This top skill can make or break a project management resume

Aspiring Project Managers need to consider mastering the methodologies actually used by Project Managers daily.

With the Agile/Scrum Certification Training for Project Managers, now available for £31.45 ($44.99) on Pocket-lint Deals, you can stack the deck of success in your favor. You’ll learn the techniques, terminology, and principles of Agile, one of the most top-used methodologies in Project Management.

The Agile/Scrum Certification Training offers 25 hours of training to help you conquer the various approaches to Agile, including Scrum, Kanban, Lean, extreme programming, test-driven development, and more. Prep for the industry-standard PMI-ACP exam as you master the source material through 20+ courses. You’ll learn to set timetables, manage multi-generational teams, and follow Agile’s pathway to project success.

Expert-led instruction offers a variety of methods and activities to make your mastery of Agile second nature, and set you on your way to acing the PMI-ACP exam. Set yourself on a direct course for success with a company that values top talent – get the Agile/Scrum Certification Training for Project Managers for £31.45 ($44.99) on Pocket-lint Deals.

The Apple Watch, one year on

One year ago Apple finally decided to get into the smartwatch game. Nobody was surprised that it happened, but the reaction it inspired has caught a few off guard. Some were shocked that it failed to explode on the scene with the same ferocity as the iPhone or iPad. Others have been amazed at how it has stubbornly clung to life, like the Apple TV did for years.

The Apple Watch has been somewhat divisive, even around the Engadget compound. Some of our editors ordered theirs on day one, others became converts later. Many still wear and like their Apple watch, while others are wondering how much they can get for it on eBay. Let’s see how seven Engadget editors feel about the Cupertino’s first stab at wearable now.

Mat Smith

I regretted buying the Apple Watch. And while I haven’t resold it, it’s not something I wear every day. The best features (message notifications, music player controls and the surprisingly consistent fitness apps) aren’t enough for something that costs just shy of an entry level iPhone. Especially since you need the phone to make the wearable worthwhile — anyone that says different is kidding themselves. Then there’s the cost of everything else: You’d better not lose that charging puck-cable. And how do they get away with charging so much for plastic straps? (Although it is a particularly velvety-soft plastic.)

There’s been a weird side effect to it all, however. I’m constantly poring over watches, and have added three more to my humble horological collection. Don’t get me wrong, the Apple Watch remains the most expensive purchase I’ve made — writing at Engadget doesn’t bring a timeless Omega within my budget. Well at least not yet. But I do like the idea of wearing a watch, having the time there, something that looks nice on my wrist. The Apple Watch is a beautiful “smartwatch,” but that’s the problem — it’s still a smartwatch. It’s chunky and normal watches just look better to me.

Edgar Alvarez

When I bought the Apple Watch on launch day, I had no idea whether it would be useful. I knew I loved the way it looked, and since I use an iPhone, compatible wearable options were limited. So I spent the $400-plus on the Watch Sport. I liked it so much I’ve since swapped that for a stainless steel model with a black leather band — it’s much fancier.

I’m happy to say I have no buyer’s remorse. My favorite thing about the Watch is that it keeps me from taking my phone out of my pocket every time I get a notification. Plus the reminders to stand up and walk around throughout the day keep my body from atrophying .

My one complaint: I wish the apps for it were faster. Sometimes they take so long to load that it’s actually quicker to take my iPhone out instead. Hopefully that will get addressed with the second-gen Watch.

Chris Velazco

Confession time: I didn’t want an Apple Watch. I only bought one because a notorious former colleague wouldn’t shut the hell up about it, and we eventually agreed it would be funny to send obscene doodles to each other. It was… for about a week. To my surprise, the Watch stayed on my wrist well after that first puerile jolt of novelty wore off, and not for any of the reasons Apple was so keen to talk about.

