Windows 7 RC to natively support .mov files

Windows 7 already has built in DivX support in the current beta. Hidden inside the various changes since beta for the RC is a change to Windows Media Player to natively support the .mov files,

Improved playback support for video content from digital camcorders and cameras

Customers loved the increased range of formats natively supported by the Windows 7 Beta, but noticed areas where they wanted broader support. For example, one was unable to seek to a specific spot in the video in Windows Media Player or Windows Media Center for AVCHD content that was imported from a digital camcorder. We've addressed this. Also, while the support for video from some digital cameras worked great, we also got feedback about supporting a broader set of devices out of the box. We've since added support for Windows Media Player to natively support the .MOV files used to capture video for many common digital cameras.

This is a great addition to the RC along with various other changes. No longer we need to download Apple QuickTime or other alternatives like VLC Media Player, just to watch .mov files!

What are the other (possible) codecs do you think Windows 7 should support natively?

Thanks to Techradar for the heads up!

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft release Windows 7 application compatibility update

Next Story

Facebook reaches out to users about policies

122 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

MKV, AVI, MOV, MP4 - i don't give a rats arse what format you use or prefer. All I give a monkeys about is "does it play on me Xbox?"

MKV does not, therefore I do not want it as much as say AVI. Then again I can watch MKV containered HD on me PC. To me there are all the same, as long as it's been properly done.

When I play an AVI file in Windows Media Player on Windows Vista, it only has sound, but no picture. Does the same happen in Windows 7?

I'd rather not have to use VLC Media Player for AVI files

Depends upon the video codec used in the file. What codec does it use? Most MPEG4 codecs should work fine in AVI with Windows 7.

You're asking if there will be a Restore Pack for "N" systems - the answer to that is Yes.

It may be simpler to simply buy the version containing the features you want, though.

Sounds good. It was always annoying that I had to get 3rd party programs to get WMP to behave like my $20 Wal-Mart DVD player.

Again, the EU forced MS to make a WMP-less version. So I don't see how they would get in trouble with this move as consumers can choose a WMP-less version. Not that anybody buys it, but the choice is there.

I'm glad they are doing this. Quicktime itself is quite good, but the Quicktime Player is a POS.

In spite of my loathing the idea of native MKV support, I strongly agree with sub support. This shouldn't be that complicated, but maybe it's still just too niche.

about freaking time WMP support more than MS own formats

still lacking mkv support

but i'm so much used to watch video with MPC and VLC that i'm not going back to WMP

Who cares? Almost no video is available in .mov format and if there is any that I might want to watch then I use vlc.

mkv support would be far more useful.

add .mkv already microsoft! I'm glad they have added .mov, now we can play apple's movie trailers without having to install quicktime or quicktime alternative. Quicktime player is awful finally normal users wont have to use it. Obviously us advanced users will use vlc player or other advanced players but for the average joe this is great news.

Now just add .mkv playback please microsoft then i'll be very happy indeed. Support for external subtitles would be nice too, AC3 audio would be nice too, might cost you a few cents for the license but users would be able to play so much media by default without having to install codecs or players.

BUT; Are we looking at basic support or full support?

Because looking at history,it seems microsoft aren't allowed to add full support for somthing, because they
will be removing competition. Just look at the EUvsMS case, people don't bother installing something else,because IE is already there, and the EU finds this....well, a great way to make some more cash

I doubt that. It doesn't simply parse "DivX", but actually parses the MPEG-4 ASP standard (which DivX is based upon).
Windows 7 will also support MPEG-4 AVC (aka H.264) decoding and therefore be able to play any streams created by x264 as well.

There has to be a catch, Apple wouldn't just let MS have it like that. There is something they aren't telling us, I'm sure of it (you know how the saying goes, if it's too good to be true, it probably isn't). Hope I'm wrong though.

Uhmmm... the beta already plays .mov files of that specific format they're talking about so, this ain't like it's news or anything. Known this since early December...

So for all those thinking this means playing any and all QuickTime files out there, you're mistaken: it's only for the specific codec format of the .mov files used for digital cameras to do short movie clips and much older QuickTime files. New QuickTime content like movie trailers from Apple.com or whatever will NOT work, that still requires the latest QuickTime (or QTAlternative/Lite).

This is a very good example of MS finally doing some of the really basic beginner's 101 things we've all wanted from Windows for years. Though long overdue, it's a very welcome move!

so Microsoft..... paid.... Apple for license to use quicktime?

i presume it's just the Motion JPEG MOVs used by digital cameras. no MP4 stuff?

Well done, Microsoft! This saves me from having to install QT Lite since the Apple's Quicktime software runs horribly slow on Windows.

Nashy said,
I bet the EU are rubbing their hands with this. MS will get fined, mark my words.

Only if Apple gets a bug up their butts and tries to find something wrong. but I doubt it since they didnt go after VLC and other players that can play MOVs.

If they license it from Apple, they are free to use it

This would be similar to the MPEG-2 decoder they have which is licensed

Actually, I thing the EU would be quite pleased with MS integrating more codecs in their WMP. It does somehow weaken their monopoly, by enabling other than MS-formats, such as wma and wmv...

(Like they are now ordering MS to ship Windows with other browsers, besides IE, for users to choose...)

Bitchin....I really hate having to download extra plugins and am glad I can ditch Quicktime. I am hoping they update Media Player for Windows XP and Windows Vista as well.

I would want to see those supported formats along wiht MKV.

Hopefully Microsoft is adding tag support for them, if not, they will be missing something important.

This is hardly a big change. As far as I remember QuickTime was the foundation for MPEG4 container format - so if Microsoft has support for MPEG4 then adding support for QuickTime is easy.

technically it would never be difficult...codec packs have added this ability for years. It's the business side that would have been the road block.

I always thought Apple somehow prevented Microsoft from doing this. But if they can do it that would be excellent! Great news!

We can only hope... probably not though. Maybe Apple will just make a next generation... ultra proprietary codec to replace the existing generation and than refuse to license it. What would be really nice is native support for protected audio and video purchased through iTunes and playable on WMP and, or other devices (besides iTunes).

A codec is proprietary or not. And if they're forthcoming with this one, why shouldn't they be with a future one? Obviously Apple wants to get their format well used, and if they want to cut costs by licensing the codec to not have all responsibility on themselves to create a full fledged QT Windows port, I can definitely understand them.

I havent tested 7... does Media Centre allow you to fast forward and rewind movie files properly (rather than just jump through them).

Marshalus said,
I'm so happy about this, one less thing I need QuickTime for. Too bad it has to be installed with iTunes anyway, and I can't avoid that with my iPhone :(


MediaMonkey ftw

I will have to check out Media Monkey. I was not aware that I could use it to transfer Audible books, move over movies, sync my mail, contacts and bookmarks and of course... move over the forty plus apps I use on a regular basis.

If the one good thing that comes out of this, maybe it will force Apple to apply native Windows interface guidelines to both Quicktime and iTunes. It would be nice to see it more like the new Safari 4 beta.

alright i just have to thank Microsoft for listening, this is good news...
most of my media has support right out of the box now

They tried to add it into Office 2k7 from the start, but Adobe had a hissy fit, now you have to d/l the add-on/plug-in for PDF support last I heard.

yeah I got the plugin, but still hoping that there would be a native option to view a pdf in windows like photo gallery

Yes but not to worry, Adobe let Apple have it no problem. For some reason letting Microsoft have it in Windows was a problem.

I'm sure Adobe doesn't have a problem per se, but that they demanded a too high licensing fee from Microsoft. Windows is a bit bigger than OS X, so presumably a much, much, higher price was demanded.

