Divers

  • Les produits d'Apple qui ont changé notre vie. 6 (MacBidouille)

    Voici certainement un produit, ou plutôt une catégorie de produit dont l'apport a été une indéniable évolution majeure.

    Première borne AirPort d'Apple

    Il s'agit de ce qu'Apple appelait AirPort, le Wi-Fi.

    Apple fut l'un des premiers fabricants d'ordinateurs à proposer massivement (en option) le Wi-Fi dans ses ordinateurs.

    Steve Jobs avait à l'époque joué le rôle du magicien en faisant passer un iBook connecté au réseau sans le moindre fil à travers un cerceau.

    Pour la première fois, on pouvait réellement surfer sur internet avec une machine sur ses genoux où que l'on soit. Cette révolution a été à la base du nomadisme qui s'est depuis généralisé par diverses technologies sans fil mais le début était là.
    Aujourd'hui, grâce à ses déclinaisons qui en ont sans cesse amélioré la portée et le débit, le Wi-Fi est devenu pour nombre de personnes le seul moyen utilisé pour connecter leur machine, bien aidé ici par Apple qui a fini par retirer l'Ethernet de ses portables.

    Ce fut réellement une révolution, la preuve, difficile de se rappeler les contraintes que l'on devait subir auparavant.

  • LG G Watch Giveaway (AnandTech)

    Last month's Google IO saw the official introduction of Google's Android Wear as well as the first two devices to run the new wearable OS. Among those was LG's G Watch, a Snapdragon 400 (4 x ARM Cortex A7) based Android Wear device with a 1.65" IPS display. As a show of continued support for the Wearables section on AnandTech, ARM is providing two G Watches as giveaways to two lucky AnandTech readers. 

    To be elligible you need to be a US resident with a US mailing address and leave a comment below. In your comment, ARM would like to know what segments or applications you think wearables would be most successful in. Some examples being communication, enterprise, fashion, healthcare, security, fitness, etc...

    Leave your feedback in a comment below and that'll automatically enter you for the giveaway. Good luck!

  • ADATA Launches XPG V3 DDR3 Range (AnandTech)

    Despite the talk surrounding the introduction of DDR4 to the market, the volume product for the foreseeable future is still DDR3. We have done a number of memory scaling articles in the past [1,2,3], but due to the resurgence of growth in the gaming segments over the last several quarters, there is still a demand for high speed DRAM, especially those that match the style of the build if the user or gamer wants to show it off at an event. This has caused some of the enthusiast DRAM manufacturers to re-launch their high end modules under new names and new skins, with the option of customization. This lies at the heart of ADATA’s new XPG V3 DDR3 range.

    The finned array for the heatsinks can be removed, similar to other high end ranges, and replaced with a custom color. ADATA is saying that the first batches of these modules for retail will include a second set of fins, so users can select between gold and red. There are plans to launch other colors in the future.

    Launched SKUs will first be available in gold/red, in either 2x4 GB or 2x8 GB kits, with the following speeds:

    DDR3-1600 9-9-9-24 1.50V
    DDR3-1866 10-11-11-30 1.50V
    DDR3-2133 10-11-11-30 1.65V
    DDR3-2400 11-13-13-35 1.65V
    DDR3-2600 11-13-13-35 1.65V
    DDR3-2800 12-14-14-36 1.65V
    DDR3-2933 12-14-14-36 1.65V
    DDR3-3100 12-14-14-36 1.65V

    All kits will support XMP 1.3, use 8-layer PCBs with 2oz copper to improve signalling, and Thermal Conductive Technology (TCT), which is a fancy way of saying that the DRAM chips themselves are in contact with the heatsink, so the heatsink may be hard to remove depending on the bonding.

    With the high frequency modules, it is always worth noting that these are designed for use with Ivy Bridge and Haswell CPUs, and the quality of the memory controller will determine the maximum speed possible. All the Ivy Bridge and Haswell CPUs I have tested, at stock, will easily do DDR3-2933, and should find DDR3-3100 OK as well with a small base frequency overclock. Overclocking the CPU may reduce the peak memory frequency possible, and thus if running an overclocked system, a balance may be needed as well as the expertise/guide to manage that balance. This is true with any high speed memory, not just the ones here, such as our reviews of the TridentX style or ADATA's own XPG V2 DDR3-2800.

    ADATA has offered us a review sample which should arrive shortly. Stay tuned for the review. I am currently awaiting a full list of MSRPs and will update the news when it arrives.

    Source: ADATA

  • Apple retire la mise à jour EFI des MacBook Air postée lundi (MacBidouille)

    Lundi, Apple avait mis au téléchargement une mise à jour EFI destinée aux MacBook Air 2011 et devant résoudre des problèmes de sortie de veille.
    Sans préavis la société a fait disparaître sa page de téléchargement.

    Visiblement un nombre significatif de personnes en témoignant sur les forums Apple n'ont plus été capables de rallumer leur machine une fois la mise à jour réalisée.

    Il semble qu'il soit possible de récupérer les machines "en panne" en réalisant trois reset du SMC. Voici la procédure selon Apple pour ces machines:

    1. Éteignez l’ordinateur.
    2. Branchez l’adaptateur secteur MagSafe à une source d’alimentation et connectez-le au Mac si ce n’est pas déjà fait.
    3. Sur le clavier intégré, appuyez simultanément sur les touches Maj + Ctrl + Option (de gauche) et sur le bouton d’alimentation.
    4. Relâchez en même temps toutes les touches et le bouton d’alimentation.
    5. Appuyez sur le bouton d’alimentation pour allumer l’ordinateur.  
  • Swatch dément travailler avec Apple sur l'iWatch (MacBidouille)

    Une rumeur a hier attibué au groupe Swatch une participation active dans la fabrication de l'iWatch. Le groupe l'a formellement démentie et nous pensons savoir que c'est vrai par d'autres canaux.
    Ce groupe a bien été approché par Apple il y a un moment mais a décliné l'offre faite. En revanche, l'iWatch devrait bien voir une partie de ses composants non électroniques fabriqué en Suisse, tout du moins pour la version la plus coûteuse.

  • SFR va dédommager ses clients (MacBidouille)

    Suite à la panne d'hier, SFR a annoncé le geste commercial qui sera consenti aux clients qui ont été touchés.

    Conscient de la gêne occasionnée par cette perturbation, SFR a décidé d’offrir prochainement aux clients impactés la voix et les SMS illimités ainsi que 2Go de données (en France métropolitaine) pendant un mois.
    Les clients bénéficiant d’un Extra de SFR se verront proposer de plus un Extra supplémentaire au choix parmi iCoyote et CanalPlay, pendant un mois également.
    Il ne sera pas nécessaire de contacter notre service client : les abonnés concernés seront contactés individuellement dans les jours qui viennent pour se voir préciser les modalités.

    Contacter individuellement chaque client sera long, mais on peut compter sur la société pour profiter de l'occasion pour faire des offre commerciales.

  • Les produits d'Apple qui ont changé notre vie. 5 (MacBidouille)

    Nous continuons notre petit voyage dans le temps, et visitons aujoud'hui les PowerBook.

    En haut vous avez le PowerBook 100 et en dessous le 520C. Ce dernier ou plutôt la gamme 5x0C résume à elle seule presque tout ce qu'un portable moderne a. On avait droit à un écran couleur, un processeur puissant, deux batteries, du SCSI externe, un modem intégré....
    Avec ses portables Apple a révolutionné la manière de travailler de bon nombre de personnes et a rendu le travail nomade sur un ordinateur réellement possible.
    Aujourd'hui plus que jamais Apple mise sur les portables qui représentent l'essentiel de ses ventes de Mac. Certes on peut déplorer certains choix faits, mais il est indéniable que la société garde une longueur d'avance sur l'essentiel du marché en terme de design et de fonctionnalités.

  • Yosemite passera en bêta publique demain (MacBidouille)

    Demain, Apple proposera à ceux qui se sont inscrits à son programme de bêta publique (gratuit) de récupérer la plus récente bêta de Yosemite. 
    C'est une première depuis fort longtemps, en fait la bêta de la première itération d'OS X qui était de plus payante.
    A priori, la version finale de ce nouvel OS arrivera seulement au mois d'octobre prochain.

