Fresh Apple: TheAppleBlog (5 сообщений)

На что подписаться? | Управление подпиской

TheAppleBlog
TheAppleBlog, published by and for the day-to-day Apple user, is a prominent source for news, reviews, walkthroughs, and real life application of all Apple products.
http://theappleblog.com
рекомендовать друзьям >>

ReelDirector: Full-featured Video Editing Comes to the iPhone

Despite some predictions to the contrary, the iPhone 3GS launched without a portable version of iMovie for editing of clips. Yes, you can scrub and trim video you shoot on the device in the native Camera app, but beyond that, you can’t do much. New app ReelDirector changes all that, for the relatively low price of $7.99.

It sounds like a decent deal, but I decided to download the app and find out just what the first real video editing app for the iPhone was capable of. Might I be able to become the next film ingenue sensation with only my 3GS?

Features

First of all, let me tell you right off the bat: This isn’t just a warmed-over version of the built-in Camera app, like so many photo effect apps tend to be. It not only allows you to stitch different clips from your device together, it also allows you to use 27 different transitions between them, including various wipes and fades.

You can also add text to your clips, including opening and closing credits and titles, and provide transitions for both. Only four font styles currently exist, but you change position to achieve different visual effects. Hopefully more styles will be added in later updates, or maybe as in-app purchases down the line.

Interface and Usability

The interface for ReelDirector isn’t going to win any design awards, but it is simple, fairly clean, and well-suited to its purpose. My main complaint is that while the app automatically switches to landscape view, which could be useful, there’s no toggle to prevent that from occurring, something I think every app should provide, including Apple’s own.

As for usability, ReelDirector generally performs well, but with a few issues that really prevent it from being an absolutely problem-free experience. For example, when you insert a video clip into your movie project, you have the option of trimming it, but once it’s in, you can’t go back and re-edit the clip itself. All you can really do at that point is change the transitions between clips. You also can’t live preview your movie in its entirety until you “Create” it, which can be a time-consuming process. The good news is, you can still go back and make changes after you output your movie.

Conclusion

It isn’t a replacement for iMovie by any stretch of the imagination, but ReelDirector is the first real movie editing solution for the iPhone 3GS, and for a pioneer, it actually works remarkably well. You probably won’t be taking home any awards at Cannes, since the app still lacks pretty basic elements like audio editing capabilities, but for home movies that look as good or better than the ones your uncle used to edit on his hulking early model DV cam, ReelDirector is more than capable.

In Q3, Uncle Sam was the green IT king maker. Read the, "Green IT Q3 Wrap-up."

Переслать
Condé Nast Brings Titles to iPhone, Keeps Eyes On the iTablet

Newspapers and magazines — the entire news print industry to be honest — have been suffering a long and torturous decline for much of the last decade as more of us turn to the Internet and electronic devices to get (increasingly personalized) news and other content. While publishers have generally been slow to adapt to shifting delivery platforms, change is — finally — afoot. Publishing supergiant Condé Nast is now taking its first tentative steps to embracing the digital realm with a series of iPhone apps designed to deliver its most popular titles electronically.

Adage reports that the first title will be GQ magazine, released this December in the app store and priced at $2.99 (the regular print edition of the magazine costs as much as $4.99).

Adage's Nat Ives writes:

The new app platform could help the company squeeze circulation and real ad revenue from digital. Because the apps will include all the editorial and ads that the print editions do, the Audit Bureau of Circulations will consider the apps to be paid circulation just like newsstand sales and subscriber copies. That’s important because advertisers only want to pay for ad space in issues that the audit bureau defines as paid.

So the digital edition of GQ will be identical to its dead-tree counterpart, but cost appreciably less. It might also offer compelling extra content and rich media at (and this is so very important to publishers) little-to-no extra cost. After all, an embedded video is an impossibility in a printed magazine, and a digital edition offers unlimited virtual column-inches for expanded editorial.

Condé hasn’t completely abandoned its old methods for generating profits. Indeed, it’s relying on the fact its digital issues will be counted as paid editions because print ads command higher rates than online ads.

