iMovie on the iPad to fast some Mac computers

Chaten Tim from App Advice decided to test performance of the application iMovie and got quite surprising results. It turns out that if you are looking for a good and fast workstation for video processing "in the field, it simply must pay attention to iMovie to iOS, designed specifically for the latest generation iPad 2.

Tim wanted to see how the work mobile iMovie handles mounted in apple tablet dual-processor Apple A5, as well as to compare the performance of this program with desktop applications for Mac OS X, which he ran on different machines Mac. For their tests, he took a set of files, went to the nearest retail Apple Store and had similar tests on all drainage computer models, except for Mac mini. And the results surprised all of his expectations.

In the first trial, Tim pinpoint how many minutes will take up a two-minute test clip, shot on the fourth-generation iPod touch, for each selected for testing apple device. Became the winner of the iPad 2 coped with the task in just 25.5 seconds, but the "intergalactic Mac Pro took 56.5 seconds on it.

The second test is to change the encoding speed is the raw video clips in 720p. Again iPad 2 surpassed the rest of the large family of Apple products with the result in 1 minute and 56 seconds, just 3 seconds ahead of the iPhone 4. Time of the fastest and ultraportable Mac Pro was 2 minutes and 15 seconds, while most 17" MacBook Pro cope with the task in 2 minutes and 20 seconds.

Naturally, the third test was the most difficult one. Tim has worked well over the video in all versions of iMovie, added background music, captions and a variety of images in the beginning and end of the roller. Of course, with coding at 720p a roller processed most quickly mastered "the older brothers iPad 2: The clear winner was the 17 "MacBook Pro with a score of 1 minute and 48 seconds, the second place finish Mac Pro (2 minutes exactly), and now perform this operation on the second generation apple tablet took a little more time - 2 minutes and 5 seconds. Of course, there are some important nuances also.

No iPhone "nano" - The New York Times

The New York Times makes its contribution to the rumor of an iPhone model of smaller and therefore more affordable for customers. However sources claim that the daily there is no provision to that effect ...

Apple is currently finalizing the 2011 version of its iPhone and no project leading to a variation of smaller size is on the menu. For several reasons: it would be impractical to handle, it would add an additional profile to handle for application developers and its cost would not necessarily reduced.

An official from Apple, unnamed, has urged the New York Times that he was not in the sense of Apple to offer multiple models all different. However, Apple could hear well, as it does every time a new iPhone arrives, apply a drop in prices outgoing model. The 3G is still sold today, next to the iPhone 4. Orange for example offering from 99 €

Other information obtained by The New York Times, however, corroborate some tracks in the Wall Street Journal, which had revived the hypothesis of an iPhone mini (read New rumor of an iPhone "nano" and a free MobileMe). Thus the improvement of navigation on the iPhone for voice who wants to avoid as much as possible the keyboard.

Without changing the format of its iPhone, Apple could change some of its components, whether the memory capacity or quality of the camera, to offer a less expensive model explains a person who worked on multiple versions of this model.

The New York Times also mentions the possibility that MobileMe becomes free and it hosts music with other types of files. A MobileMe available to all and most versatile of the coup that could justify a smaller storage capacity on some iPhone.

iPad, MacBook Pro: minor revisions until something better?

Apple Store closures expected to succeed at a steady pace in the coming days. The ball will start today with the arrival of new MacBook Pro. In terms of innovations, this new range is presented as an incremental update, which should be distinguished by the adoption of SSD arrays, generalized processor Core i and the arrival of the famous port Thunderbolt. But to iLounge, the best is yet to come. The next generation expected for 2012 should be a major revision with significant changes in terms of design. One thing is certain, it is not shortage of ideas to Apple (read: The future of the MacBook keyboard but will not with sensors).

But the most interesting revelations concerning the iLounge iPad 2. Lately, there have been lots of rumors going in all directions; some left waiting for this model would be commercially available in June, while others argued that the initial production of tablets is less than expected.

For iLounge, there is some truth behind these rumors, and Apple has had to readjust his plans.

The site cannot say whether Apple would respond to the problems encountered, we have the right to a minor revision of the device until better in the fall. iLounge mentions the possibility of an iPad 1.5 which could still be called iPad 2 but did not have all the features originally planned for this model. The Cupertino Company would deal with production problems in the short term and give a little air. To our colleagues, the situation resembles that Apple had known at the launch of the iPod touch 3G, whose camera was withdrawn at the last minute due to production problems.

iTunes: negotiations on the (re) download unlimited

Apple is in talks with record labels to allow unlimited download content already purchased from the iTunes Store. Following the Financial Times in late February, Bloomberg has obtained, from three sources, similar indications on the evolution considered.

The idea is that a client can access at any time for songs purchased on iTunes. Whether for listening on the move on their iPhone or iPad or to recover from a hard disk crash or handling unhappy.

In the latter case, the rule that prevails today is ... it is better to regularly back up their iTunes content. Videos, music or games iPod (excluding iPod touch) can be purchased in fact downloaded only once. If you lose, it's for your apple. The free re-downloading is only available for applications iOS and electronic books.

Apple is in talks with major record labels to reconsider this rule and relax. According to two Bloomberg contacts, an agreement could be announced in mid-year.

It appears on the face of such repeated and consistent rumors that we are heading towards a less iTunes competitor that would arise in Spotify or Pandora (unlimited streaming access to the catalog) and to a strengthening of the download model, where the streaming might possibly be proposed only for tracks already purchased. A shared commitment to equality by Apple and record companies wrote Bloomberg.

In addition, Bloomberg also mentioned a shift from the MobileMe offering free and store much more content.

Apple talks about the slow web apps

The controversy swells on Nitro, the JavaScript engine found in Safari Mobile from iOS 4.3. Earlier this week, we noticed that the web app were 2 to 2.5 times slower than the same site displayed in Safari.

Shortly after a study by Blaze Software said loud and clear that a Nexus S averaged 52% faster than a 4 iPhone to surf the web. However, this study was not conducted directly through Safari, but in a WebView.

These various data have not failed to create a little controversy, which once will not hurt, drove Apple to break the silence. One of his spokesmen, Trudy Miller, confirmed that the web views do not include all optimizations for Safari. Therefore, the study of Blaze Software is partly inaccurate. It is true that the iPhone's browser is slower than that of Android. By cons, running web app (thus bypassing the browser) is actually much faster on Android.

So why web apps are they deprived of Nitro and the lack of support for the HTML5 cache? For John Gruber, we must not see evil everywhere and think that the way the Californian Company focuses on native applications to web applications.

The real problem for Apple is safety. Unlike its predecessors, Nitro is a JavaScript engine that includes the time compilation (JIT). However, a JT needs to have the ability to mark pages in RAM memory as executable. However, unlike Mac OS X, Apple iOS prohibited on grounds of safety. Such a mechanism could lead to hijacked the execution of unsigned code.

In other words, if Safari 4.3 is under iOS much faster, there is a significant part-cons: if someone manages to exploit a vulnerability in its browser, then it can do much more damage than before. One can imagine that Apple has enough confidence in its browser to integrate such a possibility.

For Gruber, it is more likely that Apple will not stop there. He believes that to generalize Nitro web applications, there should be a web application to run JavaScript in a process separate and independent, a bit like Safari on Mac and PC that creates a separate process for Flash. In theory, this is what Apple is preparing for Webkit 2, whose project was announced last April: "WebKit2 is designed primarily to support the separate processes, where the Web content (JavaScript, HTML, etc.). made his living in a separate process [...] this model is comparable to Google Chrome, the chief dissimilarity that we have built straight into the structure, and it is easy to get to other browsers.