I never talk to Siri. My list of favorite friends is empty, so I don’t send anyone drawings or heartbeats. I can count on one hand the number of times I’ve used it for directions. Even getting notifications got to be sort of a hassle. In fact, most of the time I glance at a notification on my wrist, I regret it. That’s mostly due to the abhorrent state of my work inbox, but also because glancing at my watch mid-conversation makes me feel like a dick.

No, I like that it tells me the time. It’s a pretty accurate step-counter, too, and having all data that fed into iOS’s Health app to mingle with “calories Chris gorged on today” and “how much sleep I got” helps paint a picture of the state of my union. And perhaps best of it all, it’s nice to know if I have to put on a jacket before I go outside. For someone who slobbers over wearables on the regular, it turns out my needs are actually very basic. My low bar for features also means something eventually might slip in and replace the Apple Watch, but for now this setup is just the right amount of smart.

Dana Wollman

I stopped wearing my Apple Watch almost immediately after I wrapped my review last spring. It wasn’t until seven months later, at the start of CES, that I would put it on again. By that time, I had fallen into a funk, during which I all but stopped exercising and put on about eight pounds in as many weeks. I was just starting to cheer up when it came time for my annual, week-long trip to Vegas for the world’s premier consumer electronics show. I knew that I wouldn’t have much time on my work trip to go running on the hotel treadmill, so instead I brought my Apple Watch, with the idea that I could at least console myself with seeing how many miles I had walked around the Las Vegas convention center each day.

It wasn’t perfect — one day when I ended up crying in an hour-long taxi line after the Watch nudged me to “stand up” — but on the whole, it was helpful to see how much walking I was doing every day. Pretty soon, I was competing against myself. Sure, I walked seven miles yesterday, but what about today? I quickly remembered just how well-designed Apple’s fitness-tracking app is. Something about the color-coding and the animated rings and the different badges you can earn. Maybe I’m just a sucker for games.

Nearly four months have passed since CES. I’ve long since left Vegas, and I’ve lost all of my “sad weight” and then some. Barely a day has gone by that I have not worn the Apple Watch. I still won’t use it as a running watch due to the inaccurate distance tracking, which means that on days when I go running with my Garmin, I end up syncing the Garmin data to my calorie counter of choice, MyFitness Pal, and then I manually add my Apple Watch data by subtracting the Garmin calorie number from the larger Apple Watch one. I know, I know: Apple Watch can sync with various apps, including MFP. The point is that I’m trying to avoid having the same data sent over twice, since I tend not to take off my Apple Watch while going for runs. (I want to meet my daily step and calorie-burning goals, after all.)

If that sounds complicated and tedious, it’s because it is. But such is life when you like the Apple Watch as a fitness tracker and not as a running watch. I think my willingness to deal with that every day is a testament to how much I enjoy the UI of Apple’s Activity app, even if I can’t trust it to accurately track my workouts.

I also enjoy the Watch for its notifications, but only to a point. I’ve been accused on multiple occasions of being one of those people who’s on their phone too much, and having a smartwatch makes me seem… less rude. Glancing at my wrist is a more subtle gesture than pulling out my handset, and I get just enough information from the notifications to sate my curiosity. It’s been a trial and error process figuring out which notifications I actually want (hell no to Tinder and Slack), but I think I’ve landed on a setup that’s useful, not distracting.

All that said, the unit I’m wearing is one I have out on a long-term loan from Apple. Would I have paid my own money for this? A year ago I’d have definitively said “no.” Now I’ll upgrade that to “probably not.”

Devindra Hardawar

The best thing I can say about the Apple Watch is that I still wear it. And that’s more than I can say for other wearables — even those that I truly loved, like the Jawbone Up 2 and Misfit Shine. Once the novelty and joy of obsessively tracking your activity wears off, it’s pretty easy to give up on a typical wearable. But the Apple Watch has managed to make itself a key part of my daily workflow: it’s the main way I track my many appointments, view and respond to texts, and deal with a plethora of other notifications. I’ve grown to appreciate how it helps me cut through the never-ending onslaught of electronic noise (ironic for an expensive gadget, I know).