    [MàJ] Il est disponible au téléchargement via l'App Store pour les personnes enregistrées... ou celles qui ont bidouillé l'URL à laquelle se connecte le logiciel.
    Bien entendu nous déconseillons de l'utiliser comme système principal pour le moment.

  • OS X Yosemite est disponible ... en bêta publique (Génération NT: logiciels)
    La version définitive ne devrait pas sortir avant le mois d'octobre, pourtant , plus d'un million de personnes pourront tester OS X Yosemite dès aujourd'hui.
  • Seagate NAS 4-Bay with Marvell ARMADA 370 Review (AnandTech)

    Seagate recently rebooted their NAS offerings, completely revamping their 2013 Business Storage lineup and dropping the old software platform altogether. In its place, they adopted the Debian-based NAS OS,  development of which was started by LaCie prior to their acquisition by Seagate. In their 2014 lineup, Seagate has two classes of products, the NAS and the NAS Pro. While the former is suitable for workgroups of 1 to 25 clients, the Pro version pushes that up to 50. Read on for results from our evaluation of the 4-bay NAS offering.

  • Grosse panne chez SFR (MacBidouille)

    Depuis ce matin, aux environs de 9h, SFR est touché par une panne nationale de ses réseaux GSM. La défaillance serait liée à un équipement Alcatel Lucent (que la société n'hésite pas à citer et mettre en cause. L'équipement en question est un HLR, une des système chargé de localiser les clients sur les réseaux et cette panne toucherait 4 millions d'abonnés dont tous ceux ayant des abonnements 4G.
    Tout est mis en oeuvre pour que la panne soit réglée au plus vite et espérons qu'ils penseront dorénavant à des systèmes de redondance efficaces.

    MàJ : La situation semble se rétablir, retour du réseau constaté il y a quelques minutes (région de Rennes).

  • ASUS ROG Swift PG278Q Monitor Released in APAC/EU, North America Coming September (AnandTech)

    One of ASUS’ many releases during Computex was for their new ROG Swift PG278Q monitor that boasted a number of impressive specifications all at once. The PG278Q combines a 2560x1440 panel capable of 120/144 Hz operation with support for NVIDIA G-Sync and 3D Vision, putting it firmly in the region of gaming and hence the ROG moniker.

    Aside from NVIDIA G-Sync, the PG278Q comes with a Turbo Key on the rear for quick selection between 60 Hz, 120 Hz and 144 Hz depending on user preference. The GamePlus hotkey gives a crosshair overlay to enhance the gaming environment (useful in games that do not offer steady central crosshairs), as well as timer functions. The OSD is navigated by a joystick-like nub behind the side of the monitor.

    Response time is listed as 1ms GTG, with 16.7M colors and 160-170º viewing angles. Connectivity is via DisplayPort 1.2 only, with a USB 3.0 pass-through hub also in the electronics. VESA support is for 100x100mm, and the monitor is listed at 7.0 kg (15.4 lbs). The PR gives a bezel dimension of 6 mm.

    Due to the high refresh rate and inclusion of G-Sync, the Swift comes in as one of the most expensive TN panels on the market. Pricing will start at $799, varying by region, and the monitor should be available in Taiwan, APAC and EU today, with China in mid-August and North America by the end of August.

    ASUS ROG Swift PG278Q
    Display 27-inch (68.5cm) widescreen with 16:9 aspect ratio
    Resolution 2D mode: 2560 x 1440 (up to 144 Hz)
    3D mode: 2560 x 1440 (up to 120 Hz)
    2D/3D surround: 7680 x 1440 (2D up to 144 Hz / 3D up to 120 Hz)
    Pixel pitch 0.233mm / 109 PPI
    Colors (max) 16.7M
    Viewing angles 170-degree (H) / 160-degree (V)
    Brightness (max) 350cd/m²
    Response time 1ms (GTG)
    ASUS-exclusive
    technologies
    ASUS GamePlus Technology (Crosshair / Timer)
    ASUS Refresh Rate Turbo Key (60 Hz /120 Hz/ 144Hz Overclocking)
    ASUS 5-way OSD Navigation Joystick
    NVIDIA® 
    technologies
    NVIDIA® G-SYNC™ Technology
    NVIDIA® 3D Vision™ Ready
    NVIDIA® Ultra Low Motion Blur Technology
    Input/output 1 x DisplayPort 1.2
    2 x USB 3.0 (Upstream x 1, Downstream x 2)
    Stand Tilt: +20°~-5°, Swivel: ±60°, Pivot: 90° clockwise
    Height adjustment: 0~120mm
    VESA wall mount: 100 x 100mm
    Size 619.7 x 362.96 x 65.98mm        
    Weight (est.) 7.0kg

    Source: ASUS

  • Microsoft : Un Windows unique quelle que soit la plateforme (Génération NT: logiciels)
    L'information avait déjà filtré depuis quelque temps : le prochain Windows sera proposé dans une version unique et s'adaptera en fonction du matériel sur lequel il s'installera. C'est ce que nous rappelle Satya Natella, le PDG de Microsoft.
  • Les produits d'Apple qui ont changé notre vie. 4 (MacBidouille)

    Nous ne voulions pas parler de l'iPhone sans parler en même temps de l'iPod.

    A vrai dire, il a commencé non pas par changer la vie d'Apple, mais par la sauver. En effet, l'iPod a réussi un exploit, faire sortir la marque Apple de la ringardise dans laquelle elle était tombée. Avant cet appareil, avoir un produit Apple était presque une tare.
    L'iPod, sorti d'abord en FireWire et seulement pour les Mac, a été quand même une évolution majeure. Il pouvait transporter infiniment plus de musique que n'importe quel autre appareil à l'époque.
    D'une certaine manière il a totalement forgé l'avenir ou plutôt le devenir d'Apple. Face à la forte demande des utilisateurs de PC, Apple a commencé à porter ses outils sous Windows, puis a abandonné le FireWire pour l'USB, puis porté iTunes sous Windows....
    Accessoirement, mais est-ce réellement accessoire ?, l'iPod a fini de faire plonger l'industrie musicale dans la crise et il n'en a été que plus facile de négocier ensuite avec elle pour créer l'iTunes Store, lui faisant faire des concessions impensables quelques années plus tôt.

    Mais le plus important, et nous insistons là-dessus, c'est que l'iPod a relancé Apple et en a refait une marque cool que tout le monde veut avoir. Aujourd'hui, il ne pèse plus que 1% du chiffre d'affaires de la société et les iPod, ce n'est qu'une question de temps, finiront par disparaître du catalogue de la société.

  • Apple investit toujours plus en R&D (MacBidouille)

    Lors du dernier trimestre échu dont les résultats viennent de tomber, Apple a investi en recherche et développement la somme de 1,6 milliards de dollars. C'est une augmentation de près de 25% par rapport au même trimestre de l'année précédente. Sur les 9 premiers mois de son année fiscale, la société a augmenté ses investissements en R&D de 32%.
    C'est la preuve que la création de produits toujours plus innovants est de plus en plus coûteuse et qu'Apple, chose que l'on sait, ne cherche pas à intégrer des composants comme tant d'autres le font mais à créer de toutes pièce de nouveaux produits, comme récemment le capteur Touch ID.
    C'est la seule voie pour lutter contre des concurrents comme Samsung mais aussi bientôt de nombreuses société chinoises qui vont inonder le monde de smartphones et tablettes très bon marché. Dans cette lutte, Samsung sera d'ailleurs bien moins solidement armée et elle commence déjà à souffrir de cette concurrence comme l'ont montré ses derniers résultats, qui contrastent fortement avec ceux d'Apple, qui ont établi de nouveaux records.

