Next-gen gesture systems

Someday, we will all control computers with our brain waves. You will think of a command, such as turning on the headlights in your car or closing a dialog box, and a computer will react instantly.

Until then, there is an incredibly precise way to control computer interfaces.

Using nothing more than your own hands and fingers, gesture control systems seek to remove the one impediment to more immediate, ubiquitous computing: the stylus, keyboard, and mouse.

You wave your hand, and the computer starts playing a DVD. Or, you pick up a virtual object, turn it around, and throw it across the room.

Of course, Microsoft Kinect was the first raging success in this space. Recent games like Disneyland Adventures put the gamer into a virtual world.

By raising an arm or pointing at an object, you control the interface without a controller and immerse yourself into a realistic environment. Yet, Kinect is not the only gesture system around.

Several companies are developing gesture systems that take the basic kinetic model of hand gestures and finger movements to the next level.

1. Omek Interactive Beckon

One of the most interesting gesture control systems is the Omek Interactive Beckon. Essentially a development suite for making games and interactive content, the Beckon is unique in that it works with just about any off-the-shelf 3D camera and sensor system.

Many of the gesture control interfaces around today work only with a proprietary camera system. By supporting any 3D camera, Omek is more flexible in terms of the applications you can use at home or in an office setting.

The system works by making a skeleton representation of your entire body. These mapped points of movement are precise enough that the Omek system can read multiple gestures in a row and interpret them as a series of commands, and can automatically recognize a second person. (The Kinect can also recognize a new participant, but they usually have to stand still for a second.) The development kit for Omek Interactive is also unique in that the gesture commands do not require extensive programming.

2. Primesense Reach UX

The company responsible for the tech behind the Microsoft Kinect has their own product that consists of a camera and gesture control interface. Called Reach UX, the camera and UI is intended for controlling entertainment media like TV shows and movies.

For example, a CES concept showed how you can swipe through movie titles and pick the one you want by making a pick gesture. There are two cameras, one that uses an infrared sensor for detecting light and another CMOS sensor that detects movement. The two sensors are combined to form one map of movements. The main advantage of this media gesture control, other than not having to use a remote or a controller, is that you can search through a large collection and "pick" content faster.

3. SoftKinetic

If there is any company that is poised to challenge Microsoft for gesture control interfaces, it is SoftKinetic. The reason: the system is designed for developers to create their own gesture interfaces.

The DepthSense camera works by sending out an infrared beam of light and measuring the time it takes for the beam to return. That helps determine the shape and size of the person in front of the camera and their movements.

The IISU middleware component then maps those readings into the software development kit, which programmers can use for creating applications. The middleware scans an entire body, so the end-user application can consist of a full-body avatar.

4. Oblong Industries G-Speak

No overview of gesture control systems is complete without touching on Oblong Industries, the system that most experts say started the industry. Originally developed as a prototype for the movie Minority Report, the Oblong system eventually became a real product that is now used by major corporations like Boeing to visualize their own product development.

Oblong uses sensors installed all along a ceiling and on walls in a control room. You wear a glove the read precise movements. One example: you can "reach" inside a map and zoom in and out, swipe to the side, and pan up and down.

5. Opening up Kinect itself

Of course, one of the ways to go beyond Kinect is to open it up and see what people develop for it. Microsoft recently released the Kinect for Windows development platform, a way to use the Kinect controller to make custom games for PC, interactive sales demos, and entire applications for industries like health and transportation.

The system uses the same Kinect camera that works with the Xbox 360 but the dev kit now supports near-mode sensing from as close as 40cm away, skeletal tracking which can sense the body of two people, and now works with yup to four connected cameras.

It's roadmap time at AMD and the big news is the promise of mobile chips that should give those snazzy new Ultrabooks powered by Intel processors a run for their money.

A little further out, AMD also hinted that ARM processor cores, currently the architecture of choice for smartphones and tablets, might find their way into its chips.

But first, Ultrabooks. A little like Intel's Centrino effort of the naughties, the Ultrabook is a simple but deceptively clever idea that has gained traction with astonishing speed. And jolly nice they are too, with their slim proportions, strong performance and excellent battery life, largely courtesy of Intel's latest Core-i-whatever mobile processors.

There's just one problem. Pricing. Intel's original pitch for Ultrabooks involved slick, super-slim computing for $1,000 or less. Just the thing to give Apple's pulchritudinous but pricey MacBook Air a beasting.

The reality for punter's wallets has been significantly less salubrious, especially in the UK. Retail stickers well above £1,000 have been common and to date only a handful have hit the shelves for under that figure.

Chip pricing to blame

Part of the problem, ironically enough, is Intel's chip pricing. AMD hasn't exactly been snapping at its heels of late. Whenever Intel's only significant competitor for PC processors falls behind, the same thing happens. Intel's prices go up and its thirst to innovate dries up.

Enter, therefore, the long awaited AMD Trinity chip. It's AMD's second performance-orientated APU (Accelerated Processing Unit) after last year's Llano model. And it looks rather promising. On the CPU side, it gets an updated version of AMD's new Bulldozer architecture, known as Piledriver.

As regular TechRadar readers will know, the Bulldozer architecture didn't deliver on the desktop. However, updated to Piledriver specification and inserted into an APU that also contains one of AMD's absolutely excellent graphics cores, now that's a different box of CPUs altogether.

We won't know for sure until we get our filthy mitts on Trinity-powered laptop PCs. But AMD recently showed off an early Trinity system developed in partnership with Compal. It's just 18mm thick and will allegedly sell for under $900.

Moreover, AMD is making some pretty startling claims for Trinity. For starters, it's said to pack double the performance per watt of the existing Llano APU along with 50 per cent better graphics performance. And Llano already has the fastest integrated graphics core of any PC chip.

But the real killer is that AMD claims Trinity will deliver all this along with better battery life than equivalent Intel mobile CPUs. What we're promised then, is a chip that goes harder and lasts longer than Intel but will also bring prices down on Ultrabooks.

Supernote, anybody?

Of course, any system powered by an AMD chip can't actually be called an Ultrabook. That's an Intel-only gig.

But if I was AMD, I'd be thinking hard for a snappy name for mouth-breathing PC shop salesmen to bandy about. Would sir prefer an Intel Ultrabook or an AMD Supernote?

Whatever, the arrival of Trinity will almost definitely be a good thing for everyone, even Ultrabook buyers. If it's any good, it'll bring down prices across the board.

But what of that tantalising prospect of an ARM-powered AMD chip? Well, AMD has been dropping bigger and better hints in recent months about its willingness to consider use ARM cores in its processors. And people have been getting excited.

In truth, there's really not much reason to do so. There's no shortage of competition and innovation in the ARM processor game. The addition of AMD to the battlefield won't make much difference. At most it'll force everyone to up their game in graphics a little. No, it's x86 why AMD can make the most impact. Fingers crossed for Trinity, folks.

Our columnist Gary Marshall points out that Microsoft's decision to prevent third-party apps on ARM-based Windows 8 desktops will only serve to confuse.

He's right. And, what's more, it horribly hobbles ARM-based Windows 8 hardware to the extent that Intel will be rubbing its hands together with glee.

Last September I suggested that ARM-based Windows 8's lack of legacy app support was the elephant in the room for the OS. It still is.

People won't understand they can't just download and install legacy apps on something that looks like a standard Windows 8 desktop. That's not what Windows means to people.

OK, so there will be Office 15 apps and other bits and pieces pre-installed, while we will have plenty of lovely third-party apps using the Metro interface. But the ARM Windows 8 desktop won't be a flexible experience.

And that can only mean customers will turn away – indeed, I feel that this news means that manufacturers will play it safe and we'll only see a few ARM-based Windows 8 tablets at the launch of Windows 8, rather than the plethora of multipurpose devices I'd hoped for.

You see, people will expect Windows 8 devices to give them options. New possibilities. They won't want an iPad 3 alternative that has a bit of old Windows tacked on.

It's up to Intel

We knew that x86-based devices would still dominate the Windows 8 landscape. But we had hoped that ARM-based Windows devices would take the OS beyond the traditional PC and give us some really exciting tablet-laptop hybrids that could be used for work or play. The single device to suit every occasion.

I was looking forward to having an ARM-based Windows 8 convertible running a chip like the Qualcomm Snapdragon S4, where I could use Metro in tablet mode but also get the full laptop experience with a keyboard and the Windows desktop when needed.

Now it seems that many of these more complex and interesting devices will end up being Intel-based, rather like the Lenovo IdeaPad Yoga we loved so much at CES 2012.

IDEAPAD YOGA: We'll be seeing a lot more Intel-based convertible Windows 8 devices

And that'll be because manufacturers know what will sell. To be frank, people are so used to looking for something with Intel inside.

Intel made it clear at CES that touch-based Ultrabooks will be with us for Windows 8, and many of these could be convertible devices using the Core series of processors.

Intel is keen to make inroads into the tablet market and recently announced the Atom chip it hopes can compete with ARM in many phones and tablets.

Despite the Atom's relative lack of power and battery life compared to the best ARM silicon, it will be rather happy at the possibilities that Windows 8 can bring.

Great news! Microsoft has cleared up the confusion over whether ARM-based Windows 8 machines will run legacy apps!

Terrible news! It's still going to confuse people!

For those of us who spend an inordinate amount of time troubleshooting friends' and relatives' PCs and offering buying advice, Microsoft's policy regarding old Windows apps on ARM - WOA, as Microsoft calls it - has just guaranteed us weeks of confused faces and the odd tear as we lose our rag and bellow "YOU CAN'T, OKAY? YOU JUST CAN'T, DAMMIT!" at our grans.

Here's the policy: Windows 8 on ARM - WOA - won't have any old-fashioned Windows stuff on it, apart from some old-fashioned Windows stuff, and it won't let you run old Windows apps, apart from some new Windows apps that look like old Windows apps.

Phew. For a minute there I thought it was going to be confusing.

There's no business like WOA business

As Steven Sinofsky explains, WOA is all about Metro and Metro apps.

However, for technical reasons that some people may interpret as "we can't be arsed making a Metro version of Office right now", WOA will also include the traditional Windows Desktop so you can run Office 15, and only Office 15.

WOA might look like Windows and run Office like Windows, but it won't run old Windows apps.

I understand why Microsoft's done this - as Intel and ARM are different architectures, running legacy apps would require virtualisation, which won't help performance or battery life, but from a marketing point of view I think it's going to cause unnecessary confusion.

Microsoft says WOA is a separate thing like Windows Server or Windows Embedded. That's true, but people don't see machines running those OSes next to the normal PCs in John Lewis or PC World.

I'm imagining the conversations with my relatives now.

"No, I don't think you should buy that one. Yes, I know it runs Office. Yes, I know that's the Windows Desktop. No, you can't put your old programs on it. No. No, that's a new Office, there's - no, that's because there's a LOOK YOU CAN'T, OKAY? YOU JUST CAN'T, DAMMIT!"

Windows 8 on ARM: the full details

Windows 8 for ARM tablets will come out at the same time as Windows 8 for x86 PCs, if everything goes according to plan.

Microsoft has released full details on Windows on ARM today. It will have the Windows desktop, with familiar apps like Explorer, Internet Explorer and the Windows Live apps, plus Office – but everything else will be Metro.

And no, you won't be able to install it on an Android tablet.

What's WOA?

Microsoft is revealing the technical details of Windows on ARM – which it calls WOA for short – today.

TechRadar talked to Windows chief Steven Sinofsky about what WOA can do, when and how you can get it and which apps it will and won't run.

"Windows on Arm, WOA, is a new member of the Windows family that is built on the foundation of Windows," Sinofsky told us. "It has a high degree of commonality, a very significant amount of shared code with Windows 8. It's going to be developed for, sold and supported as part of our overall Windows ecosystem."

But he didn't want us to think about WOA systems as just PC with a different chip. "We created WOA so that it would enable a new class of PCs with unique capabilities and form factors. It's a new level of device." Think of it as a new weapon for Microsoft in the tablet battle. "It's up-levelling our ability to meet the consumer demand for a device that is reliable and performant over time. The canonical example is the reset and refresh feature and the difference between that and a clean install."