Size Matters

So, will you buy GQ on your iPhone? I suspect there won't be too many people who do. Seasoned iPhone users are keenly aware that the device's form factor makes for a dissatisfying reading experience of even modest duration. The iPhone is hardly the most comfortable platform for reading anything more than email. Sure, apps like Stanza and Instapaper make reading on the iPhone far more fluid and tolerable than, say, reading lengthy web pages in Safari. But they can't change the fact that you're still peering at tiny text on a 3.5 inch screen. Only the most dedicated of readers will suffer such eye-strain-inducing limitations, all the while dreaming of something just as light, just as thin, but much larger. Y'know… a tablet.

This is something Condé Nast understands very well. Its upcoming app isn't about bringing its various print publications to the iPhone — it's about the timely positioning of its product to take advantage of the upcoming tablet.

Says Sarah Chubb, President of Condé Nast Digital:

This iPhone is just one platform. We plan to be, and generally try to be, anywhere our consumers are.

We think that the minute Apple is ready, if they ever are, to announce that they're going forward with a tablet, that we'll be ahead of everybody.

I can't say I'm a GQ reader, but that's not meant as a judgement against that particular title. I just don't buy newspapers or magazines. Practically no one I know my age (or younger) does. It's not hard to see why; these days, most people enjoy regular, inexpensive access to the Internet. Services like Twitter and RSS feeds ensure we get only the news and content we want to read, when we want to read it — and what's more, it's usually free.

$2.99 is too much for a magazine that exists only as pixels on a (small) screen. 99 cents seems far more appealing and most likely would shift more (virtual) copies. It's more appropriate, too, since the traditional resource, print and distribution costs associated with a dead-tree publication don't apply in the digital realm. Perhaps when Condé Nast's printed magazines have finally gone the way of the Dodo, its digital issues will hit that magic sub-dollar price.

In the meantime, I'm excited Condé is doing this. No, not because I'm about to start buying GQ. I'm excited because I know it's only a matter of time before other big print titles start appearing on digital devices. (And not just watered-down content portals like the New York Times.) It's already happening, albeit quietly, behind closed doors. A few months ago word got out that Time was in talks with other publishers, collaborating on e-reader standards. Around the same time, it was reported Apple was negotiating content deals with several media companies "rooted in print." And while we're still waiting for Apple's tablet to arrive, e-readers are cropping up all over the place, jostling for a position in what is sure to become a massive new market.

Print is dead. But, at long last, Digital Print is here to replace it, and it's just around the corner. That's welcome news for an ailing publishing industry finally starting to take electronic platforms seriously.

Tell us in the comments if the new age of digital publishing is going to get you reading newspapers, and whether you think Apple's gonna object to some of GQ's more, um, "adult" front covers!

Growing mobile data use turned up heat on carriers in Q3. Read the, "Mobile Q3 Wrap-up."

Переслать
Apple Europe VP Talks Macs, iPhones, iPods and Surprises

Pascal Cagni, Apple vice president and general manager for Europe, the Middle East, India and Africa, did in an interview with Katie Allen of the Guardian. Speaking after Apple’s earnings report for the fourth fiscal quarter, Cagni was optimistic on the Mac in Europe, guarded about the iPod, and enigmatic about “surprises” in the future.

Questioned on Apple’s success in Europe during the recession, Cagni responded that the Mac is “typically above 20-25 [percent] market share in each of the countries.” That’s about twice the market share in the U.S., and you have to wonder how the numbers add up to worldwide figures that put the Mac under 5 percent. Still, at Monday’s conference call, it was noted that Mac growth was around 40 percent in Spain, Germany and France, so the Mac is doing very well indeed in Europe. Less so, the iPod.

On declining sales, Cagni stated that Apple needs “to carry the message out there much better” regarding the new iPod nano, and that the decline has not yet hit Europe. Again, this is in keeping with comments from the conference call, in which it was stated that the iPod is gaining market share year over year in nearly every country tracked. While Apple does not break out iPod sales by geographic region, 40 percent of all revenue comes from North America, so it would seem then that the decline is largely in the U.S. It’s possible the iPod has hit a saturation point, though another possibility would be cannibalization of iPod sales by the iPhone.

