Sunday, January 30, 2011

Walt Mossberg - Wall Street Journal

"Although this is an evolution rather than revolutions as the first model, the changes made by Apple are generally pleasant and positive, the device worked well. For most average users not techies, I recommend against many competing tablets I have tested so far, especially with entry-level price remains attractive. "

"Placed on a table between the old and the iPad, Motorola XOOM, the iPad 2 gives them an air puffy. Its surface is not even at the height of the side buttons of the first model. And although the weight difference is not huge (601 g against 680 g on the model Wi-Fi, ndr), Mossberg has still found a significant improvement when taking in hand the iPad 2.

Same comment as regards the speed of operation, no major differences, but clearly discernible gain, applications will launch a little faster and the whole is very reactive "It has never crashed during my tests, contrary all tablets Android that I tested. Given other tests, Mossberg was probably not too forced on the new iMovie and GarageBand, more prone to crashes.

Some items are subject to criticism, and are found in most reviews. "His camera takes mediocre pictures" If the video quality is considered "decent" Mossberg that Apple offers regrets cameras "disappointing" when it includes new applications and photo opts for quality.

On autonomy, it has not found the score of the previous model. A little over 10 hours cons iPad 11.30 with a continuous play of video, with Wi-Fi and 3G active and screen brightness at 75% Consolation Xoom on the same test takes less than iPad 2. But he could hold his office for 48 iPad using various applications (Mail, books, FaceTime, Twitter, Safari, etc.).

Also a critique on the new design, flatter and more rounded edges that make it a little trickier connecting accessory. Nevertheless it is to his taste for the best tablet on the market for the average user.

Sunday, January 23, 2011

The iPad 2 makes good use of his legacy

The iPad 2 comes out tomorrow in the U.S. and the first test reports were released that night. Several journalists have had the new model in the hands for a week. Overview of the opinions of each other, among technophiles blogs and public newspaper sites. A general consensus emerges, the tablet from Apple evolves very well and it could again serve as a yardstick for competition, despite some shortcomings, some of a material nature (poor camera), others to order software (iOS notifications for example) but in this case can be easily resolved. As also suggest some performance tests, developers will have huge engine with which to play. But ultimately, where Apple is unbeatable is the consistency and overall quality of its ecosystem iOS and appliances that go with it.

Monday, January 17, 2011

Mac App Store: Apple takes all

If the Mac App Store definitely creates opportunities for all developers, Apple is doing particularly well in his own store if we are to believe the list of the more profitable. On the Mac App Store U.S. - one that represents the highest volumes in the world - 9 of the 12 most profitable applications today are backed by Apple.

In the list, there are expected classics, like the three applications of iLife: iMovie (11.99 €), iPhoto (11.99 €) and GarageBand (11.99 €), and three applications iWork: Pages (15.99 €), Numbers (15.99 €) and Keynote (15.99 €). These applications have always been successful before the Mac App Store and it has further highlighted and has probably allowed many users to upgrade at a lower cost by purchasing only the software they used at Instead of buying a complete suite. GarageBand has perhaps the success of the iPad version (3.99 €).

Although priced at the floor of the App Store, FaceTime (0.79 €) has been so successful that the application has to rise to eighth place among the most profitable applications. FaceTime is still number one overall in the Mac App Store U.S., as in many other countries around the world. Conversely, Aperture (€ 62.99) has perhaps not been as successful as the number of downloads, but its higher price has undoubtedly helped Apple to earn large sums. If the price is at the top of the ladder on the Mac App Store, it is well below the prices before leaving on the application store dedicated to Mac OS X, which explains its success.

Among these nine applications, where the strangest is undoubtedly that of Apple's development environment, Xcode (3.99 €). For the first time, Apple has decided to sell its IDE, which had always been offered free until then and that was all the same installation DVD included with the Mac. If Xcode 3 is still available for free, provided to create a free developer account, Xcode is now paying 4, available to developers who pay the annual fee of 79 € indispensable to publish on the App Store, or those who want the purchase via the Mac App Store.

Fairly amazing, FDI is a box of Apple in the Mac App Store and it is today second in many countries. Why such success? IOS developers or those who chose the winning formula from Apple have no reason to buy again in Xcode the Mac App Store because they have free access through the development center. It is all developers "historic" that do not intend to change their means of distribution from a Mac App Store, which did not pay for Apple's developer program, but want to learn Xcode 4.

This is undeniably the world, but these downloads are also strong, perhaps, a sign of attraction to the public. Xcode allows you to disable the multitouch gestures on the iPad with IOS 4.3 (read: iOS 4.3: enable multitouch gestures for iPad), but there may also be curious, clumsy and maybe, who knows, the Developers who collect all versions of Xcode. Whatever the motivations, the fact is that proposing Xcode on the Mac App Store has been a great idea commercially. And according to the general trend of American reviews, Apple could have sold its software far more expensive ...

Mac App Store offers unparalleled visibility to thousands of developers. But given this performance, we also understand why Apple has created this store: The company sells its software as ever and this would justify the arrest of software sales in its physical Apple Store. By putting all of its software sold on the Mac App Store, Apple's strength so users of Mac OS X to try this new distribution channel and everything suggests that the company will go deeper into this process. After all, the beta of Mac OS X Leo was sent to developers via the Mac App Store: a system operating in the App Store, the idea would have laughed a few months ago, maybe it will be a reality this summer ...

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

The Battle

These ties benefit to Apple, but did not they play tricks? On the consumer market, Samsung has always been a serious competitor. With 280 million mobile phones sold in 2010, it is the second largest manufacturer of mobile phones. In France, the company is also the first place.

Of these 280 million, we find the Samsung S Galaxy, which alone accounts for 1 / 28 sales of Samsung mobile phones with 10 million units sold in 2010. This is the big bestseller of 2010, with its American cousin the iPhone 4. And there's no need to go ask officials to ask Samsung the reason for success, two simple images are able to explain many things.

In general, smart phones are very similar, but in this case, the resemblance is more striking than usual: middle button, outline rounded square icons arranged in 4x4 grid on a black background with a dock clearer containing four main icons. Everything is there, many people might believe in an iPhone. Samsung and plays on this illusion, by copying the same positions of the iPhone commercials.

Yet, why consumers purchase a Samsung S Galaxy more than an iPhone, while the latter enjoys a fashion show and especially good reliability? Simply because his cousin Korean is much cheaper, whether or not grant operator.

And this does not stop at S Galaxy; Samsung reuses the same business strategy with its Galaxy Tab, a touch pad as the iPad, shipping Android and a 7-inch screen. Presented thus far it seems to stand out from the iPad with its 10-inch screen, but it is clear that design and interface are similar.

White-backed, rounded edges, square icons, wallpaper with an island, the similarities are disturbing ... For the Galaxy Tab, things are more complex. Sold € 599, the tablet Samsung no longer enjoys the cost advantage. The iPad 3G is sold as expensive, but has a bigger screen. She has a better positioning in the operators with a more generous subsidy. But the offers subsidies for these products are struggling to attract consumers. Result, sales of the Samsung Tablet are far below the iPad.

We could still continue the comparison between product lines and Samsung American counterparts, with for example the Samsung Galaxy player and iPod touch, or the brand new ultraportable Samsung technical clone of the MacBook Air.

In the end, which differs from Apple Samsung commercially, it is positioning. Samsung is therefore aimed at "mass market" while Apple is the high end. And it is this "mass market" that is impervious to Apple and allows Android so quickly burst onto the smartphone segment.

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

The reality is more complex

In fact, the design of the A4 has been provided by Samsung and Intrinsity. The latter was subsequently bought by Apple. This processor is not much different from that found in the Samsung S Galaxy, Galaxy Tab and recently the Google.

But why work with Samsung more than another? At the time of designing the A4, the Hummingbird was one of the most effective flea market, more powerful example than the 1 GHz Qualcomm's Snapdragon found in the HTC Desire among others. In addition, the Korean company is a longtime partner of Apple: it's one of its main suppliers of flash memory. The two companies had even considered in 2005 to build a plant dedicated to the production of memory before being overtaken by the antitrust authorities in Korea.

More broadly, Samsung has the advantage of having a production capacity formidable. Less media attention than the Cupertino company, the Korean company is yet the number one player in the high-tech industry. In 2010, its turnover amounted to 138.7 billion dollars is more than the combined turnover of Apple and Microsoft. The Korean company has indeed a vast field of action: telephones, televisions, printers, tablets, but also an activity in semiconductors and as a manufacturer of LCD panels.

These successful relationships should be Apple's first customer of Samsung in 2011. According to some estimates, Apple should spend its $ 7.8 billion. Last January, the Cupertino evoked a strategic $ 3.9 billion over two years. To say that Apple is positioning itself to get favors from Samsung on its future advances in processors (Hummingbird), Platform (Orion) or to screen AMOLED-Retina-Display ", it does There is only one step.

Apple and Samsung: the enemy brothers

Apple and Samsung are currently two of the largest companies in the field of consumer electronics. They have much in common, often work together, depend on each other on certain points, but are also competing in highly strategic. So, Apple and Samsung partners can they stay long-term goals?

With the success in the first instance of the iPod and the iPhone and iPad, Apple has become one of the biggest buyers of components in the world. Sign a contract with the Cupertino Company is the assurance of almost an order book well stocked for many months. Apple has often used his position elsewhere to rain or shine on the market for flash memory.

If in the 80s at the time of the Macintosh, Apple could afford to live in isolation and develop almost everything she, in a globalizing world, this is simply not possible.

Corporation deemed to be tough in business, Apple has managed to forge some strategic partnerships. Besides Samsung, Intel may be mentioned (for the supply of processors on the Macintosh), NVIDIA (which has created several GPUs for Apple) and Foxconn (one of the largest subcontractors to Apple). Among these companies, it is certainly with Samsung that relationships are more complex. Apple remains true to its culture of secrecy and rarely evokes its relations with its partners.

Proof, if needed, she remained evasive on the processor design A4. On its website, the Apple brand wrote: "Apple engineers designed the chip A4 into a mobile processor both incredibly powerful and energy efficient.”