THE BOSS: We spoke to the head of Windows, Steven Sinofsky, ahead of the Windows 8 on ARM announcement

By that, he's talking about the end of 'Windows rot'; a WOA PC won't gradually fill up with cruft and get bloated and sluggish the way older versions of Windows are prone to. A WOA PC will stay snappy and responsive thanks to apps not being able to run in the background. If it gets cluttered with too many apps you don't want, you can reset it to get rid of them without losing your pictures and files.

There's no more hunting for the specific version of a driver that your PC needs on badly organised support sites. "All the updates, whether for firmware, drivers or apps, will only come through the Windows Update or Microsoft update infrastructure and the Store.

And, of course, it will have long battery life in a thin and light design with strong security and powerful applications. It's Windows, reimagined the way Microsoft thinks you always wanted it to be.

Metro, desktop and Office

WOA is very much still Windows. Microsoft is finally confirming something that we've suspected but that has been unclear since Microsoft's BUILD conference last year. Yes, Windows on ARM still has the Windows desktop. And yes, Office 15 will run on it, in the desktop rather than Metro. But there will be no third-party desktop apps for ARM

"All Metro-style apps will run on WOA just like you would expect," Sinofsky confirmed; "it's the same experience". Those are apps written in HTML5, VB, C# and XAML – and in C++ if developers prefer. That's the language most x86 Windows programs are written in, though you can't just turn an existing x86 Windows app into a Metro app (which would be a bad idea for a lot of different reasons).

"You can reuse all your code from existing apps if you want, so long as you only call WinRT APIs. If your app is going through the store and uses the WinRT APIs then it too can work on WOA and we'll provide the tools to cross compile that."

WOA will come with what Microsoft has previously been calling the next wave of Windows Live apps for Metro, hardware accelerated for speed (the way IE9 and IE10 are), already installed.

"We'll have apps from Microsoft for things like mail and calendaring and contacts and photos and storage, hardware accelerated HTML5 and a whole bunch of media formats and document formats - that all support hardware acceleration, that support offloading of computation to integrated chipsets for H264 and things like that. And all of those are included as part of WOA."

Plus you get touch-centric versions of Office (with the notable exception of Outlook), and the desktop you need to run it on, on every WOA PC.

"The other kind of app that's included for WOA are the Office 15 apps: Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote. These are all desktop apps. They're new versions that are completely compatible. They're not subset applications, they have the same file format - all of that stuff. With that of course, you also get the Windows desktop itself; for working with files, for control panel for working with devices and peripherals, Explorer, desktop Internet Explorer - all of that is part of the WOA product."

OFFICE: Office will be part of the native suite running on the Windows 8 desktop

Given that the Microsoft Metro apps include document viewers, getting desktop Office apps is a good thing; you'll use them when you need to work with a document in detail, not just glance through it.

He didn't give us any details about the user interface for Office on WOA but Microsoft has put a lot of effort into making them work well on a tablet, Sinofsky said. The Office apps "have been retuned very significantly to support touch and to support the low power requirements of running on the WOA hardware."

That's a good reason why there won't be desktop apps on WOA from any other software vendors, just Microsoft.

The machine learning Microsoft has used to make the desktop and apps like Explorer work well with touch in the Developer Preview, even when you're dealing with a tiny button, is beyond the scope of many developers - so user interfaces in existing Windows programs would be a bad fit for WOA. Just recompiling an app would give you a program that would probably run slowly, use a lot of battery life, be hard to use and wouldn't use new WinRT features like unified search and share.

Expert users or developers can't get around the restrictions. "There's not a side-loading of x86-compatible code or anything like that. There's no other way to get compiled code on the product other than through the Store."

Not allowing third-party desktop apps makes sense but it certainly has implications. Microsoft wouldn't confirm it, but we believe this means no browser plugins for desktop IE on WOA. There's no official word on Media Center for WOA either.

So to sum up the app situation. "You have Metro style apps that can come from third parties and from Microsoft, you have the desktop and you have all the features that are intrinsic to Windows, and you have Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote apps."

WOA tablets: who and when?

WOA tablets: who and when?

Several traditional PC makers – who also make Android tablets – have confirmed that they will make ARM tablets running Windows, but there are also persistent rumours that Nokia and other phone makers will also create Windows tablets.

Sinofsky didn't confirm any manufacturers but he did tell us WOA will "be supported by a new set of partners that expand the overall ecosystem". That could just be QUALCOMM, NVidia and Ti of course; the companies that are making the different ARM platforms.

The Windows 8 Consumer Preview is only for x86 PCs. That's not because WOA is behind the x86 version; it's because there isn't any WOA hardware. "These WOA PCs are all still under development, they're still being made. But our collective goal is that PC makers will ship them the same time as PCs that are shipped for Windows 8 on x86 and 64."

Developers and peripheral makers will get to see WOA first, on prototype hardware. "Over the next weeks and months following the Consumer Preview, a limited number of test PCs are going to be made available to developer and hardware partners in a closed, invitation-only program." Don't get excited: "They're already spoken for," Sinofsky warned us. And don't feel left out.

WINDOWS 8 ON ARM: From the original demos - the desktop

"There are no actual PCs yet. These are the PCs much like the ones we've been showing in demos. They are hardware prototypes. They're running all the same guts, just as debug boards. They're not the form factors that consumers will see, they don't have the industrial design. They're not thin and light. They have no battery sometimes!"

WOA PCs: only for WOA

"All the PC manufacturers are obviously super-hard at work on building these brand new devices that from the ground up are designed to be great - and exclusively for WOA," Sinofsky emphasized.

That means you can't take a WOA tablet and install Linux on it, and you can't put WOA on an existing ARM tablet. "It is not this level playing field across ARM devices," he pointed out to TechRadar; "Each one is unique. It's why you don't install Android on your iPhone."

Microsoft has done a lot of work to rebuild Windows for ARM and that's specifically for the hardware WOA PC makers are choosing.

"All of this is going to lead to a new generation of integrated end-to-end products. Hardware, firmware, the WOA software; it's all built from the ground up to work together, with a new level of collaboration between Microsoft, the ARM licensees, PC makers and developers of components and peripherals.

The work was across a really broad array of subsystems in Windows; some of them have been re-architected for low power and new kinds of devices, others are brand new support for things that haven't been there before."

But the way Microsoft is supporting ARM is also going to make life a lot easier for tablet manufacturers who've had to do a great deal of integration work putting Android onto their ARM tablets. Despite the range of hardware, there's only one version of WOA, because the Windows Hardware Abstraction Layer takes care of differences, and that could conceivably put tablet prices down.

"These PCs that we're building together are built on the hardware platforms from NVidia, QUALCOMM and Ti but they all share a common WOA OS foundation. The neat thing is all of them are running the same Windows binary," Sinofsky told us enthusiastically.

"It's a different approach that we've taken where we're working across different ARM hardware but the same Windows binaries are on each of them. We actually added more features to the HAL to work across different ARM buses, as we call them. What we're doing working across multiple ARM platforms is unprecedented."

Best of Windows, best of ARM

This is the 'best of both worlds' approach that we've predicted Microsoft would take with ARM and Windows 8. It's a tablet with tablet apps (although we expect to see slider and ultraportable form factors too and Sinofsky repeatedly said 'PC' rather than 'tablet'). But it's also a PC with the power of Windows and Office – just without many of the disadvantages.

If you want the whole of both worlds (good and bad), cross your fingers for the work Intel is doing to create low power SoC PCs. "We're doing a lot of work with Intel on this release too," Sinofsky reminded us.

"Especially when we talk about a lot of the power saving features, remember that Intel is making their System on a Chip stuff as well and everything we're talking about applies to those Intel chips." That would give you an ultra-low power system that gets the always-on Connected Standby feature and could run all your old Windows apps too, although those apps could weigh the system down and don't get all the advantages of WinRT.

The question is how many people want that 'belt and braces' approach and that's more Intel's problem than Microsoft's. With Windows on ARM, Microsoft is betting that the tablet market is going to be big, especially for tablets with long battery life and the advantages of a PC – like running Office.

Microsoft has finally lifted the lid on Windows 8 on ARM, saying that it doesn't want ARM-based devices to be simply referred to as standard Windows systems with a different processor.

Instead, Windows 8 on ARM (known at Microsoft as WOA) will give rise to a whole new type of PC according to the software giant.

There are also some startling revelations about the Windows 8 ARM desktop, which you can read more about here.

In a Mary Branscombe interview for TechRadar, Windows head Steven Sinofsky about the announcement. "Windows on ARM, WOA, is a new member of the Windows family that is built on the foundation of Windows," Sinofsky told us.

"It has a high degree of commonality, a very significant amount of shared code with Windows 8. It's going to be developed for, sold and supported as part of our overall Windows ecosystem."

"We created WOA so that it would enable a new class of PCs with unique capabilities and form factors. It's a new level of device."

"It's up-levelling our ability to meet the consumer demand for a device that is reliable and performant over time. The canonical example is the reset and refresh feature and the difference between that and a clean install."

Read the full TechRadar interview with Steven Sinofsky.

Microsoft has sent out press invites to the official Windows 8 Consumer Preview launch at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona.

The company will showcase the long-awaited public beta on February 29th in a two hour event from 3pm to 5pm, at the annual mobile show.

Microsoft had promised to release the Consumer Preview by the end of February, so it would seem that it'll be made available following the event at MWC.

Aside from the time, date and purpose of the event, additional details are thin on the ground.

Next step to release

The launch of the Consumer Preview is the next step along the line to a full release of the final version of the eagerly anticipated reimagining of Windows.

Developers have been able to use a preview version of the Metro-centric OS since September.

The final manufacturers copy is expected to be sent out in second half of 2012.

We'll be live at Mobile World Congress bringing you all of the details from Microsoft's event on February 29th.

Windows 8 will come with a number of pre-installed apps, which look set to include things like messaging, mail and contacts.

The apps will be in the Windows Phone Metro style and some, like messaging may incorporate mobile aspects like SMS support.

The full list, acquired by The Verge, includes camera, messaging, mail, calendar, SkyDrive, people, photos, video and music.

Soon, soon

We should see all these apps and, possibly, more in the Windows 8 beta set for this month.

None will be branded WIndows Live, as some Windows apps like Messenger currently are, but the Music and Video apps are said to be branded Zune at the moment, with plans to move this to Xbox Live for Windows in the long term.

Speaking of Xbox Live, there's also a possibility that a Windows Phone-alike Xbox Live Companion app will come bundled in the consumer preview too.

So, not exactly groundbreaking information, but rather another blank filled in in the great tech crossword puzzle that is Windows 8.

Gaming PC vendor Alienware recently took the wraps off its X51 - a smaller form factor desktop to go alongside its not-so-dainty Aurora line of gaming desktop behemoths.

We got up close with the Core i7 variant of the new mini gaming PC at a demo event yesterday.

The first thing that strikes you is the size - it isn't that much taller than an Xbox 360 - 32cm high at its shortest point and less than 10cm in thickness.

The box has been designed to either sit horizontally or stand vertically, and Alienware is expecting a reasonable number to find homes underneath HDTVs in living rooms.

So what we're looking at here is a couple of the £999 units each boasting a 3.4Ghz Intel Core i7-2600, Nvidia Geforce GTX 555 graphics and 8GB of memory.

Alienware is keen to stress that there's a market for a performance gaming system without the bulk - it believes people are looking for smaller machines, but that gamers still want a desktop PC rather than a laptop. The company is keen to stress it wanted to sit the X51 above traditional small form factor (SFF) systems that don't have a great deal of power or graphics capabilities.

As you can see, there's a slot-loading optical drive on the front (24x dual-layer DVD), as well as a couple of USB 2.0 ports. There are a couple of USB 3.0 ports on the back as well as three more USB 2.0 ports, HDMI, Ethernet, full complement of audio outputs including SPDIF and two DVIs. 802.11n Wi-Fi is also integrated.

Alienware was keen to demonstrate that the lower end £699 is also very capable - it packs a 3.3GHz Intel Core i3-2120, Nvidia Geforce GT545 graphics, 4GB of DDR3 RAM and a 1TB HDD. All models sport Windows 7 Home Premium.

There's also a 3GHz Core i5-2320 mid-range variant available.