  • Sony relance ses investissements dans les capteurs photo (MacBidouille)

    Sony a annoncé son intention d'investir 35 milliards de Yen, soit environ 250 millions d'euros, dans des outils de production de capteurs CMOS photo destinés aux smartphones et tablettes.
    Ce marché est un de ceux qui permettent à la société de faire rentrer pas mal d'argent et elle aurait tort de ne pas en profiter alors qu'il est toujours en forte croissance.

    Il est surtout probable que Sony ait besoin d'augmenter sa production pour être certain de pouvoir fournir l'un de ses plus gros clients qui n'est autre qu'Apple. Rien qu'avec ses prévisions de fabrication de l'iPhone d'ici la fin de l'année, 70 à 80 millions d'unités, la société a de quoi assécher une partie du marché de nombreux composants dont les capteurs photos.

  • Etendre à bas coût le stockage interne de son portable Apple (MacBidouille)

    Ce n'est un secret pour personne, Apple vend cher, très cher ses SSD. Il y a donc de quoi hésiter lorsque l'on achète un Mac portable à prendre un SSD plus gros.
    Ce problème, car c'en est un, a poussé de nombreux fabricants à trouver des solutions pour augmenter la capacité de stockage de ces machines sans concéder à leur portabilité.
    La solution la plus en vogue est celle qui consiste à utiliser le connecteur SDXC des portables pour y installer une carte mémoire qui ne dépasse pas et que l'on peut ainsi laisser à demeure.
    C'est l'une d'elles, que nous testons pour vous aujourd'hui, est la Transcend JetDrive Lite 350. Ce modèle est spécifiquement destiné aux MacBook Pro Retina 15" mais il y en a d'autres pour la plupart des portables Apple car il faut tenir compte de la profondeur de chaque connecteur SD.

    Une fois installée dans la machine, elle ne dépasse pratiquement pas, seulement d'environ 1/2mm, pas assez pour qu'il y ait un risque de l'accrocher.

    Annoncée pour 128 Go, elle en fait même un peu plus.

    Au niveau performances on est très loin d'un SSD, mais ce n'est pas si mal pour une carte de cette taille et de cette capacité. Notez que ce test a été fait sur son formatage d'origine en EXFat. Un autre test réalisé en HFS+ a montré des performances en écriture inférieures. Donc, il est préférable de rester en ExFat.

    Bien entendu, cette solution n'est pas parfaite, ne serait-ce qu'à cause de ses performances. En revanche, nous avons décidé de l'adopter pour gagner en capacité et en déportant dessus certains fichiers et dossiers. Le plus évident semble être le dossier téléchargements, sauf si vous dépassez les 400 Mbits/s. De plus, la perte éventuelle de ces données ne sera pas capitale. Mais on peut aussi envisager d'y déporter une bibliothèque iTunes, de quoi faire beaucoup de place.

    Ce produit a toutefois un défaut. Il s'avère un peu compliqué de ressortir la carte une fois qu'elle est insérée et il vaut mieux avoir des ongles longs ou une lame fine pour y arriver. Si vous utilisez souvent le connecteur SDXC pour autre chose, cette solution ne sera donc pas pratique.

    Pour finir, on trouve ce produit en 128 Go autour des 80 euros, ce qui est un tarif acceptable pour doubler la capacité interne d'un MacBook Air d'entrée de gamme.

  • Les produits d'Apple qui ont changé notre vie. 3 (MacBidouille)

    Difficile de continuer plus loin sans arriver à un produit bien plus récent, l'iPhone.

    Ce n'est pas le premier smartphone, il n'avait que du Edge quand nombre d'autres appareils étaient en 3G, il a longtemps été disponible uniquement aux Etats-Unis mais, clairement, il y a eu un avant et après l'iPhone.
    C'est le premier smartphone qui a permis d'utiliser internet de manière nomade mais confortable et il a totalement chamboulé l'écosystème des téléphones mobiles allant même jusqu'à pratiquement tuer RIM (devenu BlackBerry), la division mobile de Nokia et Sony Ericsson, l'ancien chouchou des Mac Users.

    Pourquoi présenter le premier modèle et pas un plus récent ? Parce que cet iPhone avait déjà tout inventé ou presque. Certes, Apple refusait à l'époque toute application installée dessus mais le jailbreak et la création de kits de développement parallèles ont forcé la société à créer un écosystème qui a fait depuis sa fortune.
    Dernier point sur lequel cet appareil était imbattable, son prix. Apple fonctionnait alors sur un système de subvention, le vendant à prix coûtant ou à perte et se refaisant sur les abonnements. Le désimlockage a permis à des millions de personnes d'en acquérir un aux Etats-Unis pour 299$ environ et de l'utiliser chez un autre opérateur, un véritable cadeau pour l'époque.

  • First Look: The $799 Microsoft Surface Pro 3 with Core i3 (AnandTech)

    Earlier this Summer Microsoft released Surface Pro 3, a fully equipped Haswell ULT based tablet in a chassis that was much more in line with what you'd expect from a tablet. From a hardware standpoint, Surface Pro 3 is the chassis design that Microsoft needed from the very start. If you've ever been tempted by the Surface Pro story, the latest model was bound to push you over the edge.

    Unlike previous generations however, Microsoft delivered multiple CPU/GPU options with Surface Pro 3. The device's price range extends both lower and higher than any prior iteration. While the original Surface Pro launched at $899 and $999, the second version offered increased storage options that drove the max price up to $1799. Surface Pro 3 starts at just $799 and can be configured at up to $1949. In our review we were sampled one of the launch versions of the tablet, a $1299 configuration featuring Intel's Core i5-4300U. Until next month the Core i5 models are the only ones available, however starting on August 1st you'll be able to purchase cheaper Surface Pro 3s with a Core i3-4020Y or more expensive versions with a Core i7-4650U.

    We just got our hands on the $799 entry level Core i3 configuration and are in the midst of a full review of the device. Battery life testing alone will take a few days, but I wanted to share some of my initial performance data since there is a pretty substantial difference between the Core i3 and i5 models. For a quick refresher, this is what the Surface Pro 3 lineup looks like:

    Microsoft Surface Pro 3 Configuration Options
    Configuration $799 $999 $1299 $1549 $1949
    CPU Intel Core i3-4020Y Intel Core i5-4300U Intel Core i5-4300U Intel Core i7-4650U Intel Core i7-4650U
    SDP/TDP 6W/11.5W -/15W -/15W -/15W -/15W
    Cores/Threads 2/4 2/4 2/4 2/4 2/4
    Frequency Base/Max Turbo 1.5GHz/- 1.9/2.9GHz 1.9/2.9GHz 1.7/3.3GHz 1.7/3.3GHz
    GPU Intel HD 4200 Intel HD 4400 Intel HD 4400 Intel HD 5000 Intel HD 5000
    GPU EUs 20 20 20 40 40
    GPU Frequency Base/Max Turbo 200/850MHz 200/1100MHz 200/1100MHz 200/1100MHz 200/1100MHz
    Storage 64GB SSD 128GB SSD 256GB SSD 256GB SSD 512GB SSD
    RAM 4GB 4GB 8GB 8GB 8GB

    To hit the $799 price point Microsoft went to a 64GB M.2 SATA SSD. Interestingly enough, the CPU doesn't actually save Microsoft any money. The Core i3-4020Y carries the same 1000Ku price as the i5-4300U ($281). The Y at the end of the part number implies a Haswell ULx SKU, the only Haswell type to ship with a SDP as well as a TDP rating. Even using the same workload, the Y-series parts weigh in with a lower TDP than the more typically used U-series parts (11.5W vs. 15W). Given the substantial reduction in chassis thickness, I suspect the Y-series parts may have been a better fit for the design to begin with.

    You do give up performance in the process however. Since this is a Core i3 processor Intel disables turbo boost in addition to lowering the base frequency of the chip in order to hit its 11.5W TDP. At 1.5GHz without turbo, peak single threaded performance could be as little as half of the Core i5 models. The GPU performance story is arguably more interesting. Although there's a decrease in max GPU turbo, I wonder if the lower TDP may help improve sustained performance in games. I ran a few tests to see how things change with the move to a Core i3. Let's start with a look at the CPU.