There is, of course, plenty of room for improvement. Apple needs to make future Apple Watch models more independent, and less reliant on being tethered to an iPhone (recent rumors suggest it might include cellular data connectivity). I’d also like some faster hardware to get rid of those interminable loading screens. They’re annoying enough on phones and computers, when you’re trying to quickly glance at your wrist load screens are absolutely infuriating.

I still can’t recommend the Apple Watch. It’s a device for a particular lifestyle of digital addiction. By its very nature (and price), it’s just not for everyone. But I wouldn’t call it an outright failure, as so many have. Analysts estimate Apple has sold around 12 million Watches over the last year, twice that of the iPhone’s inaugural year. It might not completely reshape the digital landscape, as the iPhone did, but there’s clearly a market out there for a smartwatch that helps you survive the digital hellscape.

Jon Fingas

Straight-up: the Apple Watch feels like an essential part of my body at times. I can certainly go without it if I have to. But I’m so used to turning to my wrist for notifications and apps that I miss the Watch when it’s gone. For someone who gets dozens of work-related emails every day, it’s a lifesaver. It’s also doing a lot to improve my fitness routine — there’s an almost Pavlovian urge to go on runs just to hit my fitness goals. Apps like Swarm and Transit are that much more useful when I don’t have to fish my phone out of my pocket.

Having said that, this is very much an early adopter gadget in the vein of the original iPhone. For one, it’s slow… horribly so, on occasion. Native app support in watchOS 2 made life a lot easier, but there are still times where I’m left staring at my arm while an app loads. And while I’ve grown to appreciate the Watch’s design, its thick body still screams “gadget” a little too loudly. Also, I’ll be honest: many of the things I appreciate can also be found in Android Wear or Samsung’s Gear line. It’s Apple’s implementation that makes the difference for me more than the features. I just happen to prefer its approaches to things like app navigation and haptic feedback.

For year two, I want to see Apple focus on speed above all else. I want interactions to be so quick that I rarely stop to think about reaching for my phone. That doesn’t just mean faster processors and data links, either. Frankly, Siri feels underused on the Watch — it’d speed things up if I could command any app with my voice, not just a handful of official programs. If Apple can make it so that the Watch is almost always the quickest way to get something done, it might appeal more to the everyday person, not just tech-savvy types willing to put up with a few flaws.

Nathan Ingraham

I got my Apple Watch more than 6 months after it launched, so I was well aware of both its good sides and bad. As such, I’ve been quite happy with it — I thought a lot about whether it could do the things I wanted, and by and large it’s been as good or better than I expected.

Fitness tracking is by far my most-used Apple Watch feature. For my purposes, it’s as good or better than most Fitbits I’ve tried, and the fact that I like the Watch’s physical appearance means I’m more likely to keep wearing it and get better data. I’ve quite simply been a lot more active since I got the Watch — part of that coincides with the time when I started focusing on running more, but the Watch has definitely helped me with that goal.

I do wish apps worked better, but I never really thought they were going to be a killer feature, so it hasn’t been a deal-breaker. And while getting all of your phone’s notifications on the Watch is a horrible way to live, if you take the time to set it up, you can get actually useful and timely info pushed there. All in all, I don’t regret my purchase at all and expect I’ll keep wearing it for a good long time.

MakerBot will start outsourcing its 3D printers

Less than a year after opening its 170,000-square-foot factory in New York City, MakerBot announced today it will partner with international manufacturer Jabil to produce its 3D printers moving forward. Over the next few months, the company will lay off a number of employees and shut down its Brooklyn facilities as it transitions to Jabil’s factories overseas.

In a blog post, MakerBot CEO Jonathan Jaglom cited “the volatility of an emerging market” and the need to reduce manufacturing costs as the main reason for the move. Meanwhile, MakerBot’s design, engineering, logistics and repairs teams will remain in the company’s offices in Brooklyn.

