If you look at the best active noise cancelling earbuds you will see that the high-end models from Apple, Bose, Sennheiser, and more are priced at more than $200. Last year’s LG TONE Free HBS-FN6 were an awesome pair of earbuds with a reasonable $150 price.

To kick off 2021, LG has the LG TONE Free FN7 that includes active noise cancellation, IPX4 sweat and water resistance, a wireless charging case, solid battery life, fantastic audio quality, and solid phone call quality. The headset is priced at $179.99, which is still much lower than competing ANC earbuds.

After wearing the LG TONE Free FN7 for the past couple of weeks, it’s clear LG has produced a compelling ANC wireless earbud. It fits well for working out and for remote work with a solid job of blocking out surrounding sounds. I’ve been very impressed by the music playback quality and as a person who prefers earbuds over cans I may have just found my new daily driver.

Specifications

• Microphones: Three mics with noise reduction/echo cancellation in each earbud
• Water resistance: IPx4 rating
• Battery life: Up to 7 hours of play with ANC off and 5 hours with ANC enabled. Talk time is 4 hours/3.5 hours (ANC on). The wireless charging case providing another 14 hours/10 hours (ANC on) of music playback. Five minutes of charging provides up to 60 minutes of battery life. Charging case also supports Qi wireless charging technology.
• Wireless connectivity: Bluetooth 5.0
• Earbud weight: 5.7 grams each

Hardware

The retail package includes the two wireless earbuds, a charging case with integrated battery, a short USB-A to USB-C cable, and small/medium/large silicone gel earbud tips. The carrying case supports Qi wireless charging. You can simply place the charging case on a Qi wireless charger or smartphone that supports reverse wireless charging.

The charging case is covered with black soft touch material that makes it easy to hold and keeps the case from sliding off a table. It is a small round puck a 2.15 inches in diameter and just over an inch thick. It’s one of the smallest earbud cases I’ve seen and easily fits into your pants, shirt, or coat pocket. The case does not have any level of water resistance.

The earbuds are identical in design with an outside touchpad, two MEMS microphones (one at the top of the earbud and another at the bottom of the stem), same charging terminals, and battery capacity. The earbuds have a stem design, similar to the AirPods, new RHA TrueConnect 2, TicPods ANC, and other wireless earbuds. The light weight and perfect fit in my ears make this one of my favorite wireless headsets for exercise without worrying about them falling out.

In order to optimize the active noise cancellation experience, LG designed the silicone ear gels with an interior spiral design. The silicone ridges inside the ear gel are very comfortable and I cannot express how great the sound of music is with these earbuds. Volume is loud, music is crystal clear, and even the bass levels are great, which is not easy with the earbud form factor. Meridian’s spatial audio processing is designed to simulate listening to loudspeakers and it works.

Multiple microphones are used to assist with noise reduction and echo cancellation. The upper mic detects external noise. The inner mic cancels out unwanted noise when the ANC function is turned on. The lower mic picks up and amplifies your vocals. Active noise cancellation is a popular feature today with all advanced earbuds and headsets so it is great to see LG add this functionality in such a compact size while retaining solid battery life.

The LG TONE Free have automatic ear detection so your music pauses when you take them out. Your phone also connects automatically once you insert them in your ears. You can also use one earbud at a time, which results in being able to greatly extend battery life through a one ear usage pattern.

I highly recommend you download and install the LG TONE Free application to your phone. With this app you can view the battery status of each earbud and the charging case, manage equalizer settings, toggle ambient sound and active noise cancellation, lock the touchpad, customize the touchpad settings, toggle notification settings, find your earbuds, and perform software updates. It’s a very well designed application that significantly enhances the LG TONE Free FN7 experience.

The LG TONE Free application is available for both Android and iOS. I connected the earbuds to both platforms for testing and the functionality is the same no matter which smartphone OS you are using.

The outside touchpad on each earbud is used to control your media, phone, and wireless assistant (Google Assistant and Siri) experience. Single, double, and triple taps on each earbud can be customized to your preferences. Options include play/pause, voice command, volume up or down, previous or next track, and off. Receiving a call with a single tap, ending a call with two taps and a long press and hold for ambient sound/ANC toggle are not editable.

You can use each earbud independently too if you want to have one ear open as you work, exercise, or commute. Obviously, controls are a bit more limited with a single earbud inserted.

If you toggle on notification settings you can have text messages read to you through the headset. Three speech rates are available for reading these messages too.

There are four default equalizer settings; immersive, bass boost, natural, and treble boost. There are also two spots for custom equalizer settings so you can customize the listening experience to your preferences.

For safety, and other reasons, you may want to hear sounds around you and with the software you can setup and control ambient sound.

If you lose one or both earbuds, you can have a very loud chirping sound play if your phone is within range of the lost earbud. You can specify to have the alert sound play on the left or right earbud.

Daily usage experiences and conclusion

My personal tests to see if a wireless earbud will stick around for longer than the review period is to put them in and perform yard work. My mower is loud with my gas blower being even louder and if a wireless headset can stay in place and block out most of the noise then it checks that box.

The next test is to go running with the earbuds in. If they can stay put in my ears for a 30 to 60 minute run then they pass that test too. Thankfully, the LG TONE Free FN7 passed both with flying colors. I don’t usually run with ANC enabled, for safety reasons, but sometimes I tap and hold on an earbud to toggle it on and like how easy it is to control this experience.

LG has partnered with Meridian in providing the customized equalizer and headphone spatial processing. Music sounds amazing with these earbuds, including bass levels. I kept using the FN7 earbuds over everything else because the music sounds so good.

I also used the headset to accept and make phone calls. Callers said I sounded great on their end and on the headphones their voice was crystal clear.

The small touchpad on the earbuds was easy to tap and performed reliably. I had no problem with the single, double, and triple taps to control my listening experience.

The LG TONE Free FN7 checks every box for a pair of wireless earbuds and comes it at a reasonable $180 price. I’ve already had two updates for the headset since I’ve been testing them too so LG is actively working to ensure the headset performs well.

By ZDNet Source Link

Apple made groundbreaking announcements at its “One More Thing” event on November 10: The launch of the M1 chip, macOS Big Sur operating system, and a long-awaited update to the Mac line up. Apple takes its destiny into its own hands from silicon to services. By having complete control of the chip, operating system software, and hardware, Apple delivers exponential gains in performance, better value, longer battery life, and significant improvements to the Mac line up.

Mac mini, 13-inch MacBook Air, and the 13-inch MacBook Pro sport the new Apple-designed M1 chip (see Figure 1).  This 5nm system on a chip (SOC) delivers Apple’s own design and architecture which pulls the processor, GPU, DRAM, fabric, cache, Neural Engine and security features, all on one chip. With the power of 16 billion transistors, the chip blows away the competition when looking at performance per watt.