    Single/Multithreaded Performance - Cinebench 11.5

    One of the benefits of a Surface Pro is the ability to run heavy PC workloads just as well as lighter tablet workloads. The device can behave as a tablet, notebook or even a desktop. We'll start with Cinebench 11.5, an offline 3D renderer that is largely CPU bound. The single threaded incarnation of this benchmark should give us a good look at the worst case scenario performance delta between the Core i3 and Core i5 Surface Pro 3s:

    Cinebench R11.5 - Single-Threaded Benchmark

    Without the ability to boost above its 1.5GHz base clock, the Core i3-4020Y comes in substantially slower than the Core i5-4300U model. It turns out a 1.5GHz Haswell core is around the performance of a 2.3GHz AMD Piledriver core.

    Cinebench R11.5 - Multi-Threaded Benchmark

    With both cores (and all four threads) active, the gap between the Core i3 and Core i5 parts doesn't really shrink any. It's clear that if you're after running heavier PC workloads on your Surface Pro 3, you'll want to spring for the Core i5.

    General Usage Performance - PCMark 8 v2

    Cinebench may overstate the difference you'll see between the $799 and $999/$1299 models in regular usage, so we turn to PCMark 8 v2 and PCMark 7 to give us a better look at real world performance differences when running lighter tasks. PCMark 8 v2 runs through a bunch of usage driven application scenarios grouped into home, creative and work usage flows.

    From Futuremark's description of the Home test:

    "The PCMark 8 Home benchmark includes workloads that reflect common tasks for a typical home user. These workloads have low computational requirements making PCMark 8 Home suitable for testing the performance of low-cost tablets, notebooks and desktops. Home includes workloads for web browsing, writing, gaming, photo editing, and video chat. The results are combined to give a PCMark 8 Home score for your system."

    PCMark 8 - Home

    A 20% increase in performance is what the Home suite shows for the i3->i5 upgrade, and that seems fairly reasonable. The Core i3 model ends up performing quite similarly to the original Surface Pro, but in a much more appealing chassis.

    Next up is the Creative test:

    "The PCMark 8 Creative benchmark includes workloads typical of enthusiasts and professionals who work with media and entertainment content. With more demanding requirements than the Home benchmark, this benchmark is suitable for mid-range computer systems. PCMark 8 Creative includes web browsing, photo editing, video editing, group video chat, media transcoding, and gaming workloads."

    PCMark 8 - Creative

    The creative suite shows a larger 34% advantage for the Core i5 vs. Core i3. Once again the i3 performs within 10% of the original Surface Pro, but for heavier use cases the Core i5 is necessary if you want Ultrabook/Macbook Air-class performance in a Surface Pro 3.

    Finally we have the Work test:

    "The PCMark 8 Work benchmark test measures your system's ability to perform basic office work tasks, such as writing documents, browsing websites, creating spreadsheets and using video chat. The Work benchmark is suitable for measuring the performance of typical office PC systems that lack media capabilities. The results from each workload are combined to give an overall PCMark 8 Work score for your system."

    PCMark 8 - Work

    Here we see another 33% advantage for the Core i5, and surprisingly enough a pretty similar gap between the Core i3 SP3 and the original Surface Pro. It's really the lighter workloads that will understandably show less of a gap between the i3 and i5.

    PCMark 7

    I'm also including PCMark 7 results which tend to fall in between the PCMark 8 v2 results, here showing a 26% advantage for the Core i5 model.

    PCMark 7 (2013)

    GPU Performance - 3DMarks

    I'll split our look at PC GPU performance into two sections, first let's look at peak theoretical performance using 3DMark. The Core i5-4300U has a 29% higher peak GPU clock compared to the Core i3-4020Y so we could see gains of up to that in any GPU bound scenario.

    Futuremark 3DMark (2013)

    The heaviest 3DMark 2013 test here is Fire Strike and we see a 27% advantage for the Core i5 vs. Core i3 model. Note that the i3 is still substantially quicker than the original Surface Pro.

    Futuremark 3DMark (2013)

    In lighter graphics workloads the gap narrows, with the Core i5 model holding a 21% performance advantage over the Core i3. The entry level Surface Pro 3 still delivers substantially better GPU performance than the original Surface Pro.

    Futuremark 3DMark (2013)

    The Ice Storm test seems to provide a good mix of CPU and GPU bound work for the platforms, which contributes to the largest gap we've seen thus far in our GPU tests of 30%.

    Futuremark 3DMark 11

    Looking at 3DMark 11 there's virtually no performance difference between the two platforms. This ends up being a bit more strenuous of a test, likely forcing the Surface Pro 3 into a thermally constrained situation where GPU clocks can't remain at max for long.

    PC Gaming Performance - Dota 2

    In our original Surface Pro 3 review I asked Ryan Smith to put together a reasonable Dota 2 benchmark to better illustrate what a prolonged light graphics workload would do to the system. In the end I found that the thermal constraints and default fan profile of Surface Pro 3 can contribute to lower sustained performance vs. Surface Pro 2. Our Dota 2 benchmark did a great job of showcasing a real world scenario where SP3 could be appreciably slower than SP2.

    With the Core i3 version I was curious as to whether the better binning and overall power reduction would result in a device that would be able to sustain a higher level of performance for longer than the Core i5 version. I ran the Core i3 model through the exact same Dota 2 workload and came away with some interesting results:

    Dota 2 Performance - ATDotaBench

    Whereas the Core i5 model couldn't make it through a single run of our test without stepping down in performance, the first run on the Core i3 system came very close to the performance of the Surface Pro 2. Subsequent runs however did drop to performance similar to the Core i5 model, although the i3 is able to sustain higher performance.

    SSD Performance

    My original review sample featured a 256GB Samsung PM851 (an OEM version of the SSD 840 EVO) SSD. The $799 Core i3 model I received features a 64GB SSD, and in my case it's an SK Hynix drive. SK Hynix is a fully vertically integrated NAND and controller manufacturer thanks to its acquisition of Link A Media. The HFS064G3AMNB-2200A in my Core i3 based Surface Pro 3 uses a LAMD 87800 controller like the Corsair Neutron/Neutron GTX and Seagate SSD 600 series of SSDs. Both of those drives proved to be highly consistent performers, even when running in a full state. I'm not sure if all 64GB models will use the Hynix/LAMD drive, but given how little free space is available on the 64GB drive I would hope as many of them are this configuration as possible. After installing my relatively limited suite of tests for this review I had 10GB free on the device, with Windows telling me that another 10.5GB was taken up by things I'd installed.

    PCMark 8 v2's storage test gives us a good look at high level performance, and here there's no real difference between the 64GB and 256GB drives:

    PCMark 8 - Storage

    However this is a bit of an optimistic look, I turned to Crystal Disk Mark to give us a quick idea of peak sequential and random performance:

     

    64GB Hynix SSD (left) vs. 256GB Samsung SSD (right)

    Testing over a 4GB span there's clearly a reduction in sequential and random IO performance but both are quite solid on the 64GB model. I don't expect users to store large files on a 64GB Surface Pro 3 so the reduction in sequential read/write speed isn't a huge deal. Overall I'm quite pleased with the performance of the 64GB drive in my i3 sample.

    Tablet Performance

    Last but not least, I wanted to look at how the Core i3 would perform in a lighter set of benchmarks we typically run our ARM based tablets through. Surface Pro has always ended up at the top of these tests, but we've never had a Surface Pro clocked as low as the Core i3 SP3. At 1.5GHz this also gives us an interesting look into the IPC comparison between Haswell and Apple's Cyclone cores as the iPad Air runs at a similar frequency (1.4GHz). Do keep in mind that there's a fairly large difference in platform power between a Surface Pro 3 and an iPad Air however.

    SunSpider 1.0.2 Benchmark  (Chrome/Safari/IE)

    The light workload js benchmarks end up being great measures of single threaded performance, which is why we see such a substantial difference between the Core i5 and i3 models here. That being said, the i3 based Surface Pro 3 still ends up being faster than any of the traditional ARM tablets. The iPad Air comes dangerously close though.