“It’s a specific, painful decision in the sense that we’re going to have to let some people go,” Jaglom told the Verge, “but it’s captured over a much broader strategic decision, which is a very important one and a very positive one for MakerBot in the long term.”

While analysts predict 3D printing will be a $20 billion industry by 2019, Jaglom has had to make some hard cuts since taking over the company in April 2015. His first major move as CEO was to lay off 20 percent of the workforce. Six months later, the company trimmed another 20 percent from its roster, with Jaglom claiming that the company needed to, “get back to our entrepreneurial spirit and address our fractured organizational structure.”

FreshTeam is a messaging app that tracks employee locations

Traveling salespeople of yore could get away with plenty because, hey, who was ever gonna find out? These days, there’s a smartphone in your pocket and a boss at the other end of the internet expecting an answer. That’s where FreshTeam comes in, which is an Android and iOS app designed to let employers keep track of employees without needing to harass them. By harnessing the sensors in your smartphone with its own algorithmic secret-sauce, the app is capable of detecting your presence without your input. The service allows your boss to know where you are, what you’re doing and how much battery you’ve got left on your device without ever having to ask. Yep, it does sound like a privacy nightmare, but the team’s reasoning does make some sense, at least on paper.

FreshTeam’s big idea is to eliminate what it calls “low value messaging,” the sort of chats that could easily be automated away forever. For instance, if a boss wants to know where you are, they can spot your GPS location without having to ask. It can even detect when you’re behind the wheel thanks to your phone’s sensors, and thus redirect incoming calls so you’ll keep your eyes on the road. Naturally, all of this info can be shut off when you’re not at work, but it could be a useful way of dealing with a company with a lot of remote employees. The app is free on both Android and iOS, and includes both voice and video chats of up to 100 people.

As tracking technology gets cheaper and more sophisticated, it’s likely that more companies will look into adopting something like this for their mobile workers. It’s also likely that this will become a new battleground for employee rights, since people may resist the idea of being tracked. Earlier this year, a British newspaper put motion trackers on the desks of every staff member, ostensibly to monitor their energy usage. Workers felt that this was a violation of their privacy, and protested, leading to the devices being withdrawn in less than a day. Although, in FreshTeam’s case, we imagine that you’ll be aware of the system before you sign your employment contract.

Source: FreshTeam

Facebook Developing Standalone Camera and Live Video App

Social networking site Facebook is developing a new standalone camera app aimed at encouraging Facebook users to share more photos and videos, reports The Wall Street Journal.

Developed by a Facebook team in London, the app reportedly opens directly to a camera much like Snapchat, giving users a way to quickly capture photos and videos. Another feature planned for the device is the ability to live stream video, mimicking existing apps like Meerkat and Periscope. In recent months, Facebook has been making a strong push into live video.

The app may be designed to combat a growing decline in the number of photos and videos Facebook users are sharing as focus has shifted towards articles and away from original content. Market research conducted by GlobalWebIndex suggests 37 percent of Facebook users uploaded or shared their own photos in 1Q 2016, down from 46 percent in 1Q 2015.

Other methods Facebook is using to encourage the sharing of original content include news feed prompts based based on interests and location, an “On This Day” feature for sharing past posts, and an option to post pre-made collages taken from a user’s Facebook photo repository.

According to sources who spoke to The Wall Street Journal, Facebook’s camera project remains in the early stages and could potentially never see a release should it be shelved.

Tag: Facebook
Discuss this article in our forums

Apple’s Upgrade Program Now Available for iPhones Purchased Through Online Store

With the launch of the iPhone 6s and 6s Plus, Apple introduced an iPhone Upgrade Program in the U.S. designed to let Apple customers pay a monthly installment fee for a new iPhone and trade it in after 12 months of payments to get the next-generation iPhone.