Compared To The Intel MacBook Pro 13″, The M1 MacBook Pro 13″ Has Many Advantages

When the M1 MacBook Pro 13″ is compared to the Intel MacBook Pro 13″, the obvious similarities come from the familiar chassis design and key display features (see Figure 2). Both models share:

• Availability in Space Gray and Silver
• 13.3-inch LED-backlit display with In-plane switching (IPS) technology, wide color (P3) and True Tone
• 720p FaceTime HD camera
• Wide stereo sound and support for Dolby Atmos playback
• 3.5 mm headphone jack
• Magic Keyboard
• Force Touch Trackpad
• Touch Bar and Touch ID
• Bluetooth 5.0

Here are the differences between the two models (see Figure 3):

Overall, the M1 MacBook Pro beats out the existing Intel line up. However, a few areas of improvement for future releases include the need for a better than 720p FaceTime camera (though the M1’s ISP does improve the performance of the 1.2 megapixel camera), Wi-Fi 6 support, and the lack of a touchscreen.

Compatibility With x86-64 Apps Remains A Work In Progress

Initial tests on the M1 MacBook Pro have yielded great performance and exponentially improved battery life when running native Apple apps. However, slight glitches and significant performance hits occurred with application crashes with some of the enterprise products from Microsoft including Microsoft Outlook, Microsoft Teams, and Microsoft Edge browsers. The Microsoft Office suite didn’t show any lag at all when used and Microsoft Excel macros seemed to experience improved performance.

Other enterprise software such as Autodesk Revit, Avid ProTools, Google Drive File Stream, MatLab, Oracle VirtualBox, Parallels, and VMWare Fusion currently are not supported by the M1 chip. Initial experiences with much of the Adobe Creative Cloud suite show some compatibility issues with Rosetta 2 for Adobe AfterEffects, Illustrator, Indesign, Photoshop 2020, and Premier Pro. Ongoing fixes and updates can be found on the Adobe website.

Slack really slacked and needed a performance hit. Video software such as BlueJeans, GoToMeeting, WebEx, and Zoom all were quite laggy. Meanwhile, DJ controller software such as RekordBox by Pioneer wasn’t working yet on Rosetta 2 or M1 as of this post. Enterprise clients should confirm which apps work with the new M1 architecture and ask for a roadmap from key vendors for M1 forward and backward compatibility on Rosetta 2.

Early adopters must determine the trade-off of native Apple performance versus x86-64 Intel compatibility. The independent crowdsourced site “Is Apple Silicon Ready” also confirmed some of the incompatibilities and performance issues with M1 and Rosetta 2 experienced in this review. (Note: this site is not an Apple-run or reviewed site, and the accuracy and timeliness of information it offers is not officially verified)

The Bottom Line: The New M1 Macs Are A Future-Proof Investment

The fully integrated control of the M1 chip, macOS BigSur, and Mac hardware kicks off the beginning of a new era for Apple.  The venerable hardware innovator now has full control of its ability to differentiate on product, performance, price, and place. As Apple Silicon makes its way into the full line up of hardware, users can expect significant advantages over commodity and purpose built PCs. Moreover, the announcements made at the 2020 Worldwide Developers Conference and the November 10th event bring the convergence of iOS and macOS one step closer.

However, much work needs to be done on backward compatibility as early users and tests show a lot of broken apps to be addressed. Overall, the M1 MacBook Pro 13″, Mac mini, and MacBook Air are a wise investment into the future. In conversations with the major software vendors, Constellation expects backward compatibility to improve as major software vendors adjust and improve their offerings to support the new line up over the next 18 to 24 months.

Early adopters and Apple shops looking to modernize their computing should consider the M1 MacBook Pro 13″, Mac mini, and MacBook Air in their procurement refresh cycle plans and short lists over the next 24 months. Why? This is the next era of computing for Apple and the long-term benefits will significantly outweigh the costs.

I’ve always preferred the hushed, mild chatter of a co-working space to the distractions of home (no offense to my wife who has to be on Zoom all day, every day!). Stranded without the productivity-inspiring hum of a lot of people doing their own thing in one space together, I suddenly needed quiet in a serious way. And I was ready to invest in it.

We’ll focus on over-ear headphones here because if you need the absolute best noise canceling money can buy, chunky ear-hugging headphones are always going to blow earbud-style options out of the water. And after you listen to any of these picks, you’ll agree with us when we say the same goes for sound quality.

Sony WH-1000XM4

Sony’s line of premium wireless over-ear active noise-canceling headphones has been regarded as the crème de la crème for a minute now, and that title is very well-deserved. At $350, Sony’s new Sony WH-1000XM4s aren’t cheap, but from the quality hard-sided case to the solid build quality, you’ll definitely get what you paid for here. Full disclosure: The previous generation of these headphones are what I opted for back in the beginning of the pandemic and I’ve recommended them to many friends with similar needs since.

The sound quality on these is a joy. If you’re the kind of audiophile that wouldn’t be caught dead in a serious listening session wearing white earbuds, you’re in for a treat. Set-up on the Sonys was painless and the app is actually useful, providing fine-tuned EQ adjustments, sound profiles and a slider that dials the intensity of the noise canceling up or down, though cupping your hand over the earphone also allows ambient sound to pass through. These headphones also went loud if you’re a fan of listening to big music at full volume (I am).

This pair of headphones does a lot of things right. The music quality is excellent, the noise canceling is eerily good, even with no music playing. A few little quality of life perks makes this pair even more appealing than its already very appealing predecessor (the previous version now makes for a great value). Something very subtle also seems to have changed with the fit here, and the M4s did feel less pinchy on the top of my head than the M3s. Sony also added multi-device pairing and a new ear-detection sensor with this generation so they pause automatically when you remove them, which I personally find to be a totally necessary feature. Sony also improved the call quality for the M4s, but it isn’t their strong suit.

Other strikes against the Sony WH-1000XM4s? There aren’t many, but these headphones, like most in their class, are kind of heavy. You probably can’t wear them for five hours at a time without wanting to take a little break, but they work really well for hourlong bursts of total silence when you really need to put your head down at work. If you aren’t a fan of Sony’s characteristically punchy, bass-forward sound, you might look elsewhere. They have a classic chunky over-ear headphone design, which probably won’t excite anybody, but it’s still a good look. And if you’re someone who plans to take long calls on their over-ear headphones, you might want to look elsewhere.

If you need absolute top-tier noise canceling to drown out whoever you’re sharing your makeshift office with these days, this is the pair of headphones you want. The fact that music sounds so incredible is just icing on the cake.

Verdict: Top-notch noise canceling with incredible sound

Bose Noise Cancelling Headphones 700

Between this pair of headphones and the Sonys, anyone who doesn’t mind the sensation of over-the-ear headphones should find something to like. The noise canceling on the Bose 700s is top-notch, offering Bose’s signature accuracy and crisp sound along with the ability to totally hush the world around you.

These sounded great for a feature-rich pair of wireless do-it-all headphones. Bose’s neutral, clean sound is lighter on the bass than Sony and feels slightly less vibrant, but if you’ve liked Bose headphones in the past you’ll probably be more than happy here too.

The Bose pair is a bit of a departure from the norm, design-wise. Rather than extending in the middle of the headband, this pair has a kind of stalk on the side of the earcup that slides up or down. The sizing mechanism probably isn’t going to make or break the headphones for anybody, but it does give them a different look, feel and balance when compared to traditional, chunkier designs. Touch controls were very responsive and you can toggle between noise-canceling modes using a set of mirrored buttons on the earcup. They also get a respectable 20 hours of battery life, which is really quite a lot, though 10 hours less than the Sony pair if extreme longevity is a concern.

