State of the art: Apple Final Cut is dead. Viva the final cut.

He did use the present tense? Sorry. Final cut has been the industry leader. Did it cost $ 1,000. But now that it's all over.

Tuesday, Apple pulled a typical move by Apple: he killed off the two Final Cut 7 years at the height of its popularity.

Instead, Apple now offers something called Final Cut Pro X (pronounced "10"). But don't be fooled by the name. Is a new program, written from scratch. Apple says that a fresh start was needed to accommodate huge changes in the technological landscape.

Veteran Apple may, at this point, be feeling some creepy d?j? vu. Have you seen this movie before. Apple iMovie, not kill too, in 2008 and replace it with a completely new version, less capable that lacked many important features? It took three years before new updates iMovie finally passed its predecessor in features and consistency.

Some professional editor are already insisting that Apple has done exactly the same error with Final Cut X; underlined several flaws with the program after an earlier version of this article was published online on Wednesday. They say the new program lacks high-end features like the ability to edit multiple camera angles, for export to tape, to burn something more rudimentary DVD and work with EDL, XML files and OMF (used to exchange projects with other programs). You can use a second monitor to your computer, but you need new drivers of TV output for connecting a video monitor. You cannot change the settings of your exported QuickTime movies without the compressor to $ 50.

Apple admits that version x is a foundational piece ". It says that it will restore some of these features in time, and that other companies are quickly filling other holes.

For nonprofessionals, meanwhile, Final Cut is already tempted — especially because the price is $ 300, not $ 1,000. Is the first program of Apple which is only available for download by Mac App Store online, not on DVD. All programs previously called Final Cut Studio have been rolled into Final Cut except Motion and compressor, which are sold separately. Final Cut Express and DVD Studio Pro are gone.)

The new Final Cut has been radically redesigned. Actually, it looks and works much like iMovie, all dark grey, with "skimming"; you run the cursor over a clip without pressing the mouse button to play it.

Once you're past the shock of the new layout, the first thing you'll notice is that Apple has left most of the biggest annoyances of the old Final Cut cutting-room floor.

First — and this is huge — no more waiting to "make". You no longer sit there, dead in the water, while the software calculates the changes, block the program, meanwhile, whenever you add an effect or insert a piece of video that is in a different format. Final Cut X renders in the background, so you can keep right on changing. You can, however, organize your files, or delete clips during rendering.

Secondly, in the old Final Cut, was all too easy to drag and drop audio and video clip of sync accidentally; Little indicators " -1" or "+ 10", which shows how many frames out of you were a chronic headaches. But in the new final cut, "sync is sacred," as Apple puts it. Primary audio and Video are always in sync, and you can also block other clips together so that all move as one.

In fact, a clever feature called Compound clip allows you to collapse a stack of audio and video clips into a single sequence, resulting from the merger on the timeline. You can edit, move, and apply effects as if it were a single unit and then UN-Union that whenever you like. Clip compound make it simple to manage with a complicated composition without going quietly mad.

View the original article here

State of the art: background of the call over the network

"Hi David! I am the only get really confused by all free/cheap calls Internet Options? You wouldn't mind clearing the waters constantly occluding Skype, Google Voice, Line2, FreePhone2Phone and so on? Your fan, Caroline c. "

I loved this e-mail message for two reasons. First, I knew the answer could make a great column.

Secondly, you rarely encounter the word "occluding."

All rights, Caroline, here is the story.

The world of phone calls is changing fast. Whenever some service is essential and expensive — as phone service — you can bet that somebody will invent less costly alternatives.

As faster Internet connections are caught, it didn't take long for programmers intelligent to realize that the Internet could transmit entries.

The world was suddenly full of programs (Skype, iChat, Google Talk, various programs Messenger) that allow free phone calls "" anywhere, as long as you and your called were both sitting at the computer.

Then came the era of mobile phones that can connect to the Internet. What a mind-boggler! Does not mean that mobile app (like iPhone and Android phones) could, in theory, "" free phone calls over the Internet, bypassing the voice networks? Internet calls up to not ever use any of your minutes. You could save all kinds of money. She has had the rock foundation of the world of telecommunications.

Well, we are getting there. There's still no app that offers all three elements: free calls to regular phone numbers from your mobile phone. That, of course, would be the maximum. For now, you can only choose two out of three. For example, you can make free calls to any phone number — but only by the computer (Google Voice). Or you can make free calls from your phone to other owners of an app (Fring, Skype, TruPhone) — but not to real phone numbers.

To prepare this report on the State of the call of the Internet, I made a lot of calls in all types of configurations: a phone, a landline, via WiFi, on mobile phones and so on. Over time, it became clear that Internet calling apps represent a great exercise in expectation-lowering.

For example, than in a normal phone call, Internet calls usually require more time to connect. The sound quality is almost always less; you would describe it as muffled, weak or distant.

Finally, the delay of heading is measured worst on Internet calls. During each test, I conducted a little experiment: I told my partner caller who was going to count to three and asked to say "three" simultaneously with me. Even on a typical phone call, I hear her "three" distinctly late — a half-second or so. But Internet calls, the delay is usually a full second or more. Don't try to practice your calendar comics on a call via the Internet.

Typically, call apps connect to the Internet when you're in a Wi-Fi hot spots. When you're not, these applications can connect to the Internet via the company's data network for your mobile phone. In this approach, however, the results are disappointing; sound is muffled delayed and, if you're driving, calls drop frequently. Internet call apps are generally worth use only when you're on Wi-Fi.

Exaggerating the ability of these applications is par for the course. Skype and Fring, say, for example, allow the phone to phone, video chat, even when not using Wi-Fi. In practice, the quality and the delays are so terrible that the feature is unusable.

Despite all these drawbacks, however, these applications offer two advantages unassailable. First, of course, you can save a lot of money. If most calls over Wi-Fi, you can install a cellular caller plan cheaper, because you are using fewer minutes. (If you have Line2, Pinger or Google Voice, you can also cancel your SMS plan because they offer unlimited free texting.)

And secondly, these apps Wi-Fi allow internal calls solids — just where cellular coverage is weaker.

View the original article here