As for the iPhone, the question was whether multiple carriers in the UK will affect pricing in the future. Again, the response lined up with the conference call. Apple does not “dictate” price. Personally, I wonder if AT&T feels that way.

Besides a non-response to the Beatles for Christmas at the iTunes Store — “nothing to announce” — the most interesting comment was another oblique reference to new products in 2010. While Apple executives routinely talk about the great and mysterious “product pipeline,” chief Steve Jobs elevated that hype in Apple’s press release for the fourth fiscal quarter. Cagni echoed that in the interview:

And guess what, as Steve stated, we are going to continue to surprise you in the year to come.

It doesn’t take 20 questions to get to the tablet, the only question now is when?

In Q3, Uncle Sam was the green IT king maker. Read the, "Green IT Q3 Wrap-up."

Переслать
Snow Leopard Still a Better Ride Than Windows 7, Even for the Not-Rich

ChannelWeb’s Steven Burke says that in the manifold comparisons of Windows 7 with Snow Leopard burning up the Web, what all the reviewers and pundits seem to be forgetting is that it’s not about the operating system, which he maintains is simply the engine that runs the PC. As Burke puts it, you don’t go into a car dealership and buy an engine. You buy a car, and in his opinion, starting October 22, there will be no better ride available for the money than Windows 7.

Burke leans heavily on the initial purchase price angle, noting that an Apple Mac Pro desktop he cites as an example is nearly four times the price of an HP Pavilion, asking rhetorically whether anyone really believes the Mac is four times better than the HP Pavilion? I think some of us would argue that the value is there under the right circumstances, but it would’ve been more relevant to compare a mainstream Mac model such as the iMac or MacBook to their still admittedly cheaper, but not so dramatically so, Windows competition.

Apple Ignoring “Economic Reality?”

Burke accuses Apple and company CEO Steve Jobs of not considering “economic reality,” and having no interest in producing mass-market PCs, which is fair comment I suppose. However I’m constrained to observe that as Forbes’ Brian Caulfield pointed out last weekend, over the past year, banks have collapsed, PC sales have plummeted, unemployment has soared, and Steve Jobs went on mysterious medical leave for a liver transplant, but meanwhile Apple has thrived through all this with sales and earnings down less than everyone else in the industry and actually up year-over-year — on Monday reporting the company’s best quarter ever and a net quarterly profit of $1.67 billion on revenues of $9.87 billion. Consequently the question is begged as to who is and is not considering economic reality.

Netbook Sales Soar But Profitability Fizzles

NPD Group’s DisplaySearch Q2 ‘09 PC shipment data released last week estimated that netbook sales soared a whopping 264 percent year-over-year in the quarter, accounting for 22.2 percent of overall PC sales, but woefully for PC manufacturers and for Microsoft — only 11.7 percent of revenues. Overall PC laptop sales (excluding netbooks) declined 14 percent and PC laptop average selling prices dropped to $688 in Q2 2009 from $704 in Q1 2009 and from $849 in Q2 2008.

Apple, on the other hand, eased prices somewhat on entry level MacBook Pro models in all three sizes while holding the $999 price point for its price leader white MacBook, and is still enjoying healthy sales and profits on its laptops. Even the most substantial MacBook Pro price cut — $400 on the base 15″ model — was partly compensated by substituting an SD Card slot for the preceding model’s ExpressCard slot, and leaving out the discrete NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT graphics processor unit with its 256MB of dedicated VRAM in the new price-leader model, so I doubt that Apple has taken a major profitability hit. It’s more about marketing refocus.

Burke says Jobs wants to build “Rolls Royces,” not “Fords” and for him it was never about putting a PC on every desktop, while Microsoft has always had more of a Henry Ford style mass production bent. Again, partially true I suppose, although it doesn’t hold up particularly well in the iPod and iPhone context, and I don’t think Mr. Jobs has anything against growing market share provided he can do it without compromising quality standards or profitability, as his “there are some markets Apple doesn’t choose to serve” comment a year ago attests.