We love the look of the thing (and yes, you can customise the colours of those LEDs - there are 8,000 different combinations) but we'll be honest - the X51 is a lot of money for what it is, especially since Alienware believes it occupies a mainstream rather than enthusiast segment of the market.

The unit's weigh clocks in at 5.5Kg - Alienware says it occupies only around 15 per cent of the space of one of its traditional desktops. The components inside are user upgradeable.

You also get a Alienware backlit keyboard and mouse in the box. We'll run our benchmarking rule over it when we hold of one in our TechRadar test lab, though Alienware has posted its on basic benchies for the Core i3 and i7 models, which you can see below - click here for a bigger version.

According to The Verge, Windows is about to lose something precious: the Start Orb, better known as the Start button.

We're already familiar with the new, touch-optimised, orb-free Windows 8 Metro interface, but it looks like the Orb's getting booted from the traditional desktop too.

There's no doubt that many people would like to see the back of it - we've had comments of the "OMG LOL YOU HAVE TO PRESS START TO SHUT DOWN YOUR PC BUY APPLE BUY APPLE BUY APPLE" variety since it was introduced in 1733, and there's no doubt that Metro looks much more modern and friendly than the ageing Windows UI.

But in the whoosh of Microsoft throwing out the bathwater, some people think they can hear the waaah of a baby.

Stopping Starting something

The rumours, I'm sure, are right: Microsoft has been making Windows 8's interface more Metro-y for some time, and killing off the Start button makes sense from that perspective.

The thing is, though, Microsoft isn't killing it: it's hiding it. When you move the mouse to the bottom corner the Orb magically appears again. You'll still be able to access the Orb from the Start key on your keyboard, too.

If we were living in a time of great pixel shortages, where gangs of graphics card manufacturers fought in the streets over packets of stolen pixels, hiding the Start Orb might be a great advantage.

However, we aren't, and as a result all that's really going on is that Microsoft appears to be making the classic Windows desktop a little bit more confusing, choosing to hide a key part of the user interface. Maybe once we get our hands on the Consumer Preview we'll think the new way is fantastic, but right now it looks like a step backwards in user-friendliness for no real benefit.

• Windows 8 beta: new features to expect

According to Windows boss Steven Sinofsky, "people 'in the know' who valued efficiency were moving away from the Start menu, and pinning their frequently used programs to the taskbar so that they could access them instantly in one click."

Program pinning is handy, but you can't pin everything to the taskbar or things start getting silly - and if you're in legacy mode rather than Metro mode, surely you want Windows to work like Windows always has?

Sinofsky says that the old Start menu is bad because it provides access to lots of programs and features people don't use very often, but for some of us that's exactly the point: we *like* having something that provides access to the things we don't use very often.

I'm imagining Sinofsky as a crazed vivisectionist here, cutting up cats and gluing their heads onto horses to make the cats better at showjumping.

Maybe, like cats and horses, Metro and classic Windows are best kept separate. Anyone fancy FrankenWindows?

10 worst programs of all time

Programs can be our friends: they can help us express ourselves, can solve our problems and can do their very best to make our days happier.

Sometimes, though, they do the Devil's work, making simple tasks so complex and frustrating that you'd happily make everybody involved face a firing squad.

So which programs made everyone angry? Let's discover the software Hall of Shame.

1. Final Cut Pro X

Apple's movie editing software isn't a bad program, but this release turned even the most mild-mannered editor into an incandescent ball of sheer fury. It was sold as an upgrade, but it was really a brand new, version 1.0 product - and that means it didn't have all the features or compatibility that existing users expected, wanted or relied upon.

2. Adobe Reader

Everybody needs to open a PDF from time to time, but Adobe Reader is a sledgehammer sold as a nutcracker: it's enormous - on the Mac, the current version is 69.1MB - it keeps putting a shortcut on your desktop for no good reason, and once you've installed it seems to spend most of its time moaning that you haven't paid it enough attention or installed yet another enormous update. No wonder Windows 8 plans to whack it with a shovel.

GOING: OS X has its own PDF reader, and Windows 8 will do the same with the new Open Reader

3. Ask Toolbar

We're not fans of browser toolbars at the best of times, but the Ask Toolbar is a particularly poor one: it's been variously accused of installing itself without asking permission, making changes to users' browser settings and promoting itself to children. Many problems occurred because over-zealous software writers bundled the toolbar with their own applications but didn't ask whether or not you wanted it.

WHAT'S THAT JEEVES?: We don't like third party toolbars at the best of times, but the Ask one proved particularly unpopular

4. Lotus Notes

IT departments loved this popular messaging and collaboration system, but users were considerably less keen: in the mid-2000s the product was widely criticised for appearing to have been put together by somebody who really, really hated the entire human race and wanted to make it suffer. According to The Guardian, its popularity in business was partly because "the people who choose [business software] tend not to be the ones who use it."

NOT OF NOTE: Lotus Notes still exists, but these days it's very different from its much-hated mid-2000s incarnation [Image credit: Koman90, Wikimedia Commons]

5. Norton Antivirus

Symantec's desktop antivirus software generated enormous ill will through its unfortunate habit of slowing your PC down to a crawl. Part of the problem was that the software tried to do too much: scanning every conceivable thing you do on PC requires significant resources at a time when PCs weren't the flying machines they are today. Thankfully, Norton has addressed such issues these days.

PROBLEMS, PROBLEMS: Happy Norton Man won't be smiling when his system slows down and he can't uninstall the program

6. Microsoft Word

Some people say "I hate Microsoft Word because it's far too complicated!" Some say "I hate Microsoft Word because it introduced Clippy the bloody Office Assistant!" A few say "I hate Microsoft Word because it's often used by idiots to make really horrible-looking things!" Others say, "I hate Microsoft Word because its HTML output made web designers' lives miserable for years!" Still others say "I hate Microsoft Word because I keep sending .docx files that only three people on Earth can actually read!" We say, people! Come together! Let's hate Microsoft Word for all of those reasons!

OFFICE PEST: Aaagh! Aaagh! Aaagh! Aaagh!

7. Adobe Flash

Despite its many benefits - in web design circles it's a powerful and useful creative tool - Flash can be enormously annoying. In many cases the problem was with its users, not the technology - you can't blame Adobe for irritating splash screens, badly designed ads or appalling user interfaces - but for many internet users, a Flash blocker is the first thing they install in a new browser.

NOT JUST JOBS: Flash remains a powerful design tool, but in the wrong hands it can be a powerful force for evil

8. iTunes for Windows

Steve Jobs called iTunes for Windows "like giving a glass of ice water to someone in hell". The reality distortion field was strong that day, because rather than show Windows users the joys of Apple software, iTunes on Windows seems merely designed to depress them. As we've said previously, "the Windows version is a sluggish, resource-hungry mess. Apple has Windows users worldwide loving its iOS devices and despising iTunes, and this needs to change."

SLOOOOOOW: iTunes is proof that Apple doesn't always get it right. On Windows it's a donkey

9. Windows Me and Windows Vista

Yes, we know these are operating systems. This one's a joint nomination: Windows Me because it was a largely pointless update of Windows 98, and Windows Vista because it didn't work properly. Vista in particular should have been a great OS, but show-stopping bugs - copying a file could easily take four million years - and a lack of initial driver support turned a potential racehorse into a donkey.

WOW NOW: The wow starts... now! No... now! Now! NOW! Oh okay, let's just wait for Windows 7 then

10. Internet Explorer 6

Imagine a pristine swimming pool with crystal clear water. That's the internet. Now imagine an enormous poo floating past. That's IE6.

You know something's bad when even its creator dances on its grave. The problem wasn't the browser as such, which was fairly modern when it was released in 2001; it was Microsoft's refusal to update it significantly for years and years, breaking websites and leaving internet users vulnerable to all kinds of online unpleasantness. IE6 was Microsoft at its worst.

TERRIBLE: "Imagine an enormous poo... that's IE6". IE6 is officially pronounced "Aieeeeeee"

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From time to time even jaded tech hacks get a "wow!" moment. I had one last night when I saw that Avid had launched an iPad app.

Avid? The high-end video and ProTools firm? An iPad app? Yep, yep and yep.

Avid reckons the iPad makes a great wee video editor, and its Avid Studio plays happily with the firm's high-end desktop software. It's right, and it's not the only firm thinking along the same lines. Apple, of course, already does Garageband and iMovie, Adobe has Photoshop Touch, and there are stacks of digital audio products such as Auria and the tasty-looking Bitwig music studio.

Not bad for toys, eh?

Getting better all the time

What's really great about this is that we're still in the very early stages, both in terms of technology - we've gone from single core to dual core to quad core tablets already; imagine what horsepower tablets will have in five years - and in terms of what's possible for our tablets to do.

Take music, for example. You can use your tablet as a quick and dirty composition device, or as a controller for a desktop music production program, or as a fully-fledged studio, or you can slot it into another bit of hardware such as Behringer's utterly brilliant/completely demented iAxe or its faintly frightening iPad mixers.

This isn't about whether tablets are better than PCs or vice-versa; it's about people, and what they can do, and the ever-expanding universe of possibilities today's technology delivers and tomorrow's promises.

We've only had iPad-y tablets for two years. What on earth will we be doing with them in ten?

Microsoft has begun shipping the Kinect for Windows hardware, opening the door for a wave of motion-based applications for PCs.

The newly-developed peripheral is now available for £249, although Qualified Educational Users, can get a $100 discount later this year.

The launch of the Kinect for Windows hardware accompanies the release of version 1.0 of the commercial SDK and runtime to enable developers to get to work on new applications.

New features

The official launch of the SDK brings several improvements on Beta 2, which was released three months ago.

Among the new features is support for up to four peripherals on the same computer, improved skeletal tracking and the new Near Mode which allows the sensor to track objects as close as 40cm from the device.

The full list of new features can be viewed on the Kinect for Windows blog.

Wednesday's launch lives up to CEO Steve Ballmer's recent promise to make the devices and software available on February 1st.

Best free video converter: 1-6

AVI, MOV, MPEG, FLV, MKV, MP4 - videos come in many different formats. Each of which can then vary in a raft of subtle ways.

Which would be just fine if every application and device could handle every possible format, but of course that isn't the case.

And so often you'll find you've downloaded a movie to your PC, phone or tablet, but either it has major playback problems - no picture or sound, say - or you can't watch the clip at all.

This doesn't have to hold you up for long, though. There are plenty of free video conversion tools which can quickly import movies in just about any format, perhaps tweak them in useful ways (change the resolution, maybe carry out basic editing operations), and export them in formats you can actually use.

And if you're aiming to view the clip on a mobile device then some of these programs can be incredibly easy to use. They'll often include a library of presets for common devices, so if you want to export a video to an iPhone 4, say, you won't have to manually tweak every possible setting.

Just choose the iPhone 4 preset and the program will automatically configure itself to produce the precise format you need.

The only real problem is that there are now so many free video conversion tools that you might be left wondering, which is best? We're curious, too - so we decided to pitch 12 popular packages against each other in an effort to find out.

NOTE: While these tools are free, many now include browser toolbars and similar addons. If you'd rather not install these, don't just keep clicking Next during the setup process: read each screen carefully. Choose "Custom" installation options where they're offered, and clear the checkboxes next to any "bonus extras" which you'd rather not have on your system.

Best free video converter: How we tested

Our first measurement of video conversion tool quality comes in looking at its features. How many formats can it import and export, for instance? Do these cover all the options you'll need?

We checked to make sure that you can carry out basic tweaks during the conversion process, like changing the video resolution. And we awarded extra marks for bonus features, such as the ability to edit the source video before converting it.

Video editing can be a complicated, jargon-packed process, so we were also interested in ease of use. We wanted our conversion tools to provide access to low-level conversion options (sometimes that's very useful), but these should never get in your way.

Our utilities should ideally provide sensible default settings at all times, and device presets as well, so you can export to, say, an iPad 2 just by selecting it from a list.

And as converting videos can take a very long time, performance is particularly important. To measure this, we gave each conversion tool four tests.

Starting with the source files from Big Buck Bunny, we converted the 1080p surround-sound AVI to 320x240 WMV; tried transcoding the 480p MOV to MP4 (vital as that's such an important format these days); and converted the 320x180 MP4 file to both FLV and MPEG2.