    Kraken 1.1 (Chrome/Safari/IE)

    Kraken tells a similar story, although here we see a larger gap between the i3 based Surface Pro 3 and the iPad Air.

    Google Octane v2  (Chrome/Safari/IE)

    WebXPRT (Chrome/Safari/IE)

    3DMark 1.2 Unlimited - Overall

    The GPU performance story is no different than in our earlier tests. The i3 model takes a hit, but GPU performance is understandably much better than any other tablet you'd come across.

    3DMark 1.2 Unlimited - Graphics

    3DMark 1.2 Unlimited - Physics

    Final Words

    Subjectively, the entry level Surface Pro 3 feels pretty quick. Even running at only 1.5GHz, a pair of Haswell cores are plenty fast. The real question is whether or not the extra $200 is worth the increase in performance. For anyone looking to use the Surface Pro 3 like a real PC and less like a tablet, the $200 Core i5 upgrade is a wise investment. Lighter tasks and more tablet oriented usage models however may not merit the extra expense. In a lot of lighter tasks we're looking at a 20 - 30% advantage to the Core i5 for a 25% increase in system cost. Ultimately I feel like the increase in storage capacity in addition to CPU performance may be what really justifies the larger expenditure for users who don't necessarily need the extra CPU performance.

    The big unanswered question at this point is whether there are any gains in battery life. I'm working on producing that data now and I'll post a follow up once it's complete.

  • Best SSDs: July 2014 (AnandTech)

    Given the recent product releases in the SSD industry, it is now a good time to do another purchase recommendation post. We did our first "Best SSDs" post in November last year and it received quite a bit of interest by providing simple recommendations instead of a several thousand word analysis like we usually do in our reviews. Quite surprisingly, our previous recommendations were still accurate until about a month ago when Crucial rolled out the MX100, so despite the fact that the article is now eight months old there was no immediate need for an updated post until now. 

    Similar to the previous post, I will be splitting the recommendations in different categories by form factor and performance. Note that pricing fluctuates constantly and there may be regional differences, so I would still recommend to check the prices from several stores and use your own consideration when buying a drive. 

    Enthusiast and Professional Level: Samsung SSD 850 Pro & SanDisk Extreme Pro

    The Samsung 850 Pro is one unique drive. It is the first mainstream SSD to utilize 3D NAND, which gives Samsung substantial advantages in performance and endurance. As a result, the 850 Pro is the fastest SSD we have tested and is backed up by an industry-leading 10-year warranty or 150TB of writes, which ever comes first. Feature wise the 850 Pro supports both TCG Opal 2.0 / eDrive and DevSleep, meaning that the drive is suitable for mobile as well as corporate environments. The 850 Pro also has a feature called RAPID, which utilizes a portion of the system DRAM (up to 4GB) to cache reads and writes to further increase performance.

    The 850 Pro's toughest competitor is SanDisk's Extreme Pro. While the 850 Pro is generally a faster drive, the Extreme Pro comes very close. It too is backed up by a 10-year warranty, although the write endurance is only rated at 80TB. Due to higher over-provisioning, the usable capacities in the Extreme Pro end up being slightly smaller compared to the 850 Pro and you also lose TCG Opal 2.0 / eDrive support.

      Samsung SSD 850 Pro SanDisk Extreme Pro
    Pros - Higher performance
    - Higher usable capacities
    - Higher endurance
    - TCG Opal 2.0 & eDrive support
    - RAPID
    - Price of the larger capacities
    Cons - Price of the larger capacities - No hardware encryption support
    - Lower endurance

    I am usually not a big fan of pros&cons tables because they tend to oversimplify things, but in this case I think the comparison does justice and provides a quick way to compare the 850 Pro and Extreme Pro. It is clear that the 850 Pro is ultimately the better drive but the Extreme Pro can be a better option if you are in the look for a high performance 1TB-class drive but do not see any additional value in the 850 Pro's features (namely hardware encryption and RAPID). 

    Capacity 120/128GB 240/256GB 480/512GB 960/1024GB
    Samsung SSD 850 Pro $130 ($1.02/GB)
    £90 (£0.70/GB)
    $200 ($0.78/GB)
    £155 (£0.61/GB)
    $400 ($0.78/GB)
    £295 (£0.58/GB)
    $700 ($0.68/GB)
    £485 (£0.47/GB)
    SanDisk Extreme Pro - $210 ($0.88/GB)
    £135 (£0.56/GB)
    $370 ($0.77/GB)
    £252 (£0.53/GB)
    $600 ($0.63/GB)
    £392 (£0.41/GB)

    That said, if you want the best SATA 6Gbps drive in the market, the 850 Pro is the drive to buy. You will have to pay a small premium at the higher capacities, although the price delta may even out in the future and make the 850 Pro a better buy in all aspects. Alternatively, if the prices of the Extreme Pro come down (or you are in a region where the price difference is higher than in the US), the Extreme Pro is a viable alternative as long as you have no need for hardware encryption.

    Mainstream Level: Crucial MX100 & Samsung SSD 840 EVO

    In the mainstream segment, the MX100 dominates the market. The exceptional pricing alone makes the MX100 an alluring drive but the fact that the drive supports power-loss protection, DevSleep and hardware encryption (TCG Opal 2.0 & eDrive) makes it an excellent bang for the buck. With performance good enough for typical client workloads, there is simply no way you can go wrong with the MX100, unless your workload requires a higher performance drive.

    Capacity 120/128GB 250/256GB 500/512GB 1TB
    Crucial MX100 $75 ($0.59/GB)
    £54 (£0.42/GB)
    $110 ($0.43/GB)
    £94 (£0.37/GB)
    $215 ($0.42/GB)
    £161 (£0.31/GB)
    -
    Samsung SSD 840 EVO $90 ($0.75/GB)
    £57 (£0.47/GB)
    $140 ($0.56/GB)
    £88 (£0.35/GB)
    $260 ($0.52/GB)
    £165 (£0.33/GB)
    $470 ($0.47/GB)
    £300 (£0.30/GB)

    The only disadvantage of the MX100 is the lack of a 1TB model, which is why I am recommending the 840 EVO as well since it comes in 1TB flavor. In terms of features and performance the MX100 and 840 EVO are very close with the biggest difference being that the EVO has no power-loss protection, although on the other hand it supports RAPID, which the MX100 does not have. As a result, the only reason I am picking the MX100 over the 840 EVO is the price but if you can find the 840 EVO cheaper (or are looking for a 1TB drive), then do not hesitate to buy the 840 EVO instead of the MX100.

    Killing Off The SATA Bottleneck: Samsung XP941

    PCIe has certainly been one of the most discussed topics within the SSD industry this year. While the true roll out of native PCIe SSDs will not happen until next year, there are now a couple of drives available. The only drive that I find interesting is the Samsung XP941 because it is currently the only native PCIe 2.0 x4 drive, whereas the other drives in the market are limited to x2, which does not provide that much benefit over SATA 6Gbps. As a result the XP941 is the fastest client SSD we have tested to date and is hence the ultimate drive for performance hungry enthusiasts.

    The only downside is that you will need a Z97 based motherboard (or a Mac Pro) to be able to boot from the drive and even then you are limited to certain models (at this point ASRock Z97 Extreme6 is the only board with official boot support, although the drive can be made bootable in some ASUS boards as well). Thus I would only recommend the XP941 if you are running a supported motherboard because otherwise the XP941 can only be used as a secondary drive. Compared to the 850 Pro you will also lose hardware encryption plus RAPID support and the warranty drops to three years. 

    Capacity 256GB 512GB
    Samsung XP941 $311 ($1.21/GB)
    -
    $500 ($0.98/GB)
    £400 (£0.78/GB)

    The pricing is also rather high compared to the 850 Pro but that is the premium you have to pay for cutting edge technology. Interestingly enough, the 512GB XP941 is currently available in NewEgg even though the drive is an OEM product. Unfortunately the 256GB model is not but you can still find it from RamCity, which was the first vendor to sell the XP941 to consumers and also supplied us with review samples. 