Heh, if MSFT got it, it'd just be one more thing they're sued over. It's ironic that although MSFT is the lesser of two evils when compared to Apple, the EU and the DoJ shafting them for antitrust violations.

After all, the DoJ/EU aren't strictly attacking their sales record, just Windows' technical merits, such as including WMP and IE in their OS.

/Typed on a delicious new MBP.

use foxit pdf reader instead... it's a 1/100th the size of reader, opens pdf's with no lag. there's no reason to ever install adobe reader, it's terrible.

Avi said,
Real is dead. Move on.

It is not dead
many sites still use it for audio streaming atleast and the rmvb format is getting popular also now with many programs allowing to convert entire dvd to reasonable quality rmvb format with very small size.

I think embedded .mov files in webpages uses QuickTime plugin,but we have to wait and see how this changes if we have WMP plugin!

I hope there will be reciprocity, in that the next OS X rev will have a few more necessary codecs installed by default. I'm more than a little tired of helping Mac friends learn to play modern video files, lol.

MKV please... I think this is a must in todays world. I know they've been debating it... its just a container, can't be that hard to do. All the codecs are already supported

No offical codec, No offical tools , No hardware support MKV is ready for the masses .

Keep the Crap Crap Crap Pack out of windows and off our PC's

MKV is just a container... it'd be nice if we don't have to install an ugly codec pack just for mkv support

And since all the codecs in Win7 are media foundation based, and the only MKV codecs are DirectShow based, you have to install duplicates of half the codecs

But aren't you still forced to use WMP either way? Can other players like Media Player Classic or ZoomPlayer access and use the built in Win7 codecs as well?

Real crap is the codec support for Windows 7, not the packs. With native Windows support you cant sharpen the video and you have to get stuck with that terrible blurriness.

IT IS ALWAYS DAMN BLURRY. Throw an Unsharp Mask at the default in ffdshow and you will get the difference Im talking about. Its specially important in HD movies.

You don't have to install CCCP or K-l1te (why is this being censored?) for complete mkv support. Just install Haali Media Splitter. It's the most "complete" mkv splitter available.
I'm sure that Haali will add Windows 7 support once the final is out. You can also (manually) install Gabest's standalone mkv splitter. I suggest using one of the later versions from the mpc-hc project.

I really doubt Microsoft will add native mkv support.

Ever notice how every format that people say is the "future" never takes off? Evolutions don't take this long to gain acceptance, and blaming the mainstream is all anybody does about it. IE was blamed for PNG's failure to overtake JPG. WMP will be blamed for MKV's failure to overtake AVI. Opensource blames users themselves for its failure to overtake the desktop.

I don't get how people can waste their time saying MKV is the future of AVI when streaming seems to be kicking both of their butts. It's not like music formats that had the help of portable music players. Video isn't nearly as heavily trafficked. When we think of the video most people access, we think of TV, which should tell us something right there: video's future lies in on-demand. MKV is not equipped to answer that call.

excalpius said,
+1 MKV support. It's trivial and it's the future of AVI. Period.

Another +1 for .mkv :D

Besides that, is this an actual codec for .mov now included in Win7 which works no matter what you use, or have they tied it to wmp so you're forced to use it for that new .mov support? The latter would make it totally useless, as you'd still have to install proper .mov support.

They aren't going to add support for some little fringe container like MKV that hardly anyone uses. What does it offer over the MP4 container anyway?

@ Catweasel

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_container_formats

mkv is clearly superior to mp4 and its hardly "some little fringe container". Its by far the most popular container if you want to go hi-def.

Also by saying "hardly anyone uses" you make a fool out of yourself. You're just ignorant. You're most welcome to stay your opionions but do some research before you make claims.

+1 for mkv though its not really needed. Haali splitter is minimal and easy to install.

I prefer DivX over MKV any day. MKV video is so horrible. Pause or take a freeze frame snapshot and compare.

I'm with you Joshie.

