Whilst I was browsing Apple’s site for info on Snow Leopard, I came across the “leap forward” we can expect with the new release of QuickTime - QuickTime X.
I have to say that I like the new branding. The integration with the Q and the X and the lens-like treatment are nice touches. The new minimized application interface is slick and takes its cues from the iPhone.
Coincidentally, as I was searching for a video to include with my last blog post I first landed on a page with an embedded QuickTime movie. My immediate reaction was “ugh”. Somehow QuickTime has become associated with “heavy” and “sluggish” - at least for me.
Why is that?
Well, on the flip side of things, I also associate QuickTime with “image quality”. I watch all of my movie trailers on Apple’s website (or my AppleTV).
But in the span of a typical week, I watch all/most of my videos through some type of Flash-based player. And for myself, along with countless other bloggers, embedding these Flash players onto our sites is super-simple. Not so, for QuickTime movies.
When I came across that embedded QuickTime today it made the site feel dated too.
In Apple’s pursuit of quality they missed a huge part of the market. I’ll be honest, I have no clue what their strategy is there. With YouTube using Flash (and possibly the speculated new Google format in the future), it will be tough for Apple to make a dent. Arguably they’ve missed the boat on this one.
And does the average Mac user even really get what QuickTime is? Between apps like iTunes or Front Row kicking in when a user inserts media, when do people have the need to launch QuickTime?
For video professionals however, the QuickTime brand is very relevant. So has QuickTime mostly become the stuff of pros?
Let me know what you think.