    All in all, if you are willing to pay the premium and sacrifice support for the opportunity to be at the edge of a new technology, the XP941 is the drive to buy. 

    The Tiny, Yet Powerful mSATA: Crucial M500 mSATASamsung SSD 840 EVO mSATA & Plextor M6M

    While the SSD and PC industries are moving away from mSATA to M.2, there is a notable upgrade market for mSATA drives. mSATA never really took off so the available SKUs are still rather limited, but fortunately there are a couple of drives that stand out. The first one is the mSATA version of the Samsung 840 EVO, which is the little brother of the 2.5" 840 EVO we already recommended above. You get the same set of features (hardware encryption, DevSleep, RAPID...) and performance as with the full size 840 EVO, so the EVO mSATA is a great value despite its small size.

    An alternative to the 840 EVO mSATA is Plextor's M6M. The M6M lacks TCG Opal 2.0 and eDrive compliance and is also a bit slower than the 840 EVO, but it is still a good option for typical client workloads as long as the lack of hardware encryption is not a deal breaker. 

    Update: I have added Crucial M500 mSATA to the list since it is the most affordable mSATA SSD and still offers a great set of features (hardware encryption and power-loss protection) and decent performance. Initially I left it out as I thought it had been discontinued like its 2.5" sibling but looks like it is still available and seems to be the best value. 

    Capacity 64GB 120/128GB 250/256GB 500/512GB 1TB
    Samsung SSD 840 EVO mSATA - $100 ($0.83/GB)
    £70 (£0.58/GB)
    $160 ($0.64/GB)
    £105 (£0.42/GB)
    $300 ($0.60/GB)
    £185 (£0.37/GB)
    $500 ($0.50/GB)
    £330 (£0.33/GB)
    Plextor M6M $60 ($0.94/GB)
    £50 (£0.78/GB)
    $86 ($0.67/GB)
    £83 (£0.64/GB)
    $150 ($0.59/GB)
    £116 (£0.46/GB)
    $360 ($0.70/GB)
    -
    -
    Crucial M500 mSATA - $75 ($0.59/GB)
    £52 (£0.43/GB)
    $125 ($0.52/GB)
    £89 (£0.37/GB)
    $240 ($0.50/GB)
    £168 (£0.35/GB)
    -

    The 840 EVO mSATA does not come in 64GB flavor at all, so if you are looking for a small and cheap boot mSATA drive, then the M6M is our only recommendation, although I strogly advice that you pay $26 more for doubled capacity. At 120/128GB the M6M is a better pick due to its cheaper price, unless you see added value in the features of the 840 EVO mSATA. However, at 250/256GB and higher the EVO is certainly a better value for the money.

    Given the price of the M500 mSATA, it is the best value for most consumers. While performance is not as good as with the 840 EVO, the M500 mSATA is fast enough for average consumer workloads and is thus the drive we recommend. Users who seek for more performance in an mSATA form factor may find the 840 EVO to be worth the extra money but otherwise the M500 mSATA is a better buy. The only exception is at 1TB where the 840 EVO mSATA is the only option.

    The Gumstick M.2: Crucial M550 M.2

    The market for aftermarket M.2 SSDs is relatively small right now since systems with M.2 have not been shipping for long but the market is constantly growing. I could not find many available on NewEgg but if I was on the market for one I would pick Crucial's M.2 version of the M550. We have not reviewed the M.2 version but it is fairly safe to assume that the performance is similar to the 2.5" version (our review). The M550 M.2 is type 2280, so make sure that it is compatible with your motherboard or laptop since some only accept smaller M.2 sizes. Like the MX100, the M550 M.2 features an extensive feature set including power-loss protection and TCG Opal 2.0 / eDrive support along with DevSleep support. 

    Note: The M550 M.2 is a SATA 6Gbps drive, so before buying the drive make sure that the slot in your motherboard or laptop supports SATA. Some only support PCIe, meaning that the M550 will not work in such slot. 

    Capacity 128GB 256GB 512GB
    Crucial M550 M.2 $100 ($0.78/GB)
    £68 (£0.53/GB)
    $170 ($0.66/GB)
    -
    $330 ($0.64/GB)
    £228 (£0.45/GB)

     

    To Conclude:

    The last couple of months have been very interesting in the SSD industry. We have seen quite a few new SSDs and it seems like the flow will not end. From what I have heard, we should see several TLC NAND based SSDs this year, which will help to drive the cost per gigabyte down. Additionally, more PCIe SSDs should start to roll out early next year, so the XP941 should finally see some real competition.

  • Yosemite passera en bêta publique demain (MacBidouille)

    Demain, Apple proposera à ceux qui se sont inscrits à son programme de bêta publique (gratuit) de récupérer la plus récente bêta de Yosemite. 
    C'est une première depuis fort longtemps, en fait la bêta de la première itération d'OS X qui était de plus payante.
    A priori, la version finale de ce nouvel OS arrivera seulement au mois d'octobre prochain.

  • Nokia Announces New Low Cost Lumia 530 (AnandTech)

    Nokia has had a lot of success with Windows Phone in the more budget-oriented segment of the market. The Lumia 630, which we recently reviewed, does well in its position in the $150-200 device bracket. But Nokia is hoping to target buyers at even lower price points with the new Lumia 530 which positions itself to take on other Android devices at the $100-150 segment of the market. At least in its name it is a successor to Nokia's Lumia 520 which was the most popular Windows Phone, and the two are compared down below.

    Lumia 520 and 530
      Lumia 520 Lumia 530
    SoC 1GHz Dual Core Krait (MSM8227) + Adreno 305 1.2GHz Quad Core Cortex A7 (MSM8212) + Adreno 302
    Memory 512MB LPDDR2 512MB LPDDR2
    Storage 8GB NAND + MicroSDHC 4GB NAND + MicroSDXC 
    Display 4” 800x480 WVGA LCD 4” 854x480 FWVGA LCD
    Cellular Connectivity GPRS/EDGE/HSPA+ GPRS/EDGE/HSPA+
    Dimensions 119.9 x 64 x 9.9 mm, 124g 119.7 x 62.3 x 11.7 mm, 129g
    Camera 5MP Rear Facing w/ F2.4 aperture 5MP Rear Facing w/ F2.4 aperture
    Battery 5.291Wh 5.291Wh
    OS Windows Phone 8.1 Windows Phone 8.1
    Other Connectivity 802.11b/g/n + BT 4.0, USB2.0, GPS/GNSS 802.11b/g/n + BT 4.0, USB2.0, GPS/GNSS
    SIM Size Micro-SIM Micro-SIM (dual SIM variant)

    As you can see, the Lumia 530 has many similarities to its predecessor. Inside it makes the move from Qualcomm's Snapdragon S4 platform to the newer Snapdragon 200 platform. It'll be interesting to see how the quad core 1.2GHz Cortex A7 implementation fares against the 1GHz dual core Krait implementation. The GPU takes a performance hit, going from the Adreno 305 to the 302. Storage similarly takes a small step down with half the internal NAND of the Lumia 520, but with support for MicroSDXC up to 128GB rather than 64GB in the 520. RAM and connectivity remains the same with 512MB of LPDDR2 memory, single stream 802.11n WiFi, Bluetooth 4.0, and 21.1Mbps HSPA+. The battery chemistry remains the same as well at 1430mAh and 3.7V.

    The front of the device sports an 854x480 LCD display, with the extra 54 pixels compared to the Lumia 520 being used for the on-screen buttons in a similar fashion to the Lumia 630. The move from a 15:9 display aspect ratio to a 16:9 ratio allows for a small decrease in the width of the device. The 530 has an appreciable increase in thickness compared to its predecessor with a thickness of 11.7mm at its thickest point compared to 9.9mm on the 520. No apparent changes to the camera have been made with a 5MP F2.4 sensor on the back and there's no front-facing camera.

    The 530 seems like a mixed bag of upgrades and downgrades compared to the 520. At 4GB of storage it really necessitates buying a MicroSD card even for users who rarely use apps, while the 8GB in the 520 leaves more breathing room. The increase in thickness is also disappointing but in the 530's price bracket there's no pressure to battle it out for the title of thinnest smartphone. In many ways it feels less like an upgrade and more like a device of its own. It will be interesting to see how users feel it compares to the original Lumia 520.

