Quicktime and which codec is supported

[Jeff Reynolds]

Richard,

you are very correct. I got a bit carried away and did not intend to  
imply that the process was a killer or big problem. I posted this  
more in the spirit of look carefully and also check with your clients  
in the matter since their level of comfort may not be the same as  
yours. the old posting about what an apple rep said then may not be  
the case now. best to check to see where things are now and get the  
proper permissions if you need them.

I too have a few products out with the qt installer and am not  
worried about them at all. It has always been the client's reaction  
(or their lawyers) that have been the problem. I wish i had that  
contact at apple in the past since clients have contacted apple about  
the issues and got the line the forms are on the website and those  
are our standard agreements. I guess they never pushed very far on  
the matter, cracked the right door, and/or were small fish.

You are very right in that its not to annoy developers Apple does  
this. its all in the hopes of keeping qt as up to date as possible  
out there. Very understandable and agreeable. Its hard for them since  
they have to balance getting it out as easily as possible with  
keeping things up to date and secure as you note.

BTW i usually have advocated for having the installer and tried to  
talk clients flinching into it, its more their hang ups than mine. I  
actually have one product that i think was under the most restrictive  
period in qt licensing and the client was happy to agree to it. so my  
experience has been all over the map.

My point is just read it carefully and make sure you can abide by the  
agreement w/in your project parameters and your client is cool with  
it to. also to see where the agreement is when you do the project  
since it has changed quite a bit over the years. theres a bit more to  
it than just put a logo on the label.

cheers,

Jeff Reynolds



On Feb 19, 2007, at 10:38 PM, use-revolution-request at lists.runrev.com  
wrote:

> Jeff, what you wrote about the QuickTime license is technically  
> correct,
> but I feel it may be in everyone's interest to note that Apple's
> priority appears to be to simply make sure people are using the  
> version
> with the greatest security and fewest bugs; they're not going out of
> their way to annoy developers.
>
> We covered this earlier, and I provided the email address of the  
> helpful
> Apple rep who has answered similar licensing questions for my clients:
> <http://lists.runrev.com/pipermail/use-revolution/2005-February/ 
> 051120.html>
>
> I currently maintain four products which require QuickTime to use  
> all of
> their features, and we just provide a link to Apple's download page  
> in a
> dialog that checks for QT on startup.  That may not work well for
> everyone, but it solves a lot of problems for the majority of
> downloadable software products very easily.
>
> While I may have many varied opinions about Apple's business  
> practices,
> I must say that with QuickTime licensing I've found them to be very
> helpful, and well worth the modest expense of downloading a form and
> dropping a CD in the mail.