AVI to WMV

Click here for bigger version

MOV to MP4

Click here for bigger version

MP4 to FLV

Click here for bigger version

MP4 to MPEG2

Click here for bigger version

And while these tests don't cover every possibility, they provided a great deal of very useful information. So read on to discover which conversion tools you really need to consider, and the programs you should avoid at all costs.

1. Any Video Converter Free 3.3.2

Compatible with: Windows 2000, XP, Vista, 7

Video conversion tools can sometimes be scary, complex, intimidating - but not this one. If your needs are basic then you can just drag in your files, choose the output format you need from the wide selection on offer, click "Convert Now!", and the program will go to work. It's all very easy.

There's also plenty of power here, though. Any Video Converter Free can download videos directly from YouTube, Google, MetaCafe and so on, for instance. Handy editing options include the ability to trim and crop footage, and apply useful special effects (sharpen, reduce noise, tweak brightness or contrast). And once you've chosen an output profile then you can customise a few of its settings, perhaps choosing a new resolution, frame rate, bit rate and so on.

Performance was a little disappointing, especially considering that Any Video Converter is (like many similar programs) mostly just a front end for the excellent FFMPEG conversion library. Only two programs were slower in the important MP4 conversion test, and the others weren't quick, either.

And there was another problem. The program includes a "Burning to DVD" profile which is supposed to burn your videos to DVD when the conversion is over, but just gave us an error message.

This is a pity, because Ant Video Converter is well designed and had lots of useful functionality. It only offers limited control over the conversion process, so video experts may want to look elsewhere, but if you're more interested in ease of use and can put up with the below-par performance then this could be an acceptable choice.

We liked

Easy to use, downloads from YouTube, useful video editing features, supports many input/ output formats

We disliked

Only limited control over the video conversion, DVD burning didn't work for us, disappointing performance

2. Free Studio 5.3.3

Compatible with: Windows XP, Vista, 7

Free Studio is a suite of 45 freeware tools to handle all kinds of video-related tasks: downloading, ripping, burning, and of course converting clips from one format to another.

A front end menu tries to integrate all these, but it still takes some exploration to find what you need. Once discovered the relevant tools, though, they follow the usual route: import your chosen videos, choose the appropriate output format or device, and convert at a click.

If Free Studio doesn't provide a profile to suit your needs, then it's possible to configure a new one. So if you need to create 1024x768 AVIs, say, then in a click or two you can build a profile which uses that resolution, and in future you'll be able to simply select it from the list. Which is handy, although there are only very few tweaks available within a profile: video frame rate, bit rate, resolution, audio sample rate, bit rate, the number of audio channels, and, well, that's it. (You can't even choose the audio codec, typically - the program selects what's appropriate for the format.)

When it comes to performance, the story is mixed: Free Studio did very well in the important MP4 conversion tests, but was poor at creating FLVs, and couldn't produce an MPEG2 file at all.

And so if you're looking for real video conversion power this Free Studio probably won't be good enough. But if you only need to convert videos occasionally, maybe to MP4, then Free Studio may deliver exactly what you need (and its ease of use and host of extras are a welcome bonus.)

We liked

Well designed, many extras (download, ripping, burning tools), good MP4 conversion speed

We disliked

conversion functions are inconveniently split across several programs, only limited conversion tweaks, slow FLV export, failed to create MP2 file

3. Format Factory 2.80

Compatible with: Windows XP, Vista, 7

Format Factory offers a good balance between ease of use and video conversion power. It's easy to get started: you can choose the type of file you'd like to create, add some videos to be converted, and pick your required output settings. But you also just get a little more control over those settings than in some of the more basic tools here.

When creating an MP4 movie, for instance, you can choose the encoding option (DivX, XviD, H264); the video resolution; frame rate, audio codec, sample rate, volume and more, even rotating the image, or adding subtitles or a watermark, if you like.

But if you're in a hurry, no problem, the program also provides multiple profiles which configure all your settings in a click. The MP4 conversion, for instance, has 27, with descriptive names like "Mobile Device Compatible 320x240 MPEG4", so it's easy to find what you need. (And if for some reason it isn't, then you can easily create new profiles to do whatever you want.)

Performance wasn't bad, either, with Format Factory scoring well on our HD to MP4 and WMV tests, although its inability to run our MP4 to FLV conversion dragged its mark down.

The programs mix of usability with plenty of advanced conversion tweaks does mean it's worth a look, though. And as a bonus, there are plenty of extra options, including the ability to create animated GIFs from movies, extract video soundtracks, convert audio and image files, rip DVDs and CDs, and more.

We liked

Advanced conversion options, plenty of built-in conversion presets, watermark and subtitling support, bonus audio/ image/ other conversion types, good MP4/ WMV output performance

We disliked

Failed to convert one test file

4. Freemake Video Converter 3.0.1

Compatible with: Windows XP, Vista, 7

If you need your conversion tool to support the widest possible range of formats then Freemake Video Converter could be ideal: it supports a lengthy list of video types, as well as being able to import audio files, images, DVDs, even YouTube URLs.

Once your movies have been imported, you're able to remove sections you don't need via a simple video editor. There's a useful option to set a limit on the maximum size of your movie, or you might choose to import a series of files, but then join them together so they're saved as a single video.

Export support for files is a little more basic, being mostly limited to the essentials, and you can only tweak a few elements of your chosen format (codec, resolution, frame rate, audio and video bitrate, sample rate, channels).

Exporting to mobile devices is better, however, with support for many Apple, Nokia, Samsung, Blackberry and other device types (there are even pictures of many phones, rather than just the model names, to help you choose). Choose the appropriate device and the program will automatically configure itself to produce compatible videos: all you have to do is click Convert and watch it happen.

And you won't be watching long, as Freemake Video Converter delivers marginally above-average performance, not least because of its CUDA support.

A few more output formats would be welcome, then, as would some more advanced conversion tweaks. But that's really just nit-picking: Freemake Video Converter is an excellent tool which already has more than enough power to satisfy most people's transcoding needs.

We liked

Wide input file format support, lots of device export options, simple video editor, can limit converted video size, reasonable performance, easy to use

We disliked

Output file format support is limited, can only tweak a few aspects of the converted videos

5. Handbrake 0.9.5

Compatible with: Windows XP, Vista, 7, Mac OSX, Linux

HandBrake is probably the oldest of our crop of conversion tools, having been around since 2003. And it's also one of the more specialised, being best at transcoding videos to run on Apple devices. The program can only export MP4 and MKV files, for example, and its output presets are mostly Apple related (iPod, iPhone, iPad and so on).

As long as your target device plays MP4 files, though (and most do), this doesn't have to be a major problem. And HandBrake does enable you to customise the video conversion process in many different ways, which could be appealing if you find the competition a little too basic.

Once you've selected your source files, for instance, you can of course choose the output resolution, video and audio codecs, frame rates and so on. But there are also options to crop the source footage, add subtitles, or include extra audio tracks. You can include chapter markers, or apply some useful cleanup filters (Detelecine, Decomb, Deinterlace, Denoise, Deblock). And real experts can access many low-level encoding and analysis details via the Advanced tab.

What you don't get here are spectacular conversion speeds, unfortunately: Handbrake's MP4 output performance remained resolutely average in our tests (although perhaps it could be improved if you spend time tuning the program's more advanced settings). Still, if you need lots of encoding options, and can live with the meagre selection of output formats, then Handbrake may still be a reasonable transcoding choice.

We liked

Many useful editing options and video filters, advanced encoding and analysis tweaks

We disliked

Only exports MP4 and MKV files, average conversion speeds

6. Internet Video Converter HD

Compatible with: Windows XP, Vista, 7

If there were awards given for horrible interfaces then Internet Video Converter HD (IVC HD) would be an obvious candidate. It's a cluttered mess, confusing and poorly laid out, and will quickly have you wishing you'd downloaded a more conventional tool, instead. The program has received quite a few positive reviews, though, and once you get past the dubious design decisions then a few plus points do emerge.

IVC HD can download videos from YouTube and 12 other video sharing sites, for instance. It's able to create Flash files (FLV or SWF) from your videos, and can generate the HTML to host them. Editing options include the ability to trim, rotate, deinterlace or sharpen your source footage, and converting HD footage from one format to another is simplified by a convenient set of built-in presets: just choose the one which matches your needs and you'll be ready to go.

The basic conversion process isn't too difficult to follow, either, once you've tried it a few times. Choose your input video, pick an output format, customise a few settings and click Convert: even if the developer is entirely clueless about interface design, the core procedure is just the same as with more normal tools.

Performance isn't quite as good as you'll get elsewhere, however, with the program delivering marginally below average conversion speeds in our tests. And so, if you really need the video downloading feature, or you want to generate Flash files (SWF) with matching HTML then IVC HD might be worth a try, just about. But otherwise we'd recommend you ignore it entirely

We liked

Handy HD conversion presets, downloads online videos from many sites, can generate HTML for Flash files, some basic editing options

We disliked

Dreadful interface, below average performance

Best free video converter: 7-12

7. KoyoteSoft Free Video Converter 3.1.0.0

Compatible with: Windows XP, Vista, 7

At first glance, Free Video Converter doesn't look like the most impressive of transcoding tools. File format support is limited, for instance; you can only tweak the most basic aspects of the output video (codec, resolution, frame rate, bitrate and so on); and there's nothing like the bonus features you'll get with some of the more powerful competition.

Try a few conversions, though, and the program will soon seem more appealing. Importing videos is just a matter of dragging and dropping, for instance (and it supports all the formats most people will ever need). There are lots of presets available for various devices (Apple, Android, Sony, BlackBerry, Xbox and more). And while there's only one editing tool, it's perhaps the most important, allowing you to trim unwanted footage from the start and end of your clip.

There are also some issues, though. And the major one is performance. The program proved particularly slow in our HD conversion tests, and the other times weren't great, either. While elsewhere, minor irritations included the lack of a local help file, always an issue when you're dealing with such a complex topic. And an interface quick means you can't manually type the video bitrate you require into the program (you're bizarrely forced to use assorted buttons and a slider, instead).

Free Video Converter scores highly for its ease of use, then, and if you only occasionally need to run simple conversions of small files then it may be good enough. If you're after power or performance, though, the program will probably disappoint.

We liked

Easy to use, lots of device presets, video trimmer

We disliked

Relatively limited file format support, some interface quirks, poor HD transcoding performance

8. MediaCoder 2011 R10

Compatible with: Windows XP, Vista, 7

If your video conversion needs are complex, and only the most powerful tool will do, then start by downloading a copy of MediaCoder 2011 - it's packed with functions and features.

The program doesn't just import all the main video formats, for instance: it can also download streaming videos, read CDs and DVDs, connect to video capture devices, and more.

In-depth editing options then allow you to trim and crop your footage; tweak levels, brightness, contrast, saturation, hue and gamma; and apply filters to deinterlace, denoise, deblock, dering and otherwise enhance your footage.

You can then output to all the usual video formats. And not just using whatever settings the developer thought best. MediaCoder gives you access to an incredible number of options, probably more than you ever realised existed (the Advanced XviD section currently contains 39 settings all on its own).

And smart optimisations, along with support for CUDA and Intel video acceleration technologies, helps to ensure that MediaCoder delivers the best possible performance. It was the fastest in our tests by a large margin.

With all this power comes a degree of complexity, unsurprisingly. The author has tried to combat this by providing a wizard and some simplified device-specific interfaces to help configure MediaCoder's key settings, but it's still trickier to use than most of the competition.

If you'll use the program's extra power, though, don't let that put you off. It doesn't take too long to master the MediaCoder basics, and your efforts will be handsomely rewarded by its powerful features, extreme configurability and great performance.

And if you must have something simpler, check out the program's website: there are simpler, more specialised versions of MediaCoder (for Apple devices, say, or mobile phones) which deliver similar performance but are much easier to use.

We liked

Wide input format support, powerful editing, vast range of conversion settings and tweaks, excellent performance, straightforward configuration wizard

We disliked

Interface can be intimidating, relatively complex to use

9. Miro Video Converter 2.5

Compatible with: Windows XP, Vista, 7

Throughout these tests we've been giving extra marks to programs which allow us to tweak the video conversion process, change various advanced settings to produce the precise results we need. But if you don't care about any of that, and just want the easiest conversion tool you can find, then Miro could be interesting.

