Quicktime Multimedia Authoring - Nearly Dead?

Sivakatirswami katir at hindu.org
Tue Oct 24 16:35:13 EDT 2006


 >>> I've
 >>> come to the tentative
 >>> conclusion that QuickTime, (as far as an authoring platform is
 >>> concerned), is falling so far
 >>> behind that it could soon be considered "dead".

Oh boy..I hope not!

this is very close to home.

"someone gather all complaints and needs in one document"

is a tall request. we need a collaborative approach. I would even open
a wiki for this on our new web server in San Franscisco tomorrow if 
needed...
and let your  VP of QT have access. *anything* to help Apple take QT 
forward.

It takes me about 5 minutes to set up a new wiki... I'm serious about
this offer. Steve: contact me off list if you think it would be useful

Some (us) are simply not in a position to jump on the Macromedia (adobe now)
bandwagon. for lots of reasons... the $ and man hours needed to
produce a little content is incredible, and if you are already vested
in the FinalCut Pro Suite (as we are) it's really hard to justify
another $10M for X number of macromedia seats in the enterprise.
So apple will happily take your $ for the FCutPro suite, but let the
delivery mechanism languish (QT)? doesn't make sense.

I was hoping QT would gain some
"market share" in the world of Flash, but I hear  Google is
going with Flash... ummm.... I thought  their new corporate relationship
with Apple would involve some committment to QT.
Looks like I was wrong...

Anyway, if sqb (smile) is offering to make "the document" here are
a few bullet points to get it started:

1) centralized, maintained and accessible "complete at any point in time"
documentation on existing interactive tools...

A PosttGreSQL type document(s) with links to associated tools...?

2) And let's make a decision about SMIL!  Yes, it's alive, or No it's dead.
Make up your Apple Mind.  QT needs to get behind XML standards
that are advancing, stable. Firefox 2.0 will support a new interactive 
format.
Does Apple even have a clue how to hook in?

3) "intense" disclosure, support and close collaboration on the API with 
developers
--streaming issues  (QT player will stream the same movie on the same
connection that a Rev Player cannot, how does the developer solve this 
problem
unless but Apple helps them?)

4) And there is the "windows parity" business... as long as apple lets
Windows implementation lag 1 (2?) years behind the Apple implementation
QT will suffer in the backwaters. That's hard on everyone who is vested
in QT...

5) (biased and vested in our favorite tool) Then how about going all the 
way to
the "hilt" have Apple Engineers work with Rev Engineers on the Rev 
Player object,
not just on Macs but on *both* platforms
After all Apple  ditched xTalk (Hypercard) and Revolution is the hope 
for xTalk future.
One would think it a natural collaboration. (naive position to be sure, 
given
Supercard's and Real Basic's position in the field, but hey, I'm a Rev 
advocate... )

6) You fill in here...

Years ago we had one of apple's top consultants here with us in Hawaii, 
and he said
Apples problem was that it could never figure out if it was a hardware 
or software company.
Those were the days when Apple flew in a camera crew to film our place 
here on Kauai because
we had the first desktop publishing network ever establishd in the 
history of PC's in 85...
We wired together our Macs and said we don't need floppies anymore. 
Apple said
it was the first time anyone had done it.

Anyway,  he felt, if they realized they were a software company,
they could conquer the world. or survive at least.

So, the situation persists.. iPods are hardware, QT is software....I 
think they can't make
  up their minds... if they Develop the windows side for QT then there 
is no reason for
"switch" but if they don't then QT will continue to languish.

Does this help seed the "one document, point-by-point"

ooops I think you pushed a button here....anyway, I'm serious about
launching a little wiki for this if it would help *if* your VP man
("Glenn"?) will watch it... But I'm looking for more
than just QT improvement, let's get Apple to "recognize" Revolution
as a serious player and work with Rev engineers like fingers on the same 
hand

(there we go, dreaming again, but of ten dreams, well dreamed, five will 
come true)

Sivakatirswami




Stephen Barncard wrote:
> I'm friends with the VP of Quicktime at Apple.
> 
> If someone can gather all the complaints and needs in one document 
> point-by-point, I can make sure he's aware of your concerns and can 
> perhaps tell us what's in the future for Quicktime without blowing an 
> NDA. He also might be aware of some new QT based authoring products in 
> the pipeline.
> 
> Glenn was VERY bullish about and proud of the product, and I'd expect 
> he's have a really good answer. It's worth a try. He was concerned and 
> disappointed when he found Realaudio files on my sites!
> 
> 
> sqb
> 
>> However, it should be noted you are speaking from a Windows perspective.
>>
>>> In my quest for finding the ultimate multimedia authoring tool, I've 
>>> come to the tentative
>>> conclusion that QuickTime, (as far as an authoring platform is 
>>> concerned), is falling so far
>>> behind that it could soon be considered "dead".  Apple, the very 
>>> folks who should be
>>> promoting solutions for interactive QuickTime haven't done anything, 
>>> themselves, for years.
>>
>> -- 
>> stephen barncard
>> s a n  f r a n c i s c o
>> - - -  - - - - - - - - -
>> _______________________________________________
>> use-revolution mailing list
>> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
>> subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
> 
> 

-- 
Om shanti
(In  Peace)

Sivakatirswami
www.himalayanacademy.com

Get Hinduism Today Digital Edition. It's Free!
http://www.hinduismtoday.com/digital/



More information about the Use-livecode mailing list