Simplistic Fixation On Initial Purchase Cost

I don’t gainsay that Windows Vista was a gift to Apple that just kept on giving, or that Windows 7 will prove much stiffer competition for OS X, but I think Burke is overstating his case in contending that Apple’s market share gains over the past several years are now destined to evaporate. To borrow his own analogy, it’s the whole car, not just the engine, and many of us perceive the Mac as being not only a smoother, better-handling ride, but also a better value in a whole raft of contexts that transcend simplistic fixation on initial purchase cost. CNET’s Dong Ngo reports that Snow Leopard consistently beats Windows 7 in many general performance areas including boot up time and battery charge life in laptops, for example.

Burke says PCs running Windows 7 are for “the masses” while Macs running OS X are for “the rich.” I’m not rich by the wildest stretch and neither are most of the other Mac-users I know. I do like to think that I appreciate value, a superior user experience, lower total cost of ownership, and elegance of form and execution, and that while Windows 7 will narrow the gap somewhat, it will fall well short of closing it.

In Q3, NewNet focus turns to business models and search. Read the, "NewNet Q3 Wrap-up."

Переслать
Facebook 3.1 Highlights All That's Wrong With Push Notifications

In a tweet on Monday, Joe Hewitt, developer of the iPhone Facebook app, announced that the next major update (version 3.1 to be precise) will finally bring Push Notifications to the popular application.

Facebook is easily one of the most popular free apps available in the iTunes App Store. I think you'd be hard pressed to find an iPhone without it. Version 3.0 was a mammoth update to earlier, functionally limited releases, and was eagerly anticipated and reported widely in the tech press. And yet, the lack of support for Apple's Push Notification Services was, and remains, conspicuous. Adding Push Notifications is the no-brainer icing on the cake function for end-users who don't spend every second in the app but value being kept in-the-loop with timely updates. It's also the last major hurdle to making the social networking app practically perfect. (Probably.)

However, TechCrunch's MG Siegler has suggested that the long-awaited introduction of Push Notifications in the Facebook app will also make it the unwitting poster child for illustrating all that is wrong with Push, and more directly, how Notifications are handled on the iPhone. Siegler writes:

The Push Notification management system beyond a certain threshold is basically useless. That is to say, when you're getting a large number of Push Notifications on your iPhone, it's almost laughable how bad the built-in system is for trying to figure out what you just got notified about beyond the most recent message.

If you're an iPhone owner you probably already know exactly what this is about. Let's say your iPhone is locked. You receive an important SMS. That familiar blue pop-up box appears on the screen. A moment later, you also receive a Push Notification from one of your apps. The blue box is replaced with another.

The next time you hit the Sleep/wake button and look at your screen (just look, don't unlock) you'll see only the latest notification. You'll have no way of knowing that important SMS is lurking in the background, waiting for your attention, unless you unlock and check for that little red notification badge on the Messages icon. If you're in a hurry (or in a meeting) and can't spend more time on the phone than is absolutely necessary, you're not going to see that important SMS until much later.

What Siegler is saying – and many iPhone owners are likely to agree – is that the iPhone needs a more sophisticated notification system. He adds,

The Push system is such a mess right now, that many of the most popular developers are letting others deal with it. Loren Brichter, the guy behind the excellent Twitter app Tweetie, tells us that he's tabled Push Notifications for the time being, letting others like Boxcar handle it, because it's a potential headache.

To date, applications are forbidden to run as background processes on the iPhone. It's important to remember that Push was created to provide application developers with an elegant solution to the challenges they faced due to that functional limitation. Even so, I find agree with Siegler – the iPhone OS desperately needs a more sophisticated way to handle multiple unread notifications, because if nothing changes, the advent of Facebook 3.1 (not to mention the growing number of other push-enabled apps) brings with it a future filled with those little blue popup boxes.

In Q3, Uncle Sam was the green IT king maker. Read the, "Green IT Q3 Wrap-up."

Переслать