    The Lumia 530 will be launching in single and dual-sim variants in August with a target price point of €85. Ignoring differences in taxes and market situations that translates to rougly $114 in the US or £67 in the UK. 

  • Windows 9 : de nouvelles images du menu démarrer (Génération NT: logiciels)
    Chaque jour, le prochain OS de Microsoft, Windows 9 se dévoile un peu plus, et c'est à nouveau son menu Démarrer qui s'affiche dans de nouveaux clichés.
  • Conditions de travail dans les Apple Store : Apple fait face à une Class Action (MacBidouille)

    TechCrunch rapporte qu'une action en recours collectif a été lancée en Californie contre Apple par des employés (ou ex-employés) d'Apple Store. Ils reprochent à la société des violations systématiques et répétées du code du travail de la Californie.
    Les premières plaintes remontent à 2011 mais le recours collectif n'a été accepté par la justice qu'hier.

    Il est reproché à Apple de ne pas avoir respecté les temps de pause et de repas des salariés et de ne pas leur avoir systématiquement versé leur salaire en temps et en heure.

    En France, Apple a actuellement plusieurs procédures en cours devant des tribunaux de prud'hommes pour plusieurs raisons différentes. Nous suivons ces affaires qui trainent en longueur mais ne préférons pas les commenter tant qu'un jugement n'aura pas été rendu dans un sens ou dans l'autre.

  • Z97 Mini-ITX Review at $140: ASRock, MSI and GIGABYTE (AnandTech)

    With every new chipset release, a large part of the community is always interested in the smaller form factor builds. Building a small yet powerful system seems to be an expanding niche, and for Intel’s Z97 platform we took three of the cheaper mini-ITX motherboards to see how they compare. The ASRock Z97E-ITX/AC, the MSI Z97I AC and the GIGABYTE Z97N-WIFI are all between $130 and $140, all feature 802.11ac support but vary in other connectivity, ease of use and their packages. We compared all three.

  • Un outil d'export de photothèque Aperture vers LightRoom (MacBidouille)

    Nous donnons la parole à Jean-Michel:

    Bonjour,

    en tant qu'utilisateur d'Aperture je fais partie de ceux qui se sont sentis floués (trahis ?) par Apple à l'annonce de son abandon.
    Un photographe m'a fait part de l'existence d'un outil (encore en béta) pour faciliter l'exportation ou l'archivage de photothèques Aperture.
    Voici la page en question:
    http://apertureexporter.com/

    Je ne l'ai pas encore testé mais ça ne devrait pas tarder.

    Si certains d'entre vous testent cet outil, merci de nous faire part de vos expériences.

  • Apple parle des outils de diagnostic iOS qui ne sont pas des backdoors (MacBidouille)

    Pour répondre indirectement aux accusations d'avoir installé des backdoors dans iOS, Apple a publié une liste de certains outils de diagnostic installés dans son système mobile:
    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT6331?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US

    • com.apple.mobile.pcapd est décrit comme un système de capture de paquets possible depuis un ordinateur "de confiance" et sert au dépannage, au diagnostic et aux connexions VPN,
    • com.apple.mobile.file_relay est utilisé par Apple Care avec l'accord des utilisateurs pour réaliser aussi des diagnostics,
    • com.apple.mobile.house_arrest est utilisé par iTunes pour les transferts de fichiers vers et à partir des appareils iOS pour les logiciels en ayant la capacité et les autorisations ainsi que par XCode pour faciliter les développements.

    Apple insiste sur le fait que tout ce qui transite est chiffré via des clés non partagées avec elle et qu'il est aussi possible d'accéder à ces services en Wi-Fi.

  • Apple Q3 2014 Fiscal Results Analysis (AnandTech)

    Today Apple announced its Q3 results for the period ending June 2014, and sales of the iPhone once again dominate revenue and earnings for the company.

    Revenue for the quarter came in at $37.4B – a 6% increase year-over-year, and a down sequentially from the previous quarter.

    Net profit was $7.7B for the quarter which is up 11.6% from the same period last year, and earnings per share came in at $1.28, also up over last year’s $1.07. Gross margin was up as well at 39.4% compared to 36.9% in Q3 2013.

    Apple Q3 2014 Financial Results (GAAP)
      Q3'2014 Q2'2014 Q3'2013
    Revenue (in Billions USD) $37.432 $45.646 $35.323
    Operating Income (in Billions USD) $10.282 $13.593 $9.201
    Gross Margin (in Billions USD) $14.735 $17.947 $13.024
    Net Income (in Billions USD) $7.748 $10.223 $6.900
    Margins 39.4% 39.3% 36.9%
    Earnings per Share (in USD) $1.28 $1.66 $1.07

    Once again, the iPhone is the dominate force for Apple right now, accounting for $19.75B in revenue for this quarter with 35.203 million iPhones sold. The device numbers and revenue are both down over last quarter, but sales are up 13% year-over-year with revenue close behind at a 9% gain. Apple doesn’t break down numbers for each model, but using some math we can see the revenue per unit sold at $561 which is a great number.

    Software, Services, and App/Music store sales came in at $4.485B for the quarter which is down 2% compared to last quarter but up 12% year-over-year.

    Mac sales were up again with 4.4 million Macs sold which accounted for $5.5B in revenue. Sales were up 18% and revenue was up 13% compared to Q3 2013, with an increase in sales of 7% over last quarter with revenue remaining flat.

    iPad sales have definitely slowed, with the second quarter in a row of decline. Total sales were 13.2 million units for a revenue of $5.9B, but the device sales are down both year-over-year (9%) and sequentially (19%).

    Unsurprisingly, iPod sales continued their decline with 2.9 million devices sold – down 36% year-over-year. Revenue for the iPod was $442M which was down 40% from Q3 2013. Somewhat surprising was that iPod sales ticked up 6% from last quarter, but revenues declined 4%.

    Finally, accessories now account for about three times the revenue of the once ubiquitous iPod, with revenue for the quarter of $1.3 billion which is up 12% over last year’s numbers.

    Apple Q2 2014 Revenue by Product (billions)
      Q3'2014 Q2'2014 Q3'2013 Revenue for current quarter
    iPhone $19.751 $26.064 $18.154 52.8%
    iPad $5.889 $7.610 $6.374 15.7%
    Mac $5.540 $5.519 $4.893 14.8%
    iPod $0.442 $0.461 $0.733 1.2%
    iTunes/Software/Services $4.485 $4.573 $3.990 12%
    Accessories $1.325 $1.419 $1.179 3.5%

    During this quarter, Apple performed a 7-1 stock split, and returned $8 billion to shareholders through dividends and the share repurchase program. Apple will pay a dividend of $0.47 per share on August 14 for this quarter’s results.

    Analysts were hoping for 36 to 38 million iPhones to be sold this quarter, with sales missing that mark. iPad sales were also lower than expected. With the new iPhone likely not being released until Q1 of fiscal year 2015, outlook for the next quarter is also lower. With the new iPhone not expected until late in  Fiscal Year Q4 (ending September), revenues are not expected to be bumped from new iPhone sales much until Q1 2015 results are available in January 2015. Revenue outlook for the next quarter is $37 to $40 billion.

    Apple Q3 2014 Device Sales (thousands)
      Q3'2014 Q2'2014 Q3'2013
    iPhone 35,203 43,719 31,241
    iPad 13,276 16,350 14,617
    Mac 4,413 4,136 3,754
    iPod 2,926 2,761 4,569

    While sales were still strong for the iPhone, the iPad has now declined in numbers for the second straight quarter. Mac sales were up a healthy 18% year-over-year which means the Mac is almost back to being the number two revenue stream for Apple. We seem to have hit some maturity in the tablet market, and upgrade cycles aren’t quite as quick as they are in the smartphone space. The waiting game is now on for new product announcements from Apple to keep the sales strong.