Set-up was a little rocky with these as I thought they sounded muddy and awful, but really they just needed a firmware update. Unfortunately, Bose requires you to sign up for an account to use the app and set up your headphones, which is silly and really off-putting, but ultimately probably not a meaningful hurdle for most people. I also got an error message with a second firmware update the app prompted me to download and had to mess around with things to get them to connect again, which was annoying, but did resolve eventually. Without that update I wasn’t able to make EQ adjustments, so be sure to check that if yours don’t ship with the latest update. It’s worth noting that you don’t get full EQ sliders after the update, just bass, mids and treble. That’s either going to bug the hell out of you or be a total non-issue.

The Bose 700s cost $340 now on Bose’s website, with a light “soapstone” color variant marked down to $300. If you’re not into standard black headphones and would prefer some lighter options this is probably a great option. We tested a silver review unit that had a kind of futuristic vibe, paired with the smooth, matte material on the headband. Bose’s pair is sleek and modern, offering something a bit more eye-catching, especially in its non-black color variations.

If you’re using your noise-canceling headphones for frequent phone calls, this Bose pair is well-regarded in terms of its mic and call quality, though the new Sony pair has made strides there too. Both the Bose pair and the Sonys come with an aux cable to extend their use beyond the already impressive battery life that each boast. Both also connect to Alexa, Google Assistant and Siri if you’re the spoken commands type.

For anyone who likes Bose’s signature clean sound and needs a pair of headphones with excellent noise canceling and a good mic, this pair of headphones is a very solid choice.

Verdict: Another great pick for serious noise-canceling needs

Sennheiser PXC 550-II

Sennheiser’s PXC-550 II might not be vying for the title of absolute premium noise-cancelingest headphones, but they emerged as a dark horse in our testing. Like the others on this list, Sennheiser’s noise-canceling headphones are wireless with an over-ear design, but that’s where the similarities end.

While the Bose and Sony pairs feel expensive and substantial, the Sennheiser PXC 550-IIs are relatively plasticky — but that might actually be a good thing. The noise canceling here is totally adequate for normal needs, but not top-of-the-line extreme like the other two picks. It mutes background noise within reason rather than transporting you to an eerily totally silent realm, and that’s probably sufficient for a lot of people. The sound quality is notably good for the lower price range ($200 from Sennheiser, at the time of writing), defined by Sennheiser’s signature clean, clear style. If you’ve liked Sennheiser sound in the past, you’ll like it here.

Where the Sennheisers really shine is day-to-day use. I found myself reaching for this pair more often than not during my testing, which was surprising given that I have quite a few higher-end pairs of headphones laying around. The reason? For one, they are made of plastic; they’re light and wearing them for very extended periods of time (many hours at once) was comfortable. Pairing and set-up was a breeze.

I was also surprised by how much I liked the mechanism for turning on the PXC 550-IIs: Rather than feeling around for a tiny button usually proximal to other tiny buttons, you can actually twist the headphones on and off with a satisfying click. I thought this would be a gimmick, but it’s super convenient and it feels nice to know your headphones won’t be burning any battery life by accident. There’s also a small battery indicator light that gives you an idea how much juice is left, a feature that might seem vestigial to some people but I personally found it super useful.

The knocks against the PXC 550-IIs? The less premium feel isn’t for everyone. They charge via an outdated micro-USB port, which is annoying because generally it meant toting around an extra cable. The headphones can also pair to more than one device at once, which is cool but did result in a British AI voice repeating “phone one connected, phone two connected” in a maddening monotone more than I cared for.

I’m not sure what it is about these Sennheisers, but I really fell in love with them. In spite of using a pair of Sony WH-1000XM3s as my day-to-day headphones, I’ll probably pick up a pair of these too, eventually. They’re just that charming — and for $150 less than our other picks, they’re a great value too.

Verdict: All-day noise-canceling headphones with crisp sound and a great price

If you can’t stand ear-hugging headphones, don’t fret — we’ve got some earbud-style noise-canceling recommendations coming soon. But if you’re open to big ol’ headphones and need top-notch noise canceling paired with incredible sound, none of these picks will disappoint.

By TechCrunch Source Link

Apple has never been a particular budget-conscious company when it comes to hardware — terms like “Apple tax” don’t spring out of nothing. But the last few years have seen the company soften that approach in an effort to appeal to users outside its traditional core of creative professionals. The iPhone and Apple Watch have both seen the company more aggressively pushing to appeal to entry-level users. It only follows that it would follow suit with its smart speaker.

Couple that with the fact that the Echo Dot and Google/Nest Home minis pretty consistently rate as the best-selling smart speakers for their respective company, and arrival of a HomePod Mini was all but inevitable, as Apple looks to take a bite out of the global smart speaker market, which currently ranks Amazon and Google at around 40% a piece. It’s going to be an uphill battle for the HomePod, but the Mini is, simply put, its strongest push in that direction to date.

Launched in early 2018 (after delays), the HomePod was a lot of things — but no one ever claimed it was cheap (though no doubt they found a way to spin it as a good deal). The $349 price tag (since reduced to $299) was hundreds of dollars more than the most expensive models from Amazon and Google. The HomePod was a premium device, and that was precisely the point. Music has always been a cornerstone of Apple’s philosophy, and the HomePod was the company’s way of embracing the medium without cutting corners.

As Matthew wrote in a David Foster Wallacesque “four sentence” review, “Apple’s HomePod is easily the best sounding mainstream smart speaker ever. It’s got better separation and bass response than anything else in its size and boasts a nuance and subtlety of sound that pays off the seven years Apple has been working on it.”

He called it “incredibly over-designed and radically impressive,” while bemoaning limited Siri functionality. On the whole, the HomePod did a good job in being what it set out to be — but it was never destined to be the world’s best-selling smart speaker. Not at that price. What it did do, however, was help convince the rest of the industry that a smart speaker should be, above all, a speaker, rather than simply a smart assistant delivery device. The last several generations of Amazon and Google products have, accordingly, mostly brought sound to the forefront of product concerns.

Essentially, Amazon and Google have become more focused on sound and Apple more conscious of price. That’s not to say, however, that the companies have met somewhere in the middle. This is not, simply put, the Apple Echo Dot. The HomePod Mini is still, in many ways, a uniquely Apple product. There’s a focus on little touches that offer a comparably premium experience for its price point.

That price point being $99. That puts the device in league with the standard Amazon Echo and Google Nest, rather than their respective budget-level counterparts. Those devices run roughly half that price and are both fairly frequently — and quite deeply — discounted. In fact, those devices could nearly fall into the category of loss leaders for their respective companies — dirt-cheap ways to get their smart assistants into users’ homes. Apple doesn’t appear particularly interested in that approach. Not for the time being, at least. Apple wants to sell you a good speaker.

And you know what? The HomePod Mini is a surprisingly good speaker. Not just for its price, but also its size. The Mini is nearly exactly the same size as the new, round Echo Dot — which is to say, roughly the size of a softball. There are, however, some key differences in their respective designs. For starters, Amazon moved the Echo’s status ring to the bottom of the device, so as to not impede on its perfectly spherical design. Apple, on the other hand, simply lopped off the top. I was trying to figure out what it reminds me of, and this was the best I came up with.

The design decision keeps the product more in line with the original HomePod, with an Aurora Borealis of swirling lights up top to show you when Siri is doing her thing. It also allows for the inclusion of touch-sensitive volume buttons and the ability to tap the surface to play/pause music. Rather than the fabric-style covering that has dominated the last several generations of Google and Amazon products, the Mini is covered in the same sort of audio-conductive mesh material as the full-size HomePod.

The device comes in white or space gray, and unlike other smart speakers, seems to be less about blending in than showing off. Of course, being significantly smaller than the HomePod makes it considerably more versatile. I’ve been using one of the two Minis Apple sent on my desk at home, and it’s an ideal size. On the bottom is a hard plastic base with an Apple logo.

There’s a long, non-detachable fabric cable. It would be nice if the cord was user-detectable, so you can swap it out as needed, but no go. The cable sports a USB-C connector, however, which makes it fairly versatile on that end. There’s also a 20W power adapter in the box (admittedly, not a sure bet with Apple, these days). It’s disappointing — but not surprising that there’s no auxiliary input on-board — there wasn’t one on the standard HomePod, either.

Where Amazon switched to a front-facing speaker for the new Echo, Apple continues to focus on 360-degree sound. Your preference may depend on where you place the speaker, but this model is more versatile, especially if you’re not just seated in front of the speaker all day. I’ve used a lot of different smart speakers in my day, and honestly, I’m really impressed with the sound the company was able to get out of the 3.3-inch device.

It’s full and clear and impressively powerful for its size. Obviously that goes double if you opt for a stereo pair. Pairing is painless, out of the box. Just set up two devices for the same room of your home and it will ask you whether you want to pair them. From there, you can specify which one handles the right and left channels. If you’d like to spread out, the system will do multiroom audio by simply assigning speakers to different rooms. From there, you can just say, “Hey Siri, play music in the kitchen” or “Hey Siri, play music everywhere.” You get the picture.

In fact, the whole setup process is pretty simple with an iPhone. It’s quite similar to pairing AirPods: hold the phone near the speaker and you’ll get a familiar white popup guiding you through the process of setting it up, choosing the room and enabling voice recognition.

The speakers also get pretty loud, though if you need clear sound at a serious volume, I’d strongly recommend looking at something bigger (and pricier) like the original HomePod. For the living room of my one-bedroom in Queens, however, it does the trick perfectly, and sounds great from pretty much any angle in the room.

As a smart assistant, Siri is up to most of the basic tasks. There are also some neat tricks that leverage Apple’s unique ecosystem. You can, say, ask Siri to send images to your iPhone, and it’ll oblige, using Bing results. The fact of the matter is, however, that Amazon and Google got a pretty major head-start on the smart home assistant front and Apple is still catching up.

There have, however, been some key strides of late — particularly as it pertains to Home/HomeKit. The last couple of iOS updates have brought some solid smart home updates; 14.1 brought intercom functionality specifically for HomePods and 14.2 extends that to other other devices. So you can say, “Hey Siri, intercom everyone, dinner is ready,” and beam it to various devices. The feature joins similar offerings from Amazon and Google, but does so on a wide range of (Apple) products, sending a pre-recorded snippet of your voice to the devices.

The system works out of the box with HomeKit-compatible devices — it’s a small list, compared to what’s currently offered for Alexa and Google Assistant, but it’s growing. You can check out the entire list of compatible smart home devices here.

I found the voice recognition to be quite responsive to voice, even when the music is playing loud. Beyond Siri, there are a couple of ways to interact with the device. In addition to a single tap on the top to play/pause, a double-tap advances the track, triple-tap goes to the previous track and touching and holding fires up Siri. Unlike other smart speakers, there’s no physical button to turn off the mic — and you can’t ask Siri to do this either. The device is only listening for a “hey Siri” trigger and audio isn’t stored, but the feature would be nice for additional peace of mind.

You can also control music from your iPhone using AirPlay 2. That’s my preferred method, because I’m a bit of a micromanager when it comes to music. You’ll need to hit the AirPlay button to do that — or you can simply hold the iOS device near the HomePod Mini to take advantage of handoff using the U1 chip (iPhone 11 or later). That’s a neat little trick.

As someone who’s more accustomed to using Spotify than Apple Music, one thing that tripped me up a bit, however, is that when you ask the HomePod to play music, it will pick up from the last time you verbally requested playback, rather than treating all of your Apple Music listening sessions as a single stream. I prefer Spotify’s unified cross-device approach here.

That said, a nice little iOS 14.2 addition brings your aggregated listening history (Apple Podcasts and Music) to a single stream accessible by long-pressing your HomePod in the Home app. From there you can tap on an album or podcast to automatically send them to the smart speaker.

All told, I’ve quite enjoyed my time with the little smart speaker. As I noted at the top, it’s hard not to wonder what might have been if Apple had launched the Mini alongside the initial HomePod. I suspect the company would still be a ways from market share domination, but the product really could have eaten into Amazon and Google’s lead. Instead, Apple waited — likely in hopes of getting the package right. That’s certainly understandable. Apple’s never been one to rush into a product, and the HomePod Mini sounds all the better for it.

By TechCrunch Source Link

ZDNet’s Jascon Cipriani posted his Apple iPhone 12 Pro in-depth review and awarded it a 9.5/10 rating. Jason is more of a regular iPhone user than I am so I highly recommend reading both of our takes on these phones. With the same 6.1-inch display and nearly the same overall design, you can save $120 on a comparable 128GB iPhone 12. The blue colors are different, there’s an extra camera on the back, the 12 Pro has 6GB of RAM instead of 4GB, and the iPhone 12 Pro is constructed with stainless steel while the iPhone 12 is aluminum.

To help justify the purchase of this 128GB iPhone 12, I sold my iPhone SE (2020) on Swappa for about $320, which was $110 more than Apple was willing to give to me as a trade-in. I highly recommend you test out the third party seller’s market before trading in your phone. Then again, Samsung usually offers more for its trade-ins than you can sell it for so the type of phone you are trading in dictates its resale value.

Specifications

• Processor: Apple A14 Bionic chip, next-generation neural engine
• Display: 6.1-inch 2532 x 1170 pixels resolution OLED (460 ppi)
• Operating system: Apple iOS 14
• Storage: 64, 128, and 256 GB internal options
• Cameras: Dual 12MP f/1.6 (wide) and f/2.4 (ultrawide) aperture rear cameras. 12MP front-facing TrueDepth camera with f/2.2 aperture.
• Wireless technology: 5G, 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/ax WiFi-6, Bluetooth 5.0, NFC, GPS/GLONASS
• Dust and water resistance: IP68
• Battery: 1,821 mAh battery (unofficial) rated at up 40 hours of audio playback and 13 hours of video. Wireless charging and fast charging with 18W adapter (sold separately).
• Dimensions: 146.7 x 71.5 x 7.4 mm and 164 grams
• Colors: Black, White, PRODUCT(Red), Green, Blue

It’s only $50 more to bump up from 64GB to 128GB and given the powerful camera, 5G for faster downloads, and no ability to expand your storage capacity later I recommend most people at least consider the 128GB model over the 64GB base model..

Hardware

Apple went back to flat edges with the Apple iPhone 12 and that’s great for those who stand the phone up by itself or that like a better edge to hold onto the phone with. The matte blue finish on the edges looks great and doesn’t show any fingerprints. I’m a fan of this return to the iPhone 4 design since it also brings along a completely flat display.

The iPhone 11 had a LCD display, that looked great, but this year both the iPhone 12 and 12 Pro have the same resolution OLED panel that is nearly perfect. Flat displays make it easy to find and apply screen protection. This year Apple labels the display ‘ceramic shield’ with advertised improved capability to withstand breakage from drops. It will still scratch so be careful with it, but maybe we will see less broken iPhone displays in 2021.

We’ve seen Apple mostly move away from the front fingerprint sensor, the 2020 iPhone SE still has one, while Google went back to that approach on the Pixel 5. Now with facemasks a common wearable accessory, Face ID is not a practical solution for unlocking your iPhone when you are out and about. I love it when it can be used though and it removes the barrier for securing your phone.

While the edges are matte blue, the back panel has a glossy finish so collects fingerprints and smudges quite easily. The blue on the iPhone 12 is a navy blue shade with a matte finish around the camera array. The blue on the iPhone 12 Pro has a green tint to it. It’s likely most iPhone 12 owners will wrap their new phone in a case, like we see from CASETiFY or Totallee, so the glossy back may not matter much to you.

Also: iPhone 12 Pro review: Does it get any better than this?

Like the iPhone 11 last year, the iPhone 12 still has two cameras on the back with no telephoto shooter provided. There are some improvements in the camera technology with night mode present for the ultrawide and selfie cameras, but the resolution and most of the capabilities are the same.

All of the same iPhone elements are present on the sides with the ringer switch and volume buttons on the left and the right side button about a third of the way down. There is also an oblong area down further on the right side that is the cutout in the aluminum case for the 5G mmWave antenna. Models outside the US will not have this cutout. The Lightning port is on the bottom with nothing on the top edge.

I’ve been very impressed with Apple’s stereo speakers on its phones the last couple of years and find the iPhone plays the loudest on connected Bluetooth headphones too. The stereo speakers sound good on the iPhone 12 and I cannot even listen to content at maximum volume.

After using the phone for 10 days, I’m easily getting through a full day of use. One of the major improvements, I was honestly skeptical Apple would add it this year, is the support for 5G networks. Every iPhone in the US supports the available bands on all major carriers so there are no differences between the radios in the various models.

I tested the iPhone 12 against Android phones with 5G on the same carrier and have seen very impressive download and upload speeds from the iPhone 12. I also tracked the reception strength and while Samsung and OnePlus still beat the iPhone 12, it’s only by a couple of dBm and in some cases the iPhone 12 beats them too. I am finally able to recommend that my wife try an iPhone again after all previous ones failed to maintain a connection as well as an Android phone.

Software

The iPhone 12 runs iOS 14.1 and in typical fashion, you can expect to get regular updates from Apple for years. There is no carrier bloatware, extra apps, or any other software installed that cannot be removed by the user.

Apple Arcade games play perfectly on the iPhone 12 and you get three months free when you buy a new iPhone 12. Apple TV+ is supported as well so you can enjoy lots of content on the gorgeous 6.1-inch display.

All the great features of the latest version of iOS are present. This includes a very Android looking platform with redesigned widgets, widgets on the home screen, widget stacks, the app library on the home screen, pop-ups for phone calls, pinned conversations, improved Apple Maps, improvements in Siri, and much more. If you are an Android user who was unhappy with the iOS of the past, you may be very comfortable with an iPhone 12 running iOS 14. I’ve heard a couple of complaints from iPhone users, but overall people like what they see in iOS 14.

Also: Best iPhone models to buy now: The iPhone 12 is not your only great choice

Price and availability

The Apple iPhone 12 is available now in five colors; Black, White, PRODUCT(Red), Green, and Blue. The 64GB model is priced at $829 with the 128GB model at $879 and the 256GB model at $979. If you select a carrier model, it is oddly priced $30 less.

Daily experiences and conclusions

I simply adore the engineering and ability to have a large 7.6 inch open display on my Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 2 so I don’t think any other phone today can take its place as my daily driver. That said, if I didn’t cover mobile technology here on ZDNet and needed to be a bit more practical with a phone that can go running with me and be used in the showers of Washington State, then my only phone would likely be an Apple iPhone 12.

It was honestly had to come up with a con for this iPhone, but it is still rather expensive at $879 for the 128GB model. However, it excels in just about every area and while the Pixel phones still set the bar for still photos, the iPhone 12 does very well and also excels at video.

Like Jason said in his review of the iPhone 12 Pro I have a hard time finding the volume buttons on the left side just by feel. The flat oblong buttons barely protrude from the side and thanks to using various cases I can activate them more accurately.

One of the major improvements for me is the cellular reception and the addition of 5G. I live and work in areas with excellent 5G coverage and when riding my commuter train on the outskirts of towns I see much better wireless reception with the iPhone 12 than with any previous iPhone. I am seeing solid speed improvements in 5G over LTE, but for me the key is broader coverage as well as I never complained of LTE performance when I had a solid signal. Calls also sound great on the iPhone 12. According to the iFixit breakdown the presence of the Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 chip is likely why reception is great.

For $120 more, I am honestly thinking of returning this iPhone 12 to pick up the 12 Pro instead as I want to test out the additional camera and like the heft of stainless steel. I may give this one to my wife and finally get the entire family on an iPhone, which is great for many reasons.

By ZDNet Source Link

Samsung has a knack for turning out powerful phones, especially in its Galaxy Note line. This year, it has two, the standard Galaxy Note 20 5G at $1,000 (£849, AU$1,499, both 4G) and the Note 20 Ultra at $1,300 (£1,179, AU$1,849, again both 4G). Both have sharp displays, excellent cameras, all-day battery life and impressive internal performance, along with an S Pen stylus that makes the Note unique. But you can only buy one, so which will it be?

This Galaxy Note 20 review focuses on the differences between 2020’s Note phones in the hopes it’ll help answer your questions while you make a decision — or just drool over Samsung’s large-screen devices. On the whole, I can recommend both Notes, just not at their retail prices.

I suggest keeping an eye out for deals, bundled offers, discounts and trade-in values that bring the prices down by $300 or more. Samsung prices tend to fall as the months go on, so your chance of snagging a deal are high. Plus, a surprise recommendation at the end if you’re not sold on using the S Pen stylus daily.

Now playing: Watch this: Galaxy Note 20 vs. Ultra: Which should you buy?

 

9:19

Design differences matter: Screen, plastic vs. glass

The Galaxy Note 20 and Note 20 Ultra clearly look like different devices, but not just because of the Note 20’s slightly smaller 6.7-inch screen to the Note 20 Ultra’s 6.9-inch display.

It’s apparent that the Ultra has a glass backing (Gorilla Glass Victus, in fact,) while the Note 20 uses polycarbonate (that’s plastic). If you use a case, it might not make a difference to you, but after all these years of being conditioned to equate a premium, $1,000 device with glass construction, plastic makes it feel cheaper than its price tag, even though the specs are strong.

I also noticed a sharp edge where the Note 20’s plastic backing joins the metal frame, meeting in a gap big enough to run my fingernail all the way around. If you’re going to use a case, it might not bother you, but Samsung can and should do better.

There’s no curved screen on the Note 20 the way there is on the Ultra. That doesn’t bother me, but the edge-to-edge display on both phones means there are still plenty of accidental screen presses when you’re simply holding the phone. For example, if you’re passively watching a video and shift your finger to find a more comfortable grip, you may wind up inadvertently triggering a button.

The final design difference worth noting is the 120Hz screen refresh rate on Ultra, compared to the standard 60Hz rate on the Note 20. It won’t make a difference if you’re switching from a 60Hz phone, but it can feel comparatively “slow” if you’re switching from a phone with a 90Hz or 120Hz display.

The Note 20 Ultra is the clear camera winner

The Ultra’s has a massive and protruding camera array on its back to accommodate larger sensors and perhaps help it stand out. Meanwhile, the Note 20’s camera bump makes the phone less top-heavy and prone to rocking when you write on it while it’s on a flat surface.

But the Note 20 Ultra took better photos overall. You’re going to get great great shots no matter which phone you use, when you’re taking photos in brightly lit conditions: saturated color, crisp edges, the works. But if you’re at all interested in zoom photography, the Ultra’s 5x optical zoom takes the crown. Not only does it get you very good telephoto images up to 5x, it can also go up to 50x.

The Note 20’s 3x optical to 30x AI-assisted zoom is still good as well, and better than the Galaxy Z Fold 2 (which has 2x optical zoom), but image quality at 30x was better on the Ultra than on the regular Note 20. Most of the time the Note 20 will fulfill your photographic needs. But when I took them both to the moody Northern California coast, many of my nature shots were simply better on the Ultra and I stopped reaching for the note 20 altogether.

The Ultra has a 108-megapixel camera you can use to crop into shots for more detail, a feature I’ve found to have uneven results.

Features the Note 20 and Ultra share

• 5G data speeds (some regions have 4G models)
• Signature Note S Pen stylus
• Android 10 out of the box
• Snapdragon 865+ processor (other markets use a Samsung Exynos chip)
• Extras like fast wireless charging

Other notable differences

• Screen size, battery (4,300 vs. 4,500)
• MicroSD card
• 512GB option with Ultra
• 8GB RAM versus 12GB RAM on Ultra

Samsung’s Note 20 Ultra 5G is striking from every angle

 

See all photos

 

 

 

 

Should you buy the Note 20, Note 20 Ultra, or a different phone?

The Note 20 Ultra is too big, too heavy and too expensive. But I’d still personally buy it over the Note 20 because I do find myself using the extra camera features. However, I don’t actually think it’s worth $300 more than the Note 20 just to have a 120Hz screen, 5x optical zoom instead of 3x, a glass backing and a microSD card storage option — plus all the other extras.

Most people will be happier with the cheaper Note 20 over the Ultra, but again, I think Samsung has overcharged for both phones at their full retail price, and I find the Note 20’s $1,000 price tag for what is essentially a plastic phone cheeky at best and insulting at worst.

For either phone, look for a deal. I’d be happier to pay $1,000 for the Ultra and $700 for the standard Note 20, if we’re keeping Samsung’s $300 price delta intact.

Here’s another alternative within the Samsung cosmos. The brand new Galaxy S20 FE (Fan Edition) is a middle way. It merges some of the Ultra’s best features with the Note 20’s cost-cutting trade-offs, bringing you a 6.5-inch display with a fast 120Hz refresh rate, a big $4,500-mAh battery, 3x optical zoom and a rear plastic backing. There’s expandable storage, too, and of course, support for 5G data speeds.

While the cameras won’t be quite as good, and there’s no S Pen stylus, the Galaxy S20 FE is the best buy in terms of value, if not a status symbol — though it does come in fun colors.

Best yet, it starts at $700 full retail and was already on sale for $600 in some stores by the time it hit the market. With trade-in values and seasonal deals, I expect that price to fall.

By CNET Source Link

The Echo stuck. In 2019, 146.9 million smart speakers were shipped globally, according to figures from Strategy Analytics. That figure marked a 70% increase over the year prior. Of that figure, Amazon owned a 26.2% market share.

That’s a success story by any measure. Of course, any competition present is also a knock-on effect of Amazon’s success. Google’s original Home speaker was released two years later, and Apple’s HomePod came out the year after that. While each certainly offered their own unique take on the category, it’s hard to imagine them making the same mark had Amazon not helped define the smart speaker category way back when.

Along with being the smart speaker grandaddy, Amazon’s also updated its devices with the most frequency. Google Home just got its second iteration (now Nest Audio) and the original HomePod is still on its first version. Last month, we got the fourth-generation versions of both the Echo and the Echo Dot. The refreshes are about more than just getting people to buy new devices (of course, that’s a big part of it, too) — they’re also about adapting to learnings about how people use these sorts of devices.

After all, the original Echo had little to go on beyond internal testing. Take audio. The initial Echo was smart first and a speaker second. Sure it could play music, but that was really just a secondary feature. First and foremost, the product was about conversing with Alexa. In 2017, however, Apple showed everyone the importance of focusing on audio quality with the HomePod. For many consumers, it made a lot more sense to purchase a quality speaker with an assistant built in, rather than a purpose-built smart speaker with lousy audio quality.

Subsequent versions of the Echo started to prioritize audio. Of course, the company never really did so to such a degree that the entry-level product could stand toe to toe with, say, the HomePod (though the Echo Studio is an attempt to approximate that on a somewhat tighter budget), but audio has increasingly become less of an afterthought across the company’s product line.

This year’s redesign centers on an audio upgrade yet again, along with an aesthetic overhaul that attempts to focus some of that newfound sound. The fourth-generation Echo is, in a word, round. Eschewing generations of cylinders, the company has gone with a design that is perfectly spherical (except the flat bottom to stop it from rolling off your table top). I suspect one learning that lead to the new design was where users place speakers in their homes.

Previous generations have been focused on a more three-dimensional listening experience, assuming, I suppose, that people are sticking these speakers in the middle of a room, rather than up against the wall. While the new Echo is round, however, the hard plastic bottom arcs upward, monopolizing about two-thirds of the device’s back. This time out, the company’s opted for a pair of front-firing 0.8-inch tweeters (one more than gen-three), coupled with a three-inch woofer (same as last year).

The speaker leans a but too heavily on the bass by default for my tastes, though you can adjust those setting via the Alexa app (I took it down about two notches). The sound quality is solid for the size and price point. I was able to get pretty decent playback listening to Spotify. Head to head, I think the Nest Audio delivers a richer, fuller sound — and if you’re currently assistant-agnostic, that’s the one I’m recommending based purely on sound.