"Also by saying "hardly anyone uses" you make a fool out of yourself. You're just ignorant."

Your source that this is by far the most popular container for high def? Also keep the personal attacks to yourself.

@Krome: lol. u have no clue about any of this, do you? :)
DivX = a video compressor based on MPEG-4 ASP
MKV = a container.

You can even put DivX encoded video inside mkv.

@Catweasel: heh, anyone that downloads any (illegal) HD movies over the Internet knows that they come in mkv container. "The scene" has that as a rule. :P I can assure you that mkv is more spread than mp4.

Well maybe that's true, not really into that myself. I just know that I've never seen any hardware that supports it or any companies that offer downloads using it. If it's the choice of pirates though I still don't think Microsoft will be offering support for it.

@Catweasel: mp4 only supports certain combinations of audio/video codecs. The reason MKV is prefered in the internets is because it supports coupling HD video (h264) with AC3 audio (which is the codec used by the broadcasters I presume). For mp4 you would have to transcode the audio to AAC since it won't allow AC3.

MKV is JUST a container and it allows certain codec combinations that other containers don't. H264 video inside a .MOV won't work well if the video is using the high profiles/levels of AVC.


@Julius Caro: you can put ac3 audio inside mp4. The main reason pirates chose mkv (over mp4) is the fact that it's open-sourced and completely free.

Just install the latest DivX codec. that has MKV support. It might even be included if the Windows 7 version is the same decompressor.

JOshie said,
Ever notice how every format that people say is the "future" never takes off? Evolutions don't take this long to gain acceptance, and blaming the mainstream is all anybody does about it. IE was blamed for PNG's failure to overtake JPG. WMP will be blamed for MKV's failure to overtake AVI. Opensource blames users themselves for its failure to overtake the desktop.

I don't get how people can waste their time saying MKV is the future of AVI when streaming seems to be kicking both of their butts. It's not like music formats that had the help of portable music players. Video isn't nearly as heavily trafficked. When we think of the video most people access, we think of TV, which should tell us something right there: video's future lies in on-demand. MKV is not equipped to answer that call.

Do you even know the differences between jpg and png ? PNG (8 or 24 depending of the needs) will slowly overtake gif and jpg for transparency and rasterized images once all browser will fully support it (ie once people stop using that crap that is called IE6). Web designer might decide to chose another format than PNG but gif is too much limited for today's needs and jpg is a bad format to store rasterized images. Of course jpg is still a better option for images taken with a camera.

You compare apples and oranges.

And yes lack of IE support did hurt PNG. You can turn this the way you want it's a plain hard fact.

@AVI
the mp4 container is a standard (for which there are papers with the specification, if IM not mistaken), and there are free and opensource tools that let you mux and demux mp4 files. I'm yet to see an mp4 file with H264 video and AC3 audio, but I'm happy to be proven wrong.

@LaP
You do realize that all you did right there was act out the part of one of the people I criticized, right? Of course I know the difference between JPG and PNG. Do you even know the relevance of that difference? Because I don't; that difference will have no impact on its success or failure. At this point, by the time all browsers fully support it, it'll be too old to go mainstream. When has an old format ever succeeded this late? It had to get its foot in the door early, one way or another.

Blame PNG, maybe, but definitely not IE. It could've saved itself by finding some market to appeal to outside of website development. Quicktime video survived thanks to the Mac platform and 90s games. Put some real effort into versatility for PNG, or it'll just be another excuse for a few people to whine and moan about their baby being assassinated by Big Bad Evil Corporations.

P.S. The same can easily be said about MKV. As has been mentioned, its popularity is in piracy. Nothing else. MKV's community has been digging its own grave thanks to that. If it has no appeal to a legit market (like QT has), there's no reason for a business to support it.

Besides, seriously now, how many pirates use Windows Media Player? Codec or no codec, these are the people that shun WMP in favor of VLC or MPC.