Why does Quicktime suck so much?
:: Thursday, August 3rd, 2006 @ 11:01:55 am
:: Tags: Computers

104% complete is an impressive feat indeed
Someone I know once accused me of being overly negative about computers, but I can’t help it because I know these companies can do better.
My hatred for Quicktime and iTunes increases. Quicktime is sluggish even on my modern Windows box with its lightning-fast video card, while Zoomplayer (my player of choice) and Windows Media Player both respond quickly. iTunes responsiveness is horrible when playing video, and Quicktime is only marginally better [rant rant rant]. ZP and WMP both play video smoothly even when I am using the machine heavily. Quicktime and iTunes both stutter, and can’t even be resized smoothly when video is playing.
Using Quicktime, I’m now trying to export a time-lapse movie out of a series of 9842 still images that have all been resized down to something manageable (640×480 pixel jpgs). The job has been running for about 10 hours, and now says that it’s 108% complete! I always knew Apple went above and beyond the call of duty when it came to software. Do I kill the process, or let it count up even higher?
UDATE: After 24 hours and a display of 144% complete, I killed the job. Doing so deleted the temp files that were made, but I had copied them before-hand, just in case. It looks like one of them is the video Quicktime was trying to make. Anyone have suggestions for another utility I can use to build a movie out of 10,000 still images? :(
UPDATE: I used Quicktime Pro to export a H.264 .mp4 file at 1080HD resolution. Zoomplayer Pro can play it scaled up to 2560 x 1600 @ 30fps without even a hickup, while Quicktime Pro struggles even when playing it in a window.
UPDATE: Hey, so how does one associate a .m4v file with Quicktime? It will play the file, but you can’t make it the default player for that file type.
