Just drop it on the timeline.
As far as I know pretty well anything that you have the codc for installed VV will digest and mostly can render out to.

You'll need to install Quicktime on your PC to enable Vegas to read the .mov.

Download the free version of Quicktime for Windows from the Apple website, do a Custom install, and choose to install everything. Then Vegas will be able to read and write files in the Quicktime .mov format.

Mark

Isn't it kind of stupid that all mac users are obsessed with .mov files, and that's all they can give you? Is all that PC users can work with AVI's? Of course not. Ther's MPEG1, MPEG 2, AVI of course, .MOV, .WMV, .RAM (let's not even talk about that one), and a crap load of codecs for each one, from DIvX to MPEG 4.

And all the Mac users can give us is .MOV. Pitifull.

Just to clarify your statement, .mov is just as open as .avi. Any number of codecs can be contained in a .mov file as can be contained in a .avi file.
RAM is a proprietary format/derivative of MPEG4 (in most cases) that belongs to REAL Networks, and may not be edited in any NLE without violating copyright laws. Even if you own the work in RAM format, encoding it to REAL removes your right to edit from that file format. They used to have a cuts-only editor available from REAL, but that is now gone.
But back to topic, .mov is just a container that is read by many devices and tools, just like .avi is. Truth be known, more apps can read .mov files than can read .avi files.

...and to ride on the coat tails of spot (and not to sound like I am a MAC user)...but if a format works - why use anything else?

Quicktime is a good format. It works on both MAC and PC. So why would anyone in the MAC world bother with anything else?

.MOV definitely works with Vegas; I use it all the time. I export with Vegas into .MOV for special effects editing, render back into .MOV and bring it back into Vegas.

Rogue One

Exactly. In fact, Apple DID do this better than anyone else at first, and is still trying to keep up. Quicktime still can do many things in various formats that can't be kept in an avi container because of how Quicktime has evolved. Thankfully, Vegas can read most QT information.
I was once a very hard core Mac user because of ProTools. I used my Mac for audio and my PC for CakewalkDOS. and eventually Forge 2.0 It wasn't until ProTools got so crappy and behind that I moved my audio to the PC. And it wasn't until Vegas Audio 1.0 that I was doing multitrack on my PC.
So I became a die-hard PC person, hating everything about OS 7, 8, 9. OSX is pretty good, nearly as good as XP, IMO. It's actually easier in some areas, and the Apple laptops simply are elegant. No other word describes them. When Sony or anyone else comes out with a laptop that performs like my G4 and weighs, looks, and has battery life like my G4, I'll use the word "elegant" about my PC laptop. Til then, I carry my Mac and PC most places. I do wish my PC could run my Apple apps. I prefer my VAIO for its big screen, ridiculously large HD, and of course, Vegas, Forge, Acid, etc.
Too bad FCP can't really compete with Vegas' speed. or maybe...I'm glad it can't?
Either way, this "PC vs MAC" stuff is mostly silly now. A year ago when OSX debuted, it was perhaps warranted. But most of the people arguing one way or another have never experienced "The Other Side." Or have little experience with the other side.

Just a quick question to someone who is a rare beast that stradles both camps. What is the story with QT not being able to handle RGB colorspace. I've read the rather caustic remarks from , I think it was DigitalVodoo, about why they were abandoning support for FCP and QT past FCP 4.

To me it sounded like a pretty major attack on Apple or is there more (or less)to this than is immediatley apparent.

Okay, thanks. I've gone out to the Apple site and downloaded the Quicktime 6.4 application.

Quicktime handles YUV and RGB both, depending on the codec involved. Some codecs handle YUV input, and spit out RGB regardless, others stick with the colorspace as input.
Even Cinepak goes both ways, even though it's a YUV codec, it shifts to RGB in processing, but spits out YUV unless you request it to do otherwise.
http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~timf/videocodec/cinepak.txt
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/samples/effects/filters/rgb.html
There is more to this picture than meets the eye. Who wants to bet Avid drops Apple support next?
Apple is becoming an island unto itself. this has major marketing benefits if managed correctly, and is the smell of doom if not managed correctly.
As a 'small' example, Apple just released Soundtrack a few months ago. This app does at 299.00 what Acid Style at 69.99 does. Uses ACID loops, but brings ACID to the Mac. Hmmm.....Or, Soundtrack comes "free" with FCP 4.0, and includes 2000 loops too. Apple was wise to develop what no one else has, but it also prevents or discourages competitive apps. When Apple didn't have FCP, AVID, Pinnacle, Adobe, and other apps all had reason to develop for the Mac. Now, FCP is a competitor to all those apps. Be watchful, you'll see others abandoning, and specific tools embracing the Apple platform. Companies that try to straddle both will fail with few exceptions like Photoshop and Quark.

Apple seem to be making a big effort at getting under Avids skin. At IBC Avid were the only ones showing their product running on Macs. At the same time Apple were trying to lure Avid users to FCP. This is extremely stupid behavior as far as I can see.

i don't quite see the marketing benefit of being an island, perhaps back in the days of Win 95, the supposed stability of the Mac platforms had something going for it but i see more and more Mac users glimpsing into the dark side to discover that it isn't that dark after all. One telling comment from one was he found Win XP more Mac like than anything Mac (That's one reason I still run Win2K!).

Yeah - that's another question -

"How does one convert a Mac videophile to a PCphile?" ;)

> but if a format works - why use anything else?

One word: Interoperability!

You don’t have to use the format as your standard format, but at a minimum, it would be nice to acknowledge that there are other formats and be able to import and export to them. Seems like a cultural, not a technical problem to me. ;-)

~jr