The program really is very simple to use. All you have to do is drag and drop a file onto it (all the major formats are supported), choose an output preset (Apple and Android devices are covered, along with the PSP and basic MP4/ WebM/ Theora options) click Convert, and that's it: Miro will begin converting your movie right away.

This simplicity does mean the program has plenty of limitations, though. You can't tweak the resolution or frame rate, for example. There's no talk of codecs here, no editor, no configurable sample or bit rates. You can't add additional presets for your own devices.

It's not even possible to process more than one file at a time, so if you've ten files to convert then you'll have to drag and drop them individually.

Still, conversion speeds proved acceptable, with the program ranking fourth out of twelve in our MP4 export test. And so, if you occasionally need to convert a single video to play on your iPad, say, then Miro will get the job done fairly quickly and with the absolute minimum of hassle.

If you'd like wider format support, more (or any) conversion tweaks and a few video editing options, though, then move along to the next program: you won't find any of those items here.

We liked

good input format support, drag and drop simplicity, above average MP4 export performance

We disliked

no configuration options at all, no editing tools, very few output formats, can't add new presets

//score//

58%

10. Quick Media Converter HD 4.5.0.0

Compatible with: Windows XP, Vista, 7

Quick Media Converter HD does its best to create a good first impression by opening in an "Easy Mode", with minimal conversion options and plenty of bright, colourful icons. But it's not long before you realise that "Easy Mode" isn't really so easy, at all.

The program tells you to drag and drop your input videos, for instance, but that didn't work for us. Many of the presets are confusing, basic and inconsistent. And while "Easy Mode" includes resizing and "bit rate select" buttons, most of the time they don't work, either.

Switching to HD Mode is a little better, in that you can choose from some common target HD resolutions.

But then Expert Mode introduces new problems, in that it allows you to create all kinds of impossible combinations (like converting videos to GIF files using the H264 codec). Presumably they're hoping experts will choose more sensibly, but a little help from the interface would still be welcome.

And other interface irritations include the horribly basic integrated video player, which doesn't have a progress bar, so you can only play clips from the beginning - there's no option to jump ahead.

Still, at least Quick Media Converter HD uses FFmpeg to convert your files, so we thought conversion performance would be acceptable. But no, it turned out the program wasn't great here, either. It did reasonably well on our small file tests, but when converting HD files Quick Media Converter HD was clearly outperformed by most of the competition.

So whether you want simplicity, advanced controls or reliably speedy conversions, Quick Media Converter HD just doesn't deliver - give the program a miss.

We liked

Colourful interface, multiple operating modes, lots of device presets, reasonable SD encoding performance

We disliked

Poorly designed, often confusing and difficult to use, feeble video player, below average HD conversion speeds

11. SUPER 2011.49

Compatible with: Windows 2000, XP, Vista, 7

While many video conversion tools try to hide their more involved settings, SUPER displays them up front, cramming its opening screen with more options than some of the competition have in total. And that can be a little intimidating, if you're a transcoding novice.

In reality, though, the settings are sensibly grouped, leading you through the various options you need to take: choose an output file format, a video and audio codec, select a resolution, frame and bit rates, and so on. You're able to drag and drop a bunch of files onto the program, and with a single click SUPER will then try to process them all.

Whether it'll succeed is another matter. SUPER uses popular tools like FFmpeg to handle the conversions, so they really ought to be reliable, but it did give us errors on some conversions (and we've no idea why).

The real problem here is the horrible performance, though, particularly in the HD conversion tests, where SUPER trailed way behind everyone else. (Putting this into perspective, MediaCoder was more than 17 times faster in our MOV > MP4 benchmark.)

It's a shame, because SUPER does have lots of interesting features: it can import streaming videos (rtsp, mms, http), understands playlists (asx, m3u, pls, wmx), and includes many advanced configuration options. In our view that's not enough to make up for the dire performance, though, and so you'll be better off looking elsewhere.

We liked

Imports streaming videos, lots of advanced configuration options, supports plenty of input and output formats

We disliked

Interface isn't the best, poor performance, various quirks and irritations

12. XMedia Recode 3.0.6.0

Compatible with: Windows XP, Vista, 7

XMedia Recode made a good impression from the moment we launched it, thanks to a clear and well-designed interface which for the most part works just as you'd expect.

Here's a box for your input files, for instance, and of course you can drag and drop whatever videos you like there. If your needs are simple then you can get by with just choosing an output format or device profile from the huge selection on offer. And if you need more, then the program organises more advanced conversion tweaks under various tabs so they're easy to find.

It's true, some of these are, well a little obscure ("Offset between I and P-frame Quants"). But there are plenty of more accessible settings here, too, with options to help you resize, crop, colour correct, deblock, denoise, deinterlace, sharpen and otherwise improve your source footage. It's an impressive package.

One small issue is that your list of imported videos can't be converted directly. You must set up the output format you need, select the files and choose the "Add Job" option before the Encode button becomes available, which isn't immediately obvious. The program doesn't have any English language help, either, so if you don't understand something then you're out of luck. And HD encoding performance was below average.

Conversion speeds in our other tests proved more acceptable, though, and the mix of powerful functionality with an easy-to-use interface gives XMedia Recode a lot of appeal. If you're a mid-level user who needs access to advanced conversion tweaks, but only occasionally, then this could be the ideal solution.

We liked

clear interface, vast array of device profiles, wide file format support, many useful filters/ editing options/ advanced configuration tweaks

We disliked

No English language help, below average performance in our HD AVI > WMV test

Conclusion

Which is the best video conversion tool, then? What our tests reveal is there's no one package which will suit every need, and the best program for you will depend very much on your requirements.

If you just want to convert the occasional video to play on a mobile device, for instance, and don't want any conversion complexities at all, then Miro should appeal. Drag and drop a file, choose your device, click a button and that's it: there's nothing quite as simple here, and its MP4 creation performance isn't bad, either.

Most people will want more power and configuration options, though, and the best all-round combination of power and ease of use is to be found in Freemake Video Converter, our pick for the novice and casual video conversion user. The interface is clean and well designed, it supports lots of input and output formats, there are useful extras, and while performance isn't the best, it's perfectly acceptable.

If you need more control over your output video, though, the next step up is XMedia Recode. Performance isn't so great, but the program makes a host of advanced settings available, while an excellent interface ensures it remains generally easy to use.

Our highest score has to go to MediaCoder, though. It's more complex than the other tools here, but if you're a confident PC user then you'll quickly master the basics. And what you'll get in return is access to more video conversion tweaks than you ever knew existed, and performance which effortlessly outstrips the competition in just about every department: it really is a staggeringly powerful tool.

802.11ac: next-gen Wi-Fi

If you thought Wi-Fi couldn't get much faster than 802.11n, think again.

802.11ac, dubbed 5G Wi-Fi, promises ridiculously fast wireless connections, better range, improved reliability, improved power consumption and a free horse. (OK, we're lying about the horse.)

802.11ac is the latest evolution of Wi-Fi, and it should be particularly good for gaming and HD video streaming.

So how does it work, does it live up to the hype, and how long will you have to wait before you can get your hands on it? Let's find out.

Your 802.11ac speed could break the gigabit barrier

The fastest current 802.11n Wi-Fi connections max out at around 150Mbps with one antenna, 300Mbps with two and 450Mbps with three antennas. 802.11ac connections will be roughly three times faster - so that's 450Mbps, 900Mbps and 1.3Gbps respectively. Netgear, brilliantly, illustrates this with two pictures of motorways: the first picture, showing "Today's Wi-Fi", is normal, but the one labelled "3x speed with 802.11ac" is really blurry.

Your 802.11ac speed won't break the gigabit barrier

As with previous Wi-Fi standards, the speeds quoted on the box and in the promotional materials are theoretical maximums, not the speeds you'll actually get: so far devices with potential top speeds of 1.3Gbps have topped out at around 800Mbps. That's still blisteringly fast, of course, but there's still a gap between advertised speeds and real world ones. 802.11ac connection speeds will be reduced by numerous factors: network overhead, which is the chatter your hardware needs to keep the connection going; interference, congestion and physical obstacles; distance; the number of simultaneous connections; and whether the router is running in compatibility mode so that older wireless kit can still connect.

802.11ac video and gaming

Because 802.11ac has bandwidth to spare, it should be great for HD video streaming and for gaming. According to Netgear [PDF], you can say bye-bye to buffering: "802.11ac will significantly enhance the user experience by improving the playback quality to any point throughout the house. With 802.11ac, for the first time wireless will provide similar performance as wired Gigabit connections."

802.11ac routers use more antennas

To improve range and reliability, 802.11ac routers can use more antennas than existing 802.11n kit: your next router may have as many as eight antennas inside it.

802.11ac routers will use "beamforming" technology

Wi-Fi is omnidirectional, but 802.11ac routers will be able to use directional transmission and reception technology dubbed "beamforming". The router will be able to identify the rough location of the device it's talking to and strengthen the appropriate antenna(s) accordingly. The idea is to reduce interference.

802.11ac Wi-Fi uses the 5GHz frequency band

Older wireless kit uses the 2.4GHz frequency band, which is fairly crowded: your kit is potentially sharing radio frequency with next door's baby monitor, your cordless phone and even your microwave. Like high performance 802.11n kit, 802.11ac routers will use the less cluttered 5GHz band where there's considerably more room for data transmission. 802.11ac hardware will use two kinds of channels in that range: 80GHz ones and 160GHz ones.

802.11ac routers will be backwards compatible

You won't need to throw out all your old wireless-capable kit as 802.11ac routers will be backwards compatible with your existing Wi-Fi kit. For example, at this year's CES Buffalo demonstrated an 802.11ac router that operated on both the 2.4GHz and 5GHz frequency bands and that promised to play nice with 802.11a, b, g and n hardware.

The 802.11ac release date is now, sort of

As with 802.11n, hardware is coming out before the 802.11ac standard is actually finalised. That's going to happen later this year, but manufacturers are readying their products now and they'll be everywhere by the summer, with minor software updates addressing any changes that might happen to the standard before it's finalised. We'd expect 802.11ac prices to be steep initially, as they were with the first 802.11n kit, but those prices should start to fall almost immediately.

Apple's putting 802.11ac into everything

Apple's a key early adopter of wireless technology - it helped popularise Wi-Fi in the first place and was quick off the mark with 802.11n support. According to AppleInsider it's going to be quick off the mark with 802.11ac too, sticking the technology into "new AirPort base stations, Time Capsule, Apple TV, notebooks and potentially its mobile devices."

802.11ac hasn't skipped lots of letters

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), the body in charge of the 802.11 standard, isn't skipping lots of letters: while major WiFi standards have jumped from 802.11n to 802.11ac, the IEEE didn't just skip 802.11o, p, q and so on. Successive versions of the 802.11 standard can also denote amendments to existing standards, so for example 802.11i introduced improved security and 802.11j introduced extensions for Japanese networks.

Microsoft Office 15 won't be rebuilt to fit the Metro stylings of Windows 8, according to insiders at Microsoft, but it will receive some tweaks to pull it in line with the modern look.

Instead of being rebuilt as Metro apps using WinRT programming, Office 15 will feature a radial menu system and a flatter, cleaner design that will mask what will be traditional Windows apps.

Pobody's nerfect

It's not what the company wanted, it seems, but time is working against it.

One source told The Verge that plans to create Office in true Metro style had to be pushed back "as the Office team would have to overhaul the entire suite to take advantage of WinRT" which would take far too long.

Some less complicated elements of Office 15 will be coming out as true Metro apps, however: OneNote and Lync are both expected to hit the Windows Store in their own rights.

This gives us hope that a true WebRT version of the Office suite could yet be in the pipeline – but we're definitely not holding our breath.

Office 15 went into private technical preview earlier this week, with a public beta to follow in the summer.

Microsoft has launched its technical preview of Office 15, promising a full public beta this summer.

If we were building a new version of Office, we'd probably give it an exciting codename like Office Excalibur or Office Opossum – you know, something that stays with you while subtly bigging up the product (do not underestimate the opossum).

