cabron Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 All quicktime versions has been released for all versions of OS X and Windows, but Apple has been silent in Quicktime X. Does anyone have information if Quicktime X will be released for Leopard and Windows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PL_ Veteran Posted June 11, 2009 Veteran Share Posted June 11, 2009 Not true. Latest version for 10.3 is 7.5, 10.2 is 6.5, 10.1 is 6.3, 10.0 is 5.0 etc etc...long story short I doubt Leopard will be getting X. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabron Posted June 11, 2009 Author Share Posted June 11, 2009 (edited) I doubt Leopard will be getting X. I am wonder if Quicktime X require Hardware acceleration H.264 in order to run? because SL is suppose to have H.264 Hardware acceleration, if not I don't understand why they will not release it for Leopard. Edited June 11, 2009 by cabron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ci7 Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 (edited) anyways how come it jumped from 7.x >>> X(10.x) :huh: Edited June 11, 2009 by skynetXrules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysaor Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 I am wonder if Quicktime X require Hardware acceleration H.264 in order to run? because SL is suppose to have H.264 Hardware acceleration, if not I don't understand why they will not release it for Leopard. QT in Leopard already have H264 acceleration but only for unibodies with NVIDIA 9400/9600. QT X is going to have the same thing (for 9400+ only). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PL_ Veteran Posted June 11, 2009 Veteran Share Posted June 11, 2009 I am wonder if Quicktime X require Hardware acceleration H.264 in order to run? because SL is suppose to have H.264 Hardware acceleration, if not I don't understand why they will not release it for Leopard. Maybe as an incentive to upgrade. QuickTime X also includes QuickTime Pro features, so it's not like you're paying for nothing. anyways how come it jumped from 7.x >>> X(10.x) :huh: It's not the first time a product has jumped version numbers. Examples off the top of my head are Office 2007 (12) to 2010 (14), as well as Solaris 2.6 to Solaris 7. Oh, and Marathon 2 to Marathon Infinity ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabron Posted June 11, 2009 Author Share Posted June 11, 2009 QT in Leopard already have H264 acceleration but only for unibodies with NVIDIA 9400/9600. QT X is going to have the same thing (for 9400+ only). That's the thing why I started hating Apple, I bought my iMac last year and already feel that my system is useless because the ATI HD 2600 PRO is not supported. Apple is just another greedy ****** company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern Patriot Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 How are they "greedy" because the hardware in your older system doesn't have the features needed to support newer software? That's like saying Microsoft is to blame because your video card won't support DirectX 11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miuku. Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 That's the thing why I started hating Apple, I bought my iMac last year and already feel that my system is useless because the ATI HD 2600 PRO is not supported. Apple is just another greedy ****** company. Well actually that would be ATI's problem, not Apple's because the 2600Pro doesn't support H264 decoding on Windows (or Linux) for that matter. They can't conjure in functionality that the chip doesn't have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabron Posted June 11, 2009 Author Share Posted June 11, 2009 How are they "greedy" because the hardware in your older system doesn't have the features needed to support newer software? That's like saying Microsoft is to blame because your video card won't support DirectX 11. So, you called older system to a computer bought less than a year and already unsupported? excuse me but that's just pathetic from Apple not to supported it. I will agree if my system was 4 years old or more, but not supporting something with less than a year show how Apple prefer selling their system and make that buck than supporting their customers. They don't give a damn about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miuku. Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 So, you called older system to a computer bought less than a year and already unsupported? excuse me but that's just pathetic from Apple not to supported it. He's referring to the hardware accelerated functionality on QT X, not the program itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quillz Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Well actually that would be ATI's problem, not Apple's because the 2600Pro doesn't support H264 decoding on Windows (or Linux) for that matter.They can't conjure in functionality that the chip doesn't have. But it was Apple's hardware decision to use that chip, and they easily could have gone with something else. So either they had not been working on Snow Leopard at all (doubtful), or it's a matter of planned obsoleteness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stetson Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 So, you called older system to a computer bought less than a year and already unsupported? excuse me but that's just pathetic from Apple not to supported it. I will agree if my system was 4 years old or more, but not supporting something with less than a year show how Apple prefer selling their system and make that buck than supporting their customers. They don't give a damn about it. He's not saying that Apple isn't supporting it, he's saying the ATI didn't support it in the first place when they physically made the card. Apple can't add hardware features to your card that do not exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miuku. Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 But it was Apple's hardware decision to use that chip, and they easily could have gone with something else. So either they had not been working on Snow Leopard at all (doubtful), or it's a matter of planned obsoleteness. So I guess I have to go and shout at every PC manufacturer because they shipped non-DX10 compliant chips on their laptops a year before Vista came out or Intel for their little GMA trick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hurmoth Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 So I guess I have to go and shout at every PC manufacturer because they shipped non-DX10 compliant chips on their laptops a year before Vista came out or Intel for their little GMA trick? I just got a brand new Dell Studio XPS 13 last month and it doesn't have a DirectX 11 chip in it and Windows 7 is only a few months away. DAMN you Dell!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miuku. Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 I just got a brand new Dell Studio XPS 13 last month and it doesn't have a DirectX 11 chip in it and Windows 7 is only a few months away. DAMN you Dell!!! Clearly Dell's fault. They're trying to force you to buy a new laptop because it doesn't support DX11 natively and that's going to blow your worl... Yeah. Maybe not ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObiWanToby Posted June 11, 2009 Share Posted June 11, 2009 Well, you would really just want or need 10.1. for a laptop anyways. No heavy gaming is going on there. 10.1 is used in the UI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PyX Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 I think QuickTime X will be out sometime in September for Leopard, just not as fully-featured as in Snow Leopard. The interface should basically be the same, but not the performances. I have no idea if it will support trimming and all that stuff, but I bet it will. As I said, it just won't be as fast. BTW I tested it under Snow Leopard and it's awesome :) I really like it so far and I really always hated the current version of QuickTime. Actually, I hate it since it exists... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thertrain Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 Office 2007 (PC) - 12 Office 2008 (Mac) - 13 Office 2010 (PC) - 14 Maybe as an incentive to upgrade. QuickTime X also includes QuickTime Pro features, so it's not like you're paying for nothing.It's not the first time a product has jumped version numbers. Examples off the top of my head are Office 2007 (12) to 2010 (14), as well as Solaris 2.6 to Solaris 7. Oh, and Marathon 2 to Marathon Infinity ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PyX Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 Office 2007 (PC) - 12Office 2008 (Mac) - 12 Office 2010 (PC) - 14 I fixed it for you. I could also point Dreamweaver. There was never a Dreamweaver 5 from what I recall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
what Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 that's why i use windows :laugh: The sole reason you use Windows is because Quicktime X won't be released on Leopard? How interesting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 Makes me wonder if they're finally dropping the Quick Time Pro thing with Snow Leopard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PyX Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 As of now, they dropped the Pro thing completely (finally, like you said). There was a Snow Leopard seed with QuickTime 7, professional version included. Now the WWDC build has QuickTime X and I can edit videos, transfer them to youtube, save them, make them full-screen, etc. It's fully-featured, like the pro version. If they decide to put it back, it'll make me really angry... I can't believe we'd have to pay to have an actual video player that does the simplest things other apps do. Now, I don't think Apple rips people off generally, but this ? It was a real joke... The sole reason you use Windows is because Quicktime X won't be released on Leopard? How interesting... LOL That made me laugh :p But how can you say it won't be released on Leopard? If XP, Vista and 7 users can have it, I don't see why Leopard is impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 Well betas of previous systems had QuickTime Pro enabled by default for testing purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calum Veteran Posted June 16, 2009 Veteran Share Posted June 16, 2009 But how can you say it won't be released on Leopard? If XP, Vista and 7 users can have it, I don't see why Leopard is impossible. As far as I am aware there has actually been nothing confirmed in regards to this being released for Windows. I'd like to try it out though. I've never used QuickTime before, I've never really had a need and always hated the interface. However, if Apple can optimise QuickTime X for Windows, like they did with Safari, that would be nice. I love the new QuickTime X icon :p I just hope iTunes adopts a similar coloured icon :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts