Thunderbird and 1GHz Duron, also w/ XP Pro and 512 MB RAM), it is clear that QT6 is indeed very processor intensive, especially when playing MP4 content of any of the bitrates available from Apple's site. Even on these systems, fullscreen playback was jumpy, and was very pixelated. It doesn't seem to upscale as well as WMV content. This could be an implementation deficiency, though. Again, I realize that this is a preview. Normal-size playback also had framerate problems at times. AAC audio seems okay. It seems to do best with classical music. WMA may be better, but I can't do a 1:1 comparison with the limited content on Apple's site. It definitely doesn't sound that good at 40k. The classical demo sounded okay at this rate (Clear difference at 128k though). It does seem, in all cases, better than MP3, however. I still look forward to Corona. I expect it will offer better results. Time will tell. This post was edited by n4cer on Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 07:03. |
| #21 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 6/5/2002 10:26:26 AM |
|
Quicktime generally works ok, the video and sound quality are less than you get with windows media or real. But the nice thing is that you can turn on this switch to cache the streamed files on your harddrive, and then go looking for them.
n4cer - I've noticed with the old QT5 player that my CPU will spike at 100%. This is on a 1.2Ghz PIII. Apple programmers are probably so used to having a single-tasked OS they figure nobody would be doing two things at once so what difference does it make? |
| #22 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 6/5/2002 12:41:36 PM |
|
lol
Why, oh why can't they just release a codec for WMP? That would do more to endear Apple to Windows users than their past few player releases. Or they could at least get help from Microsoft on porting the player. This post was edited by n4cer on Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 12:43. |
| #23 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/5/2002 12:58:47 PM |
| "Or they could at least get help from Microsoft on porting the player." Ha, Ha, Ha! Not a fan of history are you enforcer. Oh well, a pity what passes for an educated comment or person these days. |
| #24 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 6/5/2002 1:29:39 PM |
| Anon, I never said asf was a format... But it was based on mpeg-4. In fact, most of your "debunked" myths no one mentioned. And if you think Microsoft "contributed the bulk of the IP to the MPEG-4 working group" you are absolutely smoking crack. Dolby Labs contributed more to mpeg than MS did in about five minutes time. What about the 6 years before MS even realized what media was, during which the mpeg group had already built a large pool of patented media tech? What about joining mpeg after the QT dispute with Apple just to abandon the group in order to get their name in some small way on the standard and to get access to as much knowledge as they could since they didn't have it? And you actually think the last 5 years have been about licensing issues? Great to see you know crap about media technology! MS's compression was chosen? Compression algorithms are the bulk of what the standard is, and few of them are Microsoft's. Boy, oh boy, oh boy. |
| #25 By 2459 (66.25.124.8) at 6/5/2002 2:30:12 PM |
|
Nothing wrong with my history, SJ. The Quicktime player has a history of sucking on Windows. Apple clearly needs help with writing Windows software. Many users would rather they just provide a codec because of the many problems and normal Windows application functionality inconsistences that exist with QT for Windows. Then, there are the *nix users that also wouldn't mind a codec. My comments were valid.
As to the history to which I assume you are referring, it simply doesn't apply. This post was edited by n4cer on Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 14:31. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 167 Last | Next |
The time now is
11:03:18 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