Not Microsoft though – no, Ballmer's babies have gone with the thoroughly unimaginative Office 15 which tells you nothing but that it'll probably be, you know, more of the same.

Save your party poppers

But perhaps we're wrong about that: "I'm not able to share too much about Office 15, but I can tell you Office 15 is the most ambitious undertaking yet for the Office Division," blogged PJ Hough, CVP of development, Microsoft Office Division.

And by that he means that the software will be capable of simultaneous updates of cloud services, servers, mobile and PC clients for Office, Office 365, Exchange, SharePoint, Lync, Project and Vision. Doesn't it sound exciting?

We're also expecting full Skype integration into the new version of Office, video editing, some potential new apps, Metro-inspired styling and a thoroughly appropriate name like Office 2012.

We won't be hearing too much from the technical preview though, as all customers testing the early builds are bound by non-disclosure agreements.

Still, we're sure you can control your excitement until the public beta this summer – something which surely means a Windows 8 release date is not far behind.

Sky has announced a brand new internet TV service, aimed at selling its premium content to those people who do not currently want a satellite service but have a broadband connection and are happy to pay.

In a key move, Sky will offer movies at first, and then expand to sport and entertainment, with the UK launch set for 'the first half of this year'.

The offering will be available across numerous devices, including PCs and Macs, but also tablets, mobile phones, games consoles and connected TVs.

Shackles

It is not the first time Sky has broken free from the shackles of satellite broadcasting, but this scheme is designed to move beyond what was attempted on Sky Player and provide anyone with a broadband connection (and a suitable device) simple pay-monthly or pay-as-you-go offerings.

The obvious target to this move is Netflix, which has launched in the UK and made it clear that it is hoping to hoover up movies lovers from the likes of Sky, although the likes of BT Vision, Lovefilm and the forthcoming Google TV and YouView will be watchful.

"This exciting new service will offer some of Sky's most popular content through a wide range of broadband connected devices," said Sky chief executive Jeremy Darroch.

Growth

"Alongside the continued growth of our satellite platform, this will be a new way for us to reach out to consumers who love great content, but may not want the full Sky service," he added

"Bringing a distinctive, new choice to the marketplace will help us meet the needs and demands of an ever wider range of consumers.

"This new product launch will build on our early leadership in multi-platform distribution. It will allow us to make our expertise and investment in content and technology work even harder, extending our options for continued growth."

The pricing has not yet been revealed but will no doubt be made clear closer to launch, with the arrival set for the first half of this year.

Best free graphics editing software

It's very easy to build up a custom collection of media files; take a few digital photos, shoot a movie or two on your mobile phone, download a little music, and your PC will be packed with files in no time at all.

Processing these files afterwards, though, is a little more challenging. What if some of your photos need work, your videos could benefit from a little trimming, maybe your audio files need an edit or two?

You could opt for a commercial solution, of course. But this could be expensive - the best image and video editors in particular come with a sizeable price tag - and may also be overkill for what you need.

A simpler solution might be to opt for a free media editor. There are a wide range available, from straightforward beginner-friendly tools which can handle the basics, to advanced, high-end applications which are up for almost any challenge. So which are the best? We pitched fifteen top names against each other - 5 graphics, 5 audio and video editors - in an effort to find out.

Just keep in mind that, while all our tools are free, it's increasingly common for programs to come bundled with browser toolbars and other potentially unwanted extras.

You don't have to install these, but sometimes you'll have to do a little work to avoid it, so make sure you don't simply keep clicking "Next" through an installation: read each dialog, choose the Custom installation option where it's offered, and refuse any bundled toolbars if you'd rather do without them.

Graphics editors

1. Paint.NET

Just as you'd expect from a project which (it was hoped) would one day replace the regular Windows Paint, Paint.NET focuses primarily on ease of use. And in general it succeeds very well.

The toolbar buttons are sensibly chosen, for instance, with helpful tooltips available to explain how everything works. The menus are well designed: even if you've never used the program before, you won't be searching long for a particular function. And overall it's easy to open an image, carry out some basic edit, repair or retouching task, and save it in the format you need.

Still, demanding graphics users may be left wanting more.

The program's file format support is mostly essentials-only, for instance (although it can read and write DirectDraw Surface/ DDS files, too).

Vector drawing and paint tools are a little on the basic side.

The selection of effects (and their configurability) is limited by comparison with some of the competition.

And although Paint.NET has a very lengthy list of plugins available to extend its abilities, the program uses a standard of its own: you can't simply drop in your own Photoshop plugins and expect them to work.

Of course if you only need a basic feature set then none of this matters (if anything, not having too much extra junk cluttering the menus and toolbars makes the program easier to use). So while Paint.NET may not be the ideal editing choice for experienced users, if you're a beginner - or just in a hurry - then the program will get most basic jobs done with the minimum of hassle or fuss.

We liked

Ease of use, clean interface, lots of plugins available, busy online community ready to help if you need advice

We disliked

Drawing tools are very basic, no Photoshop plugin support, limited number of effects, short on configurability, no local help

2. PixBuilder Studio

At first glance, PixBuilder Studio seems to be a fairly basic editor, along the lines of Paint.NET. There's a similar toolbar, up-front layer and history panels, the same sort of natural interface for basic operations: it's all very easy to use. But take a closer look and you'll soon spot more advanced features, dotted around the package.

There's support for importing more file types, for instance, including icons (ICO) and Photoshop PSD formats (although the program can't write either).

PixBuilder is strong on selection options, too. You can choose areas of your image by rectangles, polygons, magnetic polygons, single rows and columns, a colour range and more.

The program has more features than you'd expect in a number of areas. So when painting, for example, you don't just get to choose from a selection of prebuilt brushes, but you can also edit these in some fairly subtle ways (diameter, hardness, angle, roundness, spacing).

And if you'd like to use PixBuilder Studio on an underpowered system then you'll appreciate the memory manager, which enables you to restrict how much RAM the program will consume.

You only get a very few effects built in as standard, though. There's no red-eye remover here, no noise removal, no distortion effects and so on. But by way of compensation, you do get support for Photoshop 8BF filters, so if you're willing to invest the time and effort to get set up then you'll be able to install just as many effects as you need.

The fact that you need to carry out this preparation means PixBuilder Studio won't be for everyone. If you just want to fix up a few party photos to remove a little red-eye, say, it'll be easier to install Paint.NET and get the job done right away.

But if you're looking for a tool which goes just a little beyond the basics, with good layer and selection tools, PDF import and 8BF support, then PixBuilder Studio could be the ideal choice.

We liked

Straightforward interface, PSD and ICO import, good layer and selection controls, memory manager, Photoshop 8BF filter support

We disliked

Short of built-in effects, can't write PSD/ ICO files, requires some preparation before you can use 8BF filters

3. PhotoScape 3.6

PhotoScape takes an unusual approach to the editing interface, with a thumbnail browser, an area for a picture preview, and a compact tabbed pane containing surprisingly few buttons. Your first impressions will be that there's no way it can compete with the competition, then - but start clicking a few of those buttons and you might just be surprised.

You may only see one of the program's photo frames up front, for instance, but there's actually around 170 available for use.

It's easy to add lines, polygons, ellipses, squares, stars, and many other objects - including speech bubbles, complete with captions - to a photo.

And while seeing a single listbox with the word "filter" probably won't leave you expecting very much, give it a click and it actually turns out to be packed with functions. And not just obvious choices, like Blur, Emboss or Noise. You also multiple film effects, some powerful vignetting tools, and an attractive lens flare. As well as multiple distortion tools, smart tools to correct red-eye, remove moles and more, and eleven ways to turn your image into a piece of art ("Oil Painting", "Pastel", "Pen", "Pencil", "Cartoon" and more).

The unusual form of presentation may mean some will never take to PhotoScape. And it's no doubt there are some crucial omissions to the program. There's no layer support, for instance, and you can't select areas of a photo to work on in the usual way. (Although the program does partly address this by providing tools, like Red Eye Correction or Mole Removal, where you must first select the relevant part of the photo before they'll work.)

Still, there is plenty of more basic image editing power here. And PhotoScape extends this even further with a host of associated programs, including a screen capture tool, a module to convert RAW files to JPG, batch rename and editing tools, printing utilities, even an option to create animated GIFs from multiple photos. So its interface may be quirky, but if you can live without layers then there's a lot to like here.

We liked

Plenty of effects, a good selection of photo frames, lots of bonus features,

We disliked

Quirky interface, no layers, limited selection options, some effects deliver below average results, no local help, very little brush control

4. GIMP 2.6.1.1

It started life as a student project way back in 1995, but GIMP - The GNU Image Manipulation Program - is now a powerful image editor which is available on Linux, Windows and the Mac.

Old age hasn't lead to a more finely-tuned interface, though, unfortunately, and the program's images, dialogs and toolbars all open in separate panes. Which can be a little confusing. It seems the complaints have finally hit home, though, and the interface will be unified into a single window in an upcoming release.

Fortunately there are plenty of compensations for any interface confusion, though, and the first appears as soon as you hit File > Open. As well as the common image formats, GIMP can read a host of others, including Photoshop PSDs, Windows icons (ICO), PS and EPS files, even PDFs and AutoDesk FLIC animations.

Once your image is available, then it can be processed by stacks of essential features. And these show huge attention to detail. So you don't get just one "blur" filter, for instance, but rather 6, and each of these is further configurable in a host of valuable ways. There are some excellent distortion filters, too, and a top-quality "oil painting" option.

The Colours menu is another strong point, with its ability to tweak hue, lightness and saturation, brightness, contrast, levels, and more. Again, you get a rich set of tools to do whatever you want, without any of it being particularly difficult. That is, if you don't want to tweak your image manually then a click or two and GIMP will handle everything on your behalf.

And elsewhere there are a host of painting options, a good range of selection tools, plenty of layer control, and just far more power than you any right to expect from a free tool.

If you only need something very basic, just to resize a few clips or apply simple image corrections, then it's probably not worth the effort of installing GIMP. The program isn't particularly complicated, but it does have a lot of features, and you're likely to spend quite some time learning how everything works.

If you're looking for real image editing power, though, and you're willing to spend time getting over the initial learning curve, then the GIMP just might be all you'll ever need.

We liked

Wide file format support, lots of powerful filters and editing options, highly configurable, customisable keyboard shortcuts,

We disliked

Quirky interface, some filters don't have preview options, local help not installed by default

5. Photo Pos Pro

Photo Pos Pro got off to a bad start by attempting to install a browser toolbar during setup. That's acceptable if it's done up-front, but the program makes it less than obvious - you must choose the "custom installation" option to clearly see what's happening.

With that done, though, Photo Pos Pro launches to reveal a fairly clear and conventional interface. The toolbar buttons are a little small and there's a vast array of menu options to explore, but most users should still feel at home right away.

You get all the usual basic manipulations, for instance: flips, rotations, resizes and more. You can tweak image colours, brightness and contrast manually, or get the program to do the hard work for you. There's a good set of effects, and plenty of selection tools and layer options for when you need to get a little more advanced (although this can get a little complicated at times).

The program also includes some relatively unusual features. So there's a very capable thumbnail browser, for instance. The HTML Export wizard allows you to save a tweaked image as a customised web page. And Photo Pos Pro doesn't just have a few canned batch processing options to, say, rename images or convert between formats: you get a full script editor which supports applying any sequence of 29 commands to the images of your choice: resize, rotations, brightness and contrast tweaks, colour changes, whatever you want.

And these more surprising aspects of the program keep popping up, everywhere you look. Like an HTML Image Map creator, for instance. The ability to open some animations and movies to grab a particular frame, at least in theory (it didn't always work for us). And the library of objects which Photo Pos Pro can use to customise an image: the buttons and banners, the decorative clipart, the frames, picture boxes, the text with special effects applied, and more.

You don't get quite the painting, selection or layer control which you'll see with GIMP, however, and so if you're looking for the powerful basics then that remains our favourite. Photo Pos Pro has plenty to like about it, though - the script editor alone could save you hours of work - and so if you'll make use of its wider feature range then it could be the ideal choice for all your photo work.

We liked

Thumbnail browser, web features, batch processing/ script editor, loads of features, local help file

We disliked

Tries to store browser toolbar during installation

What is the best free graphics editing software?

If you're mostly interested in carrying out simple operations - resize this, crop that, add a text caption maybe - then Paint.NET could be ideal. It's clean, easy to use, handles the basics well, and supports layers for more advanced work if you ever need that.

If you need a little more power then there's something to like about each of our test tools. So PixBuilder Studio may be useful if you need PSD import, and 8BF filter support; Photo Pos Pro is a good choice for batch processing, carrying out the same operations on a set of photos; and PhotoScape comes packed with extra functions and annotation options, including a raft of photo frames.

For all-round editing power, though, the winner has to be GIMP. The multi-windowed interface can be confusing, but you'll get over that in time, and then details like the program's file format support, its lengthy feature list and configurability all help to ensure you'll get the best possible image editing results.

Best free audio editing software

Best free audio editing software

1. Audacity 1.3.14

Audacity began life long ago as a personal project of Dominic Mazzoni, in his student days. Mazzoni has long since graduated and now works at Google, but Audacity lives on, only now it's so popular that he gets development assistance from all around the world.

The program scores highly on the editing basics. It can import a wide range of file formats, for instance (once extended with external tools like LAME and FFmpeg, anyway). Unwanted areas and be selected with the mouse, then trimmed in a click or two, and if that's all you need then the results can be exported as MP3, FLAC, WMA, AAC, AIFF and many other formats (again, with a little help from FFmpeg and others).

If you need something more complex, though, you'll appreciate the 37 built-in effects: there are options to change pitch and speed, fade audio in and out, clean up a recording, improve the bass, and much more. (You'll need to be familiar with audio jargon to understand all your potential options, though - there is a manual, but don't expect its explanations to help very much.)

Audacity is also useful for recording audio from a microphone, line in or any of your other soundcard sources, though. And if you've the hardware, then it can even manage the recording of 16 channels at once.

The program is unusually extensible, too, in that if it doesn't provide the features you need, then you may be able to add them via LADSPA or VST plugins.

And while the interface doesn't make any concessions to audio beginners, it's not particularly difficult to use. If you've ever used another Windows-based audio editor then you'll be opening, playing and carrying out basic editing operations within a few minutes of trying it out. And although mastering the more advanced tools may take considerably longer, the program makes it easy to progress at your own pace, making it an interesting choice for both experts and beginners who'd like to learn more.

We liked

Straightforward interface, good file format support, lots of effects, strong recording abilities, can be extended via LADSPA/ VST plugins

We disliked

Many features require extra components to be installed, program manual isn't too beginner-friendly

2. Expstudio Audio Editor Free 4.31

Expstudio Audio Editor Free is actually the free version of a commercial product, and as such it does have a restriction: it can only save files in WAV or MP2 formats. Which means you'll need a converter to hand (or, perhaps, one of the free editors here) before you can use it.

Is it worth the hassle? The program does support opening an excellent range of formats: MP2/ MP3, CDA, WAV, VOX, RAW, OGG, WMA, G.72x, AIFF, even the soundtracks from MPG or AVI videos. And this just works, no need to integrate with other products as with Audacity.

Expstudio Audio Editor Free includes easy-to-use zoom controls which make it straightforward to zoom in on your audio waveform, too. And editing works much the same as in most other tools: choose the area you need with the mouse, then cut or delete it, or apply one of the other menu options.

The core effects selection is capable, if not quite up to the standards of Audacity, but Expstudio Audio Editor Free does provide an additional "Special FX" menu with a couple of useful options: Cassette Noise Reduce and Voice Breath Reduce. And a few novelties, if you're interested, such as converting male voices to female and vice versa, as well as giving recordings the voice of a chipmunk.

And while the interface inevitably includes plenty of audio jargon, the program does at least provide a searchable local Help file which makes some small effort to explain what's going on. It's often not enough, but the document is still better than you'll get with some of the competition, and so could be useful if you're an audio beginner.

Is any of this good enough to put up with the WAV/ MP2 export restriction? Maybe, just about, if you need to work with an unusual format or will make use of the noise restriction special effects. Otherwise Expstudio Audio Editor Free isn't significantly different from the rest of the competition here, and you'll be better off choosing one of those.

We liked

Supports opening a wide range of file formats, easy zoom and editing controls, useful noise reduction special effects, documentation is occasionally helpful

We disliked

Free version only saves WAV/ MP2 files, some of the competition have more effects

3. Music Editor Free 2012

Music Editor Free 2012 is one of those programs which stands out from the crowd just as soon as it's launched.

The authors don't assume that everyone understands audio editing, for instance - beginner-level tutorials take the time to explain the basics.

The attractive ribbon-based interface proved a pleasant change after we'd spent so long dealing with programs which hadn't seen a significant facelift in years.

Navigating around a wavefile is easy, thanks to an easy-to-use bookmarking system. And the program just feels more straightforward to use, that it works more or less as we'd expect. So you can select a part of the waveform, right-click and carry out some useful operation right away.

This simplicity doesn't mean Music Editor Free 2012 is short on features, though. It comes with all the usual effects, sensibly categorised so they're relatively easy to find. And multiple noise reduction tools are on offer to help clean up a recording (Noise Reduction, Cassette Noise Reduction, Voice Breath Noise Reduction).

The program also provides a capable set of recording functions.

And, surprisingly, it's even able to rip and burn audio CDs.

Music Editor Free 2012 may not appeal to everyone. The program can't be expanded through plug-ins, for instance, so advanced users may still prefer something like Audacity. But if you're an audio editing beginner then this is an ideal tool to learn the basics, and it has more than enough power to handle just about any task you'll give it.

We liked

Attractive interface, straightforward waveform navigation, beginner-friendly help file & tutorials, lots of effects, rips/ burns CDs

We disliked

No plugin support

4. WavePad Free

WavePad Free is the giveaway version of a commercial product, and so missing a few features - but there's still plenty here to help the program stand out.

If you need to import some oddball file formats, for instance, there's a good chance WavePad Free can help. The program can handle MP2/ MP3/ MPGA, WAV, OGG, WMA, RA/ RM, GSM, VOC, VOX, RAW, MID, DCT, AMR, MPC, APE, SPX and WV formats, amongst others, as well as being able to extract the soundtrack from many common video formats.

A convenient bookmarking system and a good range of zoom controls makes it easy to navigate around your audio waveform.

Editing works more or less as you'd expect. A reasonable selection of effects are well-organised to help you quickly track down what you need (the Clean section includes multiple noise and pop-reduction tools, automatic gain, the high-pass filter and more), and some of these are particularly configurable: there are some great equaliser tools, for instance.

Authors NCH Software have made more effort than usual to explain the basics, too, with a marginally above average help file and a few video tutorials.

And there are also occasional features which you won't find anywhere else. In particular, clicking Sound Library gives easy access to hundreds of sounds and music samples, which can be freely downloaded in a click or two and then used to enhance your recording.

When you factor in the program's support for VST plugins, too, then this really is one powerful editing setup, with plenty to offer everyone from the novice to the expert user.

We liked

Opens lots of file formats, easy navigation, decent selection of effects, VST plugin support, free library of downloadable sound samples

We disliked

Cut-down version so some functions don't work unless you upgrade

5. Wavosaur

Some of the audio editors here are complex creations, requiring many different files and components to be installed before they'll work correctly. Wavosaur? That's a little different. This tiny program consists of a single 560KB executable, and as it's portable you can launch it from a USB flash drive on any convenient PC, running Windows 98 or later.

It's no surprise that the Wavosaur interface is a little basic when compared to some of the competition, then, with lots of tiny icons scattered around its toolbars. Still, the basic editing procedures are more or less the same as they are elsewhere (select a part of the waveform with the mouse, then carry out some operation on it), and the program has far more power than you might expect for something of its compact size.

You get all the usual commands to zoom in and out, zoom to a selection, and so on, for example. And a convenient Marker toolbar works much like the bookmarks in other programs, so you can set markers at key points, and jump from one to the other with a click.

There are a surprising number of ways to view your source audio: a 2D and 3D spectrum analysis, a sonogram, even input and output oscilloscopes for tracking live sound. (These are always displayed in a separate window, though - the editing window uses a conventional waveform only.)

The effects on offer are relatively basic: you can fade samples in or out, tweak their volume, apply a few filters, and so on. More advanced effects are restricted to a single example, the vocal remover, which can sometimes deliver good results but for the most part really doesn't. However, if this is an issue then Wavosaur's VST support will allow you to add further plugins, at least in theory (it can be a complicated process).

Wavosaur is a little too much like hard work to use it for advanced editing tasks, then. But if you're looking for a compact tool which you can run almost anywhere then it could be a sensible choice, and it's certainly powerful enough to sort out the usual audio editing basics for you.

We liked

Tiny, portable, provides lots of views on your audio source, easy waveform navigation, VST support

We disliked

Relatively limited file format support, slightly cluttered interface, vocal remover works only occasionally, few effects, VST setup can be cumbersome

What is the best free audio editing software?

If you're new to the world of audio editing, not quite sure how the technology works, then you'll probably benefit from starting with a program like WavePad Free or (particularly) Music Editor Free 2012. Both programs are very capable of handling the editing basics, while clear interfaces and helpful tutorials will quickly get you to up-to-speed with more complex tasks, too.

You're already familiar with most editing tasks? Then, if you simply want to carry out some basic job, Wavosaur may be enough. It's tiny, doesn't even require installation - just unzip it, and go - yet still somehow manages to cram in more features and functionality than many competitors.

Our pick of the editors for experienced users, though, has to be Audacity. It's not flashy, and doesn't fall over itself to appeal to the editing novice. But the program's not that difficult to use, includes an excellent feature set, and can easily be expanded via plugins to add even more capabilities, if you need them: it's a powerful and reliable tool.

Best free video editing software

Best free video editing software

1. VirtualDub 1.9.11

Just like Audacity and GIMP, VirtualDub started life long ago as a student project. It's a relatively simple editor and remains that way today, but its straightforward, no-nonsense interface gained the program a lot of fans and if your needs are fairly basic then it may still provide everything you need.

Your first issue may be file format, though; VirtualDub is optimised for editing AVI files, though it can handle MPEG-1 streams and a few other oddities (including animated GIFs). If you're working with MOV or MP4 files then you'll need to look elsewhere.

Once you have your movie open, however, a host of keyboard shortcuts makes it very easy to navigate around. You can step backwards and forwards by a frame, 50 frames, a keyframe, a drop frame, a scene and more. And it's easy to trim off footage which you don't need.

Need more power? The program provides around 60 video and audio filters to handle all kinds of tasks, anything from sharpening or resizing a movie, to resampling its soundtrack or even giving a video your own custom watermarked logo. The presentation is lacking - there's none of the animations you might see in a high-end commercial editor, everything here all looks very plain - but the core features are surprisingly powerful.

What's more, as VirtualDub's been around for such a long time it's now also built up a useful collection of add-ons, including filters to add pans and rotations, tweak colour and white balance, remove noise, smooth, crop and just generally get more out of your movies.

And while, again, the presentation is basic, VirtualDub's core is well engineered and generally delivers top-quality results: just be prepared to spend some time learning the fundamentals before you feel at home (this isn't a program for total beginners).

We liked

Simple interface, keyboard shortcuts speed up navigation, some useful effects, filters deliver high quality results

We disliked

Limited file format support, very basic presentation, not particularly beginner-friendly

2. Free Video Dub 2.0.3

If you're looking for a really simple video editor, then they don't get much simpler than this. Free Video Dub has no effects, no filters, no transitions, no complexities at all, because it concentrates on just one task: trimming unwanted footage from your movie.

The program does benefit from a lengthy list of supported file formats, though. Not only does it open all the basics - AVI, MPEG, WMV, MP4 - but it can also handle videos that other tools often miss: WebM, MKV, MOV, FLV, RealVideo files, and a host of HD formats (TS, MTS, M2T, M2TS, MOD, TOD, VRO).

Once your movie is open then you can navigate it manually, or use the built-in scene detection feature to work your way through its contents.

Trimming is a simple matter of finding the left or right edge of the section you'd like to remove. This only takes a click with the mouse, but if you prefer keyboard shortcuts then they're on offer, too.

And when you've finished, a click on the Save button will save your modified video. It won't be re-encoded, either, so there's no loss in quality and the entire process is completed at very high speed.

Free Video Dub is distinctly short on features, then. But still, it does perform one very useful editing function, and it does it very well, so if you're looking for an easy way to just trim a video clip or two down to size then this could be the perfect choice.

We liked

Supports loads of file formats, built-in scene detection, edits without reencoding your source video, fast, very easy to use

We disliked

Interface is a little plain, trims footage only - can't do anything else at all

3. Avidemux

Avidemux is an interesting video editor which immediately stands out from the crowd, thanks to its above-average interface. All the core settings you need are immediately obvious, useful keyboard shortcuts help you to navigate around your clip, and there are plenty of configuration options to ensure the program works just the way you'd like.

Basic trimming is easy, then, but the program also benefits from a good selection of filters. There are tools to resize, crop or rotate a clip, adjust colours, reduce noise, sharpen or smooth your footage, handle various deinterlacing tasks, and even embed a range of subtitles (VobSub, DVB-T, ASS/SSA, srt/ sub). They're sensibly categorised, so it's relatively easy to find the options you need, and speedy previews attempt to give you an idea of their effect (although in our experience this doesn't always work well).

And Avidemux also tries to simplify the process of defining your required output format, by providing a few presets: iPhone, iPod 5.5g, DVD, Zune, Sony PlayStation Portable, and so on. So if you've opened a movie which you'd like to prepare for the iPhone, say, then choosing that preset will automatically select the appropriate codec and bitrate, as well as adding any necessary filters (sharpen, resize, "Add black borders" and similar).

The program isn't just about ease of use, though. Tap the Video "Configure" button, for instance, and you'll have access to all kinds of advanced settings (if you feel it's important to select the appropriate B-frame Bias, I-Frame Threshold or GOP Size for your project then this is just the tool to let you do it). And Avidemux has many powerful scripting and automation options.

If there are issues here, it's with reliability, just occasionally: the program doesn't always behave as you might expect. When things go well, though, Avidemux is both powerful and easy to use, and if you need to go beyond the basics then it's definitely worth a closer look.

We liked

Appealing interface, plenty of well-organised filters, decent subtitling support, useful presets for common output tasks, generally easy to use, some very advanced configuration options

We disliked

Occasionally buggy, doesn't always behave as you might expect

4. Windows Live Movie Maker

It would have been easy for Microsoft to produce a very basic movie editor for their Live Essentials collection, something which could carry out a few basic tasks, but very little else. Fortunately they resisted that temptation, and the free Windows Live Movie Maker turned out to be one of the more capable and accessible free video editors around.

The program provides support for a huge range of import formats, for instance: all the usual desktop choices, HD formats, mobile standards like 3GP, images, music and more.

There are stacks of animations and effects: wipes, sweeps, curls, shatters, pans, zooms and more. A straightforward interface means they're easy to browse, and you can apply the option of your choice with a click.

Still too much like hard work? Simply move your mouse over an AutoMovie Theme and Movie Maker will automatically add captions, transition and other effects to the current movie, then preview the results. You really can achieve a great deal here in seconds.

But there's also plenty of manual options, for those who need them. You can trim your footage, of course, or manually customise a subtitle in a host of different ways (font, font size, styling, alignment, the time the text is on screen, the effect to use, and more).

And once you've finished, there are presets to save your video in various common formats, as well as the option to upload it directly to Facebook, YouTube, Flickr and more.

Okay, it's true, Movie Maker doesn't offer some of the advanced features you'll get elsewhere, such as VirtualDub's more powerful filters, or Avidemux's fine control over the video creation process. And so those programs may still come in handy occasionally. For most people, though, Movie Maker offers all the trimming options, filters and format conversions they're ever likely to need: if you plan to download only one video editor, make sure it's this one.

We liked

Wide file format support, lots of animations and effects, clean interface, easy to use, AutoMovie Themes add captions and transitions automatically, lots of useful export options

We disliked

Doesn't offer quite the same fine control over its output as some of the competition

5. SolveigMM AVI Trimmer + MKV

As you'll guess from its name, SolveigMM AVI Trimmer + MKV is a fairly basic tool: it trims AVI and MKV files only, but delivers fast and lossless video editing, so if you're looking to remove a few frames from a compatible format then it could be ideal.

The program provides a straightforward interface. Open a video, and it appears in a window; choose the start and ending points for a clip, click the Plus sign, and your selection is added to the list of fragments. Repeat the process as many times as you like, then click Save to export the results as an AVI file.

There are also one or two extra features. AVI Trimmer + MKV includes a scene detection tool which works with DV-AVI files, and MKV videos with chapters, for instance. And, usefully, it's able to invert your fragments, so if you want to throw away your fragments then choosing the Invert option will enable you to save everything else, instead.

But, of course, there's nothing else. No filters, no effects, no options to convert your video format - no other editing extras at all.

If you only need to trim compatible videos then this need not be a problem. AVI Trimmer + MKV is a likeable tool, easy to use, ideal for quick, lossless editing operations.

Free Video Dub can work with a far wider range of formats, though, and has some useful additional features, so that would be our preferred trimming tool for most situations.

We liked

Straightforward interface, easy to use, lossless video editing, fast

We disliked

Only supports AVI/ MKV movies, scene detection only works with specific formats

What is the best free video editing software?

If you're just looking to trim some unwanted footage from a video then there's no need to install a full-scale editor; a tool like Free Video Dub provides a quick and easy way to remove your chosen frames without the hassle of encoding everything else.

And if you're an experienced editor then there's still a place for VirtualDub first, perhaps Avidemux second; both offer some excellent filters, and provide fine manual control over your finished movie, so helping to ensure you get precisely the results you require.

For most people, though, the winner here is extremely obvious: it's Windows Live Movie Maker. The program may not have the extensibility and configurability offered by VirtualDub's filters, but it's still packed with powerful features, yet supremely easy to use, and even editing novices will be using it to produce quality work within minutes.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Interview: Intel's Genevieve Bell

When the CEO and the head of the PC group at Intel stop talking about processor speed and start talking about user experience and making technology people lust after, there's something going on.

One of the people behind Intel's new approach is Genevieve Bell, the cultural anthropologist who runs the Interaction Research Lab in Portland.

"We spend a lot of time settling with technology," she complains. "I wanted to ask what was really going to make us go 'I must have it!' Irrationally; must, must, must! What compels people to love phones?"

To answer that, her team spends time studying how people actually use technology, especially at home, and most recently in cars.

"It turns out that if you want to make the right decisions at a silicon level, you actually have to have a vision of where that silicon is used. You want to work out what people love and then you want to work out what are the technologies that will make that possible - or that will get in the way.

"Things that really piss people off turn out to be really instructive about what not to do."

You're not everyone

The irrepressible Australian once confronted Otellini about the way Intel was approaching the TV market. "He explained to me that no-one watched TV any more. And I was 'Excuse me, but I'm pretty sure everyone does. You read books instead; that's just stellar, but you're not everyone. In my professional opinion, you're neither normal nor average'."

Many products fail because technology companies that became successful building for people just like their engineers are now making something no-one working there will use.

"It's not just Intel; my colleagues at Microsoft, IBM, Google, Huawei all have the same problem. The gut instincts of decision makers, the ones that have served them so well up until now, turn out not to be the ones that scale for everyone.

"There was a time that what Intel made was PCs, laptops and servers and that was it. But the world of computing is infinitely more complicated now and our markets are bigger and the people who are buying the technology are like no-one in the building."

OTELLINI: He didn't think that TV was that big

That's why Bell's team spends time watching people watch TV and, most recently, unpacking and photographing what people keep in their cars.

"About 40% of the cost of a new car is the electronics. And while car companies are increasingly building technology into cars, consumers just keep bringing more technology to the car. Car companies have a vision of 'connected cars' in much same ways tech companies have visions of technology. I thought, OK, let's see what people actually do."

Socially safe

Cars, it turns out, are rather like sheds. "Stuff goes into cars and never leaves them again. Something you imagine you might one day need – like the dongle for a device you haven't had in three years."

We keep emergency supplies like flashlights or water and in many cultures, we also keep things in our cars to make sure we're not going to be embarrassed socially; spare greetings cards in the US, alcohol in Australia, lucky envelopes of money in Asia - and an A-Z in the UK. The same is true of phones.

"Phone numbers have people's faces and names attached, Facebook tells you birthdays. We spend a lot of time talking about privacy but we haven't spent much time thinking about how people use these devices to ensure the continuity of social relationships. It's not about protecting themselves, it's about protecting their relationships.

"That lets you think really differently about people categorise data. What are the ways people might think about privacy? What are the ways devices might need to talk to each other – and what are the kinds of things you might not want devices to talk about?"

Devices talking might matter more than people talking. "Whatever the latest cool phone is, I can guarantee you it is not the easiest thing on which to make a call," Bell claims.

"They're much less about communications but you'll never be somewhere without something to do. If it is more about constant engagement, it has really different implications for what you design into the platform, what software you might want to embed in it and what it needs to know about you and what you're doing."

Her lab is working on that; "The stuff that will come out of Intel in the mobile space in the next couple of years has our fingerprints on."

Ultrabooks "empower people"

Not convinced Ultrabooks have a future when tablets are so popular? Bell calls herself "bullish" on Ultrabooks because "they are not just about Sandy Bridge - they are about empowering people to be creative." Yes, we want to consume content, but that's not all we want.

"For five years now, consumers have had this incredible panoply of devices on which they can consume content, of which the iPad and Kindle Fire and Kindle are just the latest examples. TV viewing is up 15-25% in the last ten years; we watch more television that we did ten years ago. These devices make it easier to consume content than anything else - but what we were starting to hear from consumers for a long time was this desire to also participate and make things and share things."

ULTRABOOKS: But will they sell in numbers?

Another Intel idea she believes people want is WiDi. "I have never done a household interview where someone didn't take me to a corner of the room and say 'You see this pile of wires? Can you get rid of them?'."

In the longer term, Bell is trying to reimagine security. "I'm really fascinated by what we trained people to do on laptops and that fact that is not going to expand to other devices.

"All the ways we talk about security come out of a very military and western view; we have a drawbridge, we have a gate, we repel the hordes. I was struck by things that people have in their cars to protect them that have nothing to do with repelling danger. They were all about attracting good fortune. What are the other stories we tell about security that might lead to different ways of thinking about it? What are the conceptual models?"

She also wants to make devices less demanding. "Years ago I interviewed a woman who thought the technology in her life was like a backpack of baby birds with their mouths open saying 'feed me, feed me, feed me!' They need to be plugged in, they want networks; they need to be taken care of. They're really demanding and also, it turns out, remarkably insecure. They lack self-confidence. 'Are you sure you want to delete that?' Yes, that's why I've asked you twice. 'Want to connect to that thing?' Yes, I always connect to it every morning. They're really high maintenance and there's only going to be more of them."

We just want to make things easier

She dismisses the usual predictions about the future of technology. "This notion of artificial intelligence; objects will get smarter and be able to engage with us in rational conversations. I don't want rational conversation! I just want it to stop asking me 'do you want to delete this'. The second is of course as soon as the machines get a little bit more self-confident they will kill us."

Assuming we avoid HAL 9000 and Skynet, we can make life easier for ourselves.

"We want to create a more balanced relationship where these devices become both more self-confident and less needy and start to be able to do some things on our behalf.

"It's perfectly possible to imagine - without it being too creepy a world - where it says 'Genevieve always has the same meeting at 10am every Monday and at 10am every Monday she always opens up the laptop and starts shopping for shoes; this 10am meeting is one we could interrupt with email. Now this 11 o'clock meeting she's never online, so we might want to hold stuff back'."

That means knowing what matters. "If you are on your computer and you're making a Skype call, chances are the call is the important thing. I should probably prioritise that and deprioritise other things. I should probably make sure if the network degrades I can hop you onto another network so long as I already have the password; I shouldn't have to ask you 'the network degraded, do you want a new one?' It should be clear that's the priority."

And that comes back to silicon as much as software, she points out. "There's some really interesting stuff you can do at that level to just rearrange everything, from hierarchies to memory caches, to priority calls on the hardware, that would let you operate machines that were a little more stable and a little more caretaking of you." Definitely better than Skynet…