When it debuted, the iPhone Upgrade Program required customers to purchase their iPhones within an Apple retail store to take advantage of the service, but as of today, the iPhone Upgrade Program is also available as an option when purchasing an iPhone from Apple’s online store.

Apple’s iPhone purchasing pages have been updated to reflect the change, with Apple’s own pricing listed as a payment plan option instead of the carrier pricing options that were previously listed when purchasing an iPhone.

With the iPhone Upgrade Program, installment pricing on the entry-level iPhone 6s begins at $32.41 per month while pricing on the larger-screened entry-level iPhone 6s Plus begins at $36.58 per month. Apple’s iPhone Upgrade Program is unique compared to carrier installment plans because it includes AppleCare+ in the monthly price.

The iPhone Upgrade Program is available for devices purchased with AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint service.
Discuss this article in our forums

Nvidia Shield Android TV review – CNET

The Good The Nvidia Shield Android TV streaming box offers best-in-class hardware, connectivity and gaming capabilities. It works with 4K streaming services including Netflix and YouTube. The Android TV platform delivers good conversational voice search from the included game controller. Native app selection is solid, and if you use your smartphone or tablet to Cast compatible apps, it can access most important services. The interface is lightning-fast — even with relatively complex apps. You can upgrade storage up to 128GB.

The Bad It’s more expensive than any other streamer and doesn’t include a remote, aside from the game controller. Native app selection is still weaker than that of Roku, Apple TV and Amazon Fire TV. The menu system seems designed to push users toward Google’s media services, and voice search doesn’t yet include Netflix.

The Bottom Line The Nvidia Shield’s 4K video and solid gaming chops will appeal to geeks, and software updates have made it more stable, but app shortfalls and a relatively high price limit its appeal.

The Nvidia Shield Android TV box tries to straddle two galloping horses headed in different directions. It’s a difficult and potentially painful balancing act.

One plucky palomino is the world of media streamers, represented by the Chromecast, Amazon Fire TV, Apple TV and Roku. They’re all cheap, work great (more or less) and are only growing in popularity and app support.

The other raging stallion is the gaming world, in the form of the Xbox One and PlayStation 4. They’re significantly more expensive than the Shield, but they’re superior gaming devices. Most serious gamers have one or the other, or an even more expensive gaming PC.

Doing the splits in the middle is the Shield, which starts at $200 or £150. It uses the Android TV streaming media and app platform, which has solid voice search, Google Cast functionality just like a Chromecast, a pushy interface and fewer native apps than competitors.

Android TV has access to a limited library of apps compared with the Google Play Store for phones and tablets, and still lacks Amazon Instant Video, Watch ESPN and Spotify apps among others. Fire TV and Roku have a better selection of native apps, although neither has the Shield’s Google Cast capability.

If you have an early 4K TV that lacks built-in 4K streaming apps you might be tempted by the Shield’s 4K capability, but the less-expensive Roku 4 is the better choice. The Shield might also appeal to people who have large libraries of Android games they want to play on a TV, or are interested in streaming a selection of older games for $8 per month. If any of those people actually existed.

There is one group of buyers to whom Shield does appeal. Since it debuted in 2015 Shield has gained a good following of people I like to call file hoarders. They have big collections of files — namely TV shows and movies downloaded from various no-questions-asked corners of the Internet, usually ripped by somebody from DVD or Blu-ray — that they want to play on a TV over a home network. The powerful Shield does a superb job of that, whether via Plex, Kodi, Emby or something else. Of course, it also costs more than many other hoarder-friendly devices.

When they reach for their wallets, most people will bet on another horse: a different streamer or a serious gaming rig like a console or PC, or both. Although it’s better than it was a year ago at launch, the expensive Shield still fills too narrow of a niche.

Editors’ note, April 25, 2016: This review has been updated since its publication, taking into account updates including Android Marshmallow, which improved stability and added features, as well as new apps and games, and testing of the GeForce Now game-streaming service. Its Value rating was changed from 5 to 6 and its Ecosystem rating was changed from 7 to 8, which increased its overall rating from 6.9 to 7.5.