Of course, the sound is much fuller if you’ve got a pair of the $99 devices in stereo mode. Amazon thoughtfully sent along two for testing that feature specifically. A similar feature is available for both Google’s Nest devices and Apple’s HomePod and HomePod Mini. Given that two Echos are roughly the price of one Echo Studio, the math might make sense, depending on your home setup.

I do like the design here. Though sitting next to the Nest Audio, it’s hard to shake a sense of convergent evolution with all of these smart speakers. As it happens, both of my review devices are the same color, and really look like they could have sprung out of the same product line, with their dark fabric coverings. I do, however, appreciate the design work that’s being done to make them feel a bit more subtle than previous generations — and in a sense part of the furniture.

As I mentioned in my recent review of the Echo Dot (which is physically identical to the Echo in all but size), I’m a bit less thrilled with the design to move the light ring to the bottom. I understand practically why the company did this: it wouldn’t have made sense to slice up the round design with a light ring. But the new design only makes sense if the Echo is close to eye level. Otherwise you’re reliant on its reflection from the surface on which the device sits.

The biggest upgrade here, however, may be the inclusion of a Zigbee hub, which negates the existence of the Echo Plus. It was only a matter of time before the Echo became a smart home hub, and it’s nice that Amazon’s found a way to incorporate that into a device at this price point. It’s a big part of the company’s push to corner the smart home control market. Notably, the new Nest Audio also offers the feature.

An interesting surprise addition is the temperature sensor. In addition to local weather, asking “Alexa, what’s the temperature in here?” it will offer up an average temperature for the room where the Echo resides. Not exactly necessary, but helpful information, I suppose.

Amazon’s nearly annual updates to the line ensure that no new generation represents as radical an upgrade as the one we just saw between Google Home and Nest Audio. But all in all, Amazon’s presented us with a nice little refresh here.

By TechCrunch Source Link

These goodies include a 90Hz display, 2GB more RAM, a bigger battery and a water-resistant, aluminum body. It also has wireless charging and reverse wireless charging. (For more on the differences, check out CNET’s video, Pixel 5 and Pixel 4A 5G spec comparison.)

Other than that, the phones have the same camera setup, processor and general look and feel. And because they have so many overlapping features, I lean towards the Pixel 4A 5G. While I love the higher refresh rate on the Pixel 5 and wireless charging, that $200 I’d be pocketing by going with the 4A 5G makes it worth skipping out on those features, at least for me. After all, with that chunk of change I could buy a pair of wireless earbuds or more storage on Google One. Plus, it still has 5G and a bigger screen, which makes the Pixel 4A 5G my pick of the three new Pixel phones this year (yes, don’t forget about that Pixel 4A from August) and one of my top overall picks for Android phones in its price range.

As for the Pixel 5, it’s hard to recommend given its price. True, it is $100 cheaper than the Pixel 4 ($390 at Back Market) was when it launched last year. And Google knows people aren’t willing to spend a lot right now and is producing only 800,000 Pixel 5 phones this year. But while the Pixel 5 is Google’s flagship phone, it isn’t exactly an ultra-premium flagship phone. There are plenty of alternatives from Samsung, Apple, OnePlus and even LG that boast better hardware.

Most cost as much or more than the Pixel 5, but not all. The OnePlus 8 ($699 at Amazon), for example, is currently $600 for the 8GB/128GB model. It too has 5G, an ultra-wide lens, a 90Hz display and the T-Mobile variant is water-resistant. Though it doesn’t have wireless charging or reverse wireless charging, it has a larger display and the more powerful Snapdragon 865 chipset, as opposed to the Pixel 5’s Snapdragon 765G. And if you’re looking for even more flagship features, like 8K video recording, a faster processor, expandable storage or more cameras (like a telephoto lens), it’s best to look elsewhere altogether.

Pixel 5’s camera: New ultra-wide camera and stabilizing options

Like in past years, the Pixel phones’ main selling point is the camera. Google got rid of the telephoto lens that we saw on the Pixel 4 and replaced it with an ultra-wide camera. Though I like having a telephoto lens, the ultra-wide camera works well and I do enjoy having the wider field of view for sweeping landscapes or just fitting more content in a single frame.

The camera’s low-light mode, branded as Night Sight, takes great pictures in dim lighting and now it works in portrait mode so you can still take those polished, dramatic pictures in the dark. The effect isn’t always perfect, however. In the photos I took I did see some patchiness around my flyaway hairs and instances where my fingers in the foreground (holding up a peace sign) was confused and blurred out as part of the background. Google also added a tool that lets you play around with portrait lighting. It’s easy to use and it came in handy whenever I took a generally nice image, but the lighting just didn’t quite come out right.

For video, the phone still uses a mix of optical and electronic image stabilization that gives video a smooth, almost drone-like quality. And there are now different types of optimizations you can choose for stabilization, including Cinematic Pan. This offers a slower, more cinematic look for panning. (I also like that Google included quick explainers and samples of when to use each of these options and what they look like; it makes the phone quite user-friendly.) And for slow-motions fans, the phone can now record 60fps in 4K resolution.

In general, the cameras are still fantastic and remember the Pixel 5 and 4A 5G share the same cameras. Pictures have great dynamic range, shots are vibrant and clear and Night Sight does an excellent job at handling low-light. Digital zooming maxes out at 7x and while it works well enough, details do get muddied on faraway objects. Also, the delta between the Pixel’s camera and other phones isn’t as wide anymore. Compared to the OnePlus 8T, for example, pictures looked pretty on par with one another. Though, when it came to low light, the Pixel had better dynamic range and white balance.

Pixel 5 previews Hold For Me and other Android 11 goodies

The Pixel phones run Android 11 and there isn’t a huge amount of new software things we haven’t already seen since the OS has been rolling out. That includes Dark Mode, Quick Controls and a feature I’ve used often to help with this very review — the built-in screen recorder.

The devices do preview something called Hold For Me, which lets Google Assistant take your place when you’re on hold and notifies you when a real person is back on the line. It builds off the same AI technology as Call Screen and the interface is quite efficient when I used it to call a dummy line that Google setup. You still have to hover around the phone when a person takes up your call, but I’ll take any relief I can get from crappy hold music.

The native recorder app also has more tricks up its sleeve since the last time I took a look at it on the Pixel 4A. I’m not too sure why Google has really leaned in on this app, but as someone who uses it all the time for taking notes and recording interviews, I’m not complaining. You can now edit text and copy or remove chunks of audio. Unfortunately, you can only edit text one word at a time for now, which prevented me from breaking a misheard word into two (it transcribed me saying “their powers,” into “empowered”) and it was tedious when I had to correct a handful of mistakes in a row. I do like this new tool in the Recorder app, which creates a little graphic if you want to share some quote or audio snippet on social media.

Pixel 5’s natural, minimalistic aesthetic and 90Hz display

Compared to the Pixel 4, the Pixel 5 and 4A 5G have thinner bezels and a hole-punch camera display on the front. The rear camera bump is more flushed on the Pixel 5 too, which looks much nicer. 

When designing the Pixel 5, Google said it wanted the phone to have a soft look that’s reminiscent of a pebble or stone. Perhaps because the cozy, Scandinavian aesthetic is trendy right now, but I dig the phone’s matte, natural appearance. It reminds me of high-end Japanese washi paper and the sage green color looks especially good. The reflective accents of the power button and “G” logo on the back are also a lovely touch. On the surface, I couldn’t tell the difference between the Pixel 5’s aluminum design and the Pixel 4A 5G’s polycarbonate, or plastic, encasing. But in the hand it does feel denser, despite being smaller. 

The Pixel 5 also has a 90Hz display, meaning the screen refreshes 90 frames a second. Most phones, including the Pixel 4A 5G, refresh 60 times a second, though there are some that have 120Hz displays, like the OnePlus 8T and Galaxy S20. For the Pixel 5 to have a higher refresh rate means that scrolling through news feeds and web pages feel much smoother and almost bouncy. To save on battery life, there are some situations that the phone will revert back to 60Hz, like when the screen is static or when an app doesn’t necessarily call for a high refresh rate. 

Pixel 5 performance and battery

The Pixel 5 and 4A 5G feature a Snapdragon 765G processor. It’s an interesting choice given that a lot of current flagships and last year’s Pixel 4 have the more robust Snapdragon 855 chipset. While that means the Pixels’ benchmark scores aren’t as high as, say, the OnePlus 8 or Galaxy S20, the phones are comparable to devices that have the Snapdragon 765G processor, like the LG Velvet for example. It’s still fast and reliable too, and during my time with it, I didn’t experience any hiccups or lag time throughout my day-to-day tasks.

The Pixel 5 has a 4,000-mAh battery while the Pixel 4A 5G has a 3,800-mAh battery. It’s the highest capacity of any Pixel phones in years past, but keep in mind plenty of other phones — like the OnePlus 8 and the Galaxy S20 have batteries that are as big or even bigger than that.

From what I’ve seen so far, the Pixel phones are able to go without charging for more than 24 hours with mild usage. I remember last year with Pixel 4, that phone’s battery noticeably drained pretty quickly through the day and fortunately, I’m not seeing the same thing here. Preliminary battery tests on the Pixel 5 for continuous video playback on Airplane mode closed in 21 hours, 17 minutes, which is excellent. But we’re still conducting battery tests on the Pixel 5, so check back soon for an update. Lastly, Google is introducing a new mode called Extreme Battery Saver. It’s an option on top of the regular battery saver mode and it severely limits app usage to extend battery life. 

*prices are at launch

By CNET Source Link

It certainly took the company long enough. It’s been four years since the first device arrived — that’s a lifetime on the scale of smart home devices. But while Google introduced a slate of new products and delivered a key update to its smaller sibling, the Mini, its flagship smart speaker remained untouched, in all of its air freshener designed glory.

In four years, Google has proven less interested in hardware upgrades than Amazon. That’s not a huge surprise from a company that’s long suggested that software — not hardware — is at the heart of product evolution. But even Google knows that software can only take you so far when it comes to things like premium audio. That’s where the new device comes in.

Nest Audio’s name represents two key things. First, it’s the last of Google’s smart speaker/smart screen line to adopt the Nest title, cementing its 2014 Nest acquisition as its smart home brand. It’s not quite accurate to say that the Nest brand encompasses all of Google’s Home products — after all, a new Chromecast was launched this week with Google branding, but then, no one’s ever accused Google of being consistent about such things.

The Audio bit finds Google following a similar journey as Amazon. The first generation of smart speakers focused significantly more on the smart than the speaker. The devices were primarily considered a way to deliver smart assistants into the home — certainly not something that was set to replace anyone’s home stereo.

But Apple, for all of its issues bringing Siri into a home setting, proved that users were willing to invest in a premium product — so long as a company could demonstrate superior audio. Google followed up with the Home Max and Amazon did so first by beefing up the sound of the standard Echo, and more recently introducing the Echo Studio. There’s also the matter of the Samsung Galaxy Home, but the less said about the unreleased speaker — and Bixby in general — the better.

With Nest Audio, Google is looking to prove that good sound shouldn’t be the exclusive realm of high-end speakers. It even went so far as dropping $30 off the price of the original Google Home — putting it in line with current Echo pricing. The internals have been considerably upgraded, as well. A 50mm full-range driver (40mm on the Nest Mini) has been upgraded to a 75mm woofer for much stronger bass. Two passive radiators, meanwhile, have been swapped out for a 19mm tweeter to complete the picture.

The speaker is also capable of getting really loud — 75% louder than the original Home, according to the company. It’s too loud for my apartment. Though I would advise against relying on a single speaker to fill a large space, as stuff gets distorted at peak volumes. A speaker of this caliber is best paired with another — which is, thankfully, something Google does reasonably well.

As it stands, the Nest Audio is quite clear and full, given its pricing and size. For space like the living room in my one-bedroom New York apartment, it’s got pretty good sound. The design means that (like the new Echo) you get pretty good audio from all sides — though the company cautions against, stay, sticking it deep on a bookshelf, or else you may deal with some muddy reverb. It’s clear that Google knew it had to step up its game to deal with superior audio from third-party speaker makers like Sony who have embraced Google Assistant, and it’s done a pretty good job here.

I still prefer the much heftier and massive Google Home Max that’s currently sitting by my computer on my desk. Size really does matter in the world of speakers, for a number of pragmatic reasons, including how it moves air to create sound. That said, you can currently purchase three Nest Audios for the price of a single Google Max, so that may be something worth considering, depending on your setup and the layout of your home.

Groups and pairing are one of the strongest reasons to consider these device. The Google Home app setup is extremely simple in that regard, and presents an extremely simple and fairly inexpensive way to set up a home audio system. You can either pair two of the same speakers to create stereo (a solid choice for, say, flanking the computer screen) or simply creating groups for multiple speakers to fill a space. I do the latter with my own home setup.

It’s usually a good solution, though even at this point in the life of the devices, it can still be pretty buggy. A lot of this comes down to Wi-Fi and connectivity issues, but it can be frustrating. Wireless systems are a lot easier — but less reliable — than simply wiring up your system the old-fashioned way. And of course, there’s the fact that the more wireless devices you install, the more strain there’s going to be on your home network.

There are some nice tweaks to the system, as well. Ambient IQ actually turns up assistant’s voice when there are sounds in the background, while Media EQ dynamically adjusts the balance depending on what you’re listening to — be it music or a podcast, turning up the vocal output for the latter.

The speaker’s design has improved dramatically. We mocked the original Home for looking like a Glade air freshener since day one, and that criticism still stands. The Nest Audio, meanwhile, if far more unassuming. Covered entirely in fabric with a design that Google freely admits was inspired by a pillow, it’s designed to blend in with its décor — which, frankly, is precisely what a smart speaker should do.

There are five colors: white (chalk), black and Sage, Sand and Sky — all pastels. Odds are pretty good you’ll find one that fits your home. Google sent me a black one, which is likely what I would have chosen myself. And bonus points for the fact that the fabric is made from recycled water bottles, like the Nest Mini before it.

The Nest Audio is a long-overdue upgrade to the company’s line of smart home devices and one that puts the focus on sound, precisely where it should be.

By TechCrunch Source Link