  • Google Play App Updated to 4.9.13 With Material Design App Pages (AnandTech)

    Google has begun the rollout of an update to the Google Play application on Android. At first glance the update doesn't seem to have any big changes. The sliding menu is the same, and the Play Store home page is the same as it has been for a while. Once you actually navigate to the page for an app it's very clear that this is a bigger update than a quick glance lets on. Google has redesigned the app pages with new animations and a new design to fit in with their new Material Design style.

    Old Google Play on the left, new on the right.

    As you can see, the new design is much different and this applies to almost every aspect of the design from the colors to the shapes to the animations. The first thing that stands out is the change in background color from grey to white. While this is a matter of personal preference, I find the white much more appealing than the grey. Google has also shifted around many parts of the application. The positions of app screenshots and the app changelog have been moved to put better focus on the actual information on the page. Apps that have a video trailer will have it prominently displayed at the top. The changes to animations are difficult to describe in photos but what can be said is that they take advantage of the idea of layers and objects in Material Design. As you scroll downward the page gradually begins to cover up the space where the trailer was as it is pushed offscreen. When selecting "read more" in the app changelog the top and bottom sections of the app are pushed offscreen and the user is greeted with a fullscreen view containing only the relevant information about the app description, changes, and developer info.

    Upon scrolling down you can see that Google has increased the size of the application photos. With the video trailer moved to the top of the application there's also much more space to display screenshots which is good for developers hoping to show off their application. Google has also added more color to the application by color coding the bars that represent the ratings given by users. The overall app itself also has fewer horizontal lines separating sections which leads to a much cleaner look, particularly in the reviews section of the app page. Finally, Google has moved the share and Google+ buttons down beneath the reviews section from its previous position right underneath the app screenshots.

    This update isn't quite the complete Material Design overhaul that users are excited for. That will likely come closer to the time that we see Android L released in the fall. But for now it gives good insight into where Google is headed with app design and what can be looked forward to for all of Google's apps going into the future. As with all of Google's app updates, it may take some time for the new application to reach your device.

  • Microsoft Q4 FY 2014 Financial Results (AnandTech)

    This afternoon Microsoft held an earnings call to announce the results of their fourth quarter for fiscal year 2014.

    Strong growth in Microsoft’s cloud offerings offset a loss by the recently acquired Nokia Devices and Services to contribute to an overall GAAP revenue of $23.4B, up 18% from Q4 2013, and up 15% from Q3 2014. Gross Margin came in at $15.8B which is 67.5%, with an operating income of $6.5B and net income of $4.6B for the quarter. Operating income was up over Q4 2014, but net income was down due to an additional $785M set aside for income taxes. Diluted earnings per share was $0.55, which missed analysts’ expectations of $0.60. For the quarter, $3.4B was returned to shareholders which was a 17% increase from last year.

    Microsoft Q4 2014 Financial Results (GAAP)
      Q4'2014 Q3'2014 Q4'2013
    Revenue (in Billions USD) $23.382 $20.403 $19.896
    Operating Income (in Billions USD) $6.482 $6.974 $6.073
    Gross Margin (in Billions USD) $15.787 $14.462 $14.294
    Net Income (in Billions USD) $4.612 $5.660 $4.965
    Margins 67.5% 70.8% 71.8%
    Earnings per Share (in USD) $0.55 $0.68 $0.59

    The Devices and Consumer lines came in with good results for the quarter, with the caveat that Q4 2013 included the $900M write down of Surface RT inventory which skews the results somewhat.

    Devices and Consumer Licensing contributed $4.7B to the overall revenues and $4.4B to Gross Margin with both values being higher both sequentially and year-over-year. Windows OEM revenue was up 3% with a split of an 11% increase in Pro revenue combined with non-Pro revenue being down 9%. The non-Pro decrease can likely be at least somewhat attributed to offering Windows free for certain devices now. Office Consumer revenue was up 21% compared to Q4 2013, and Windows Phone revenue was up 95% due to no longer having to pay for the commercial agreement with Nokia.

    As for consumer hardware, revenue was up 23% from Q4 2013 at $1.44B but down from the $1.97B last quarter, and Gross Margins increased 103% year-over-year to $0.02B which is also down from $0.26B last quarter. The large increase in Gross Margin is attributed to the Surface RT right off last fiscal year and Microsoft also took a hit for not shipping a new form factor this quarter which is likely the rumored Surface Mini, which didn’t ship as expected with the Surface Pro 3. Overall Surface revenue was $409 million for the quarter. Xbox sold 1.1 million consoles this quarter, and had a 14% increase in revenue driven by increased console revenue. The new segment to Devices and Consumer hardware is the Phone Hardware, which contributed $1.99 billion in revenue but the new Nokia division came in at a $692M loss. Microsoft reported sales of 5.8 million Lumia Smartphones, and 30.3 million other phones.

    The final piece of the consumer division is D&C Other, which includes Office 365 Consumer, Resale, Windows Store, Xbox Live, Bing, and a few other offerings. Revenue for this segment was up $20% year-over-year at $1.88B, but down from the $1.95B in Q3. Gross Margins were also up 21% from last fiscal at $0.45B. Microsoft added an additional 1 million new subscribers to Office 365 Home and Personal, which now totals 5.6 million subscribers. Bing advertising revenue was up 40% due to higher revenue per search, higher search volume, and an expiration of payments to Yahoo from last year. Bing search share is now at 19.2% in the US, up 130 basis points from the same time a year ago.

    The commercial side is where Microsoft makes the majority of its revenue, and this quarter is no different with overall revenue coming in at $13.48B for the quarter which is an increase of 11% year-over-year. Gross Margin was also up 10% at $10.99B for the quarter. Commercial is broken down into Commercial Licensing and Commercial Other, with the former being up 6% to $11.22B in revenue and the latter up 44% to $2.26B. Commercial Licensing includes revenue for on premise offerings such as Server 2012, SQL Server, and System Center, while the Other segment is for cloud offerings and services which grey 147% from the same period last year.

    Microsoft Q4 2014 Segment Overview (in Billions USD)
      Q4'2014 Q3'2014 Q4'2013 Percentage for quarter
    D&C Licensing Revenue $4.69 $4.38 $4.29 20.1%
    D&C Licensing Gross Margin $4.41 $3.91 $3.88 27.9%
    D&C Hardware Revenue $1.44 $1.97 $1.17 6.2%
    D&C Hardware Gross Margin $0.02 $0.26 -$0.65 0.1%
    D&C Other Revenue $1.88 $1.95 $1.56 8.0%
    D&C Other Gross Margin $0.45 $0.54 $0.37 2.9%
    Phone Hardware Revenue $1.99 NA NA 8.5%
    Phone Hardware Gross Margin $0.054 NA NA 0.3%
    Commercial Licensing Revenue $11.22 $10.32 $10.58 48.0%
    Commercial Other Revenue $2.26 $1.90 $1.57 9.7%
    Commercial Gross Margin $10.99 $9.91 $10.00 69.6%

    So what can we learn from this quarter? Clearly Microsoft is well positioned going forward to continue its play in the enterprise, with cloud services in particular being a strong point. No other cloud provider has the product offerings which can compete for the hybrid cloud model of on premise servers running alongside cloud offerings, and they are leveraging this strength to make substantial gains in this sector. As for the consumer offerings, we now see why such drastic action was taken last week with the downsizing of the Nokia division in particular, which lost almost $700 million this quarter. A lot of the job cuts were aimed at manufacturing, and those will likely be aimed towards locations that created the non-Lumia smartphones. Earnings for the quarter were right in line or slightly over the projected results provided last quarter, assuming the Nokia earnings and loss are excluded because they were not a part of Microsoft when the projections were made. Microsoft as a company has traditionally been used to the high margin software business, and the recent push to be a hardware manufacturer has shown that this is a low margin, high risk playground with all of the major losses being in hardware. With a new CEO at the helm for the full FY 2015, we’ll have to see what his vision and patience are for the hardware segment.

N'est-il pas honteux que les fanatiques aient du zèle
et que les sages n'en aient pas ?
-+- Voltaire -+-