View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET

Triple Shielded

The Android TV box is the third Nvidia Shield in the PC graphics company’s armory. All three are Android devices with access to the Google Play Store’s app library. They also get three Nvidia-specific features, namely optimized games and a handful of big titles like Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel and Metal Gear Rising: The Revengeance (here’s a partial list); compatibility with GameStream, which lets you stream games running on an Nvidia-equipped PC to screens elsewhere in the house or remotely; and access to Grid, the company’s cloud-based game-streaming service.

Allow me to draw tenuous comparisons to three kinds of medieval shields as we run through the family tree.

The first Nvidia Shield, a tiny, duel-friendly buckler in size, was renamed Shield Portable and sells for a whopping $550. It’s still available, although this generation is being phased out. Basically a game controller with a touchscreen screen grafted on top, the weird device suffered from a small game library compared with other portables like the PlayStation Vita or Nintendo 3DS .

The second, called the Shield Tablet, is a high-powered, $300 Android tablet that we really like. Our admiration stems from its relative value for the specifications, not from its gaming prowess. It’s a classic medium heater shield in terms of popular appeal and screen size.

View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET

The third is the new Nvidia Shield Android TV box. Like a tower shield, or scutum, it’s the biggest of its kind, at least in terms of the screens it feeds.

It comes in two varieties, the $200 Shield and the $300 Shield Pro. Both are available in the US and Europe now (Australian availability is not part of the conversation — sorry!).

The Pro increases onboard storage from 16GB to 500GB. I reviewed the standard Shield, but since the two units are identical aside from storage capacity (and weight, although the other physical dimensions are the same), my observations apply to it as well.

If you’re hard-core enough to be considering the Pro, be aware that the upgrade to Android Marshmallow brings with it the ability to replace Shield’s internal storage with an SD card or USB device up to 128GB. Unless you’re storing numerous files and big games on the device, that’s probably enough.

View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET

The box: Is that Dragonglass?

If set-top boxes were graded on aggressive looks alone, the Shield would bash the competition, and perhaps slay a White Walker or two along the way. This slim, angular shard is traced by diagonal ridges, alternating glossy and matte-black finishes, and a razor-sharp sideways green “V” that illuminates when it’s on. Best. Power. Indicator. Ever.

View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET

The default orientation is horizontal but you can also set it into an optional matching stand ($30 or £25) to keep it vertical. On the top is a touch-sensitive power button I accidentally hit more than once, and the slim front face sports an infrared (IR) sensor so the Shield can work with most universal remote controls.

View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET

The back panel lines up the Shield’s prodigious array of ports, bookended by a cooling vent. Because Nvidia.

The controller: Feature-packed but too bulky

A single Shield controller ships with the device. Chunkier than other controllers, especially those of the PlayStation 3 and 4, it feels significantly heavier in the hand.

View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET

It’s decent, but I definitely prefer the Xbox and PlayStation controllers, mainly because they feel much lighter; their longer grips felt more natural, especially over extended periods of gaming. Happily, the Shield worked with a variety of Bluetooth controllers (including Amazon’s) and the wired Xbox 360 controller.

View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET

The Shield controller out-features most, however. It offers a volume control, a microphone for voice search and a headphone jack for private listening, a la Roku 3. Unlike the Roku, volume on the Shield also controls the HDMI port’s output level, so you can control the TV or AV receiver volume, too. It’s also worth noting that, like the Fire TV and Apple TV, the Shield can pair with Bluetooth headphones like the Sennheiser Momentums I tried.

One-handed remote: A $50 option (ouch)

Unlike pretty much every other streaming box, the Shield doesn’t ship with a simple remote. Sure you can use the controller to do everything, but it’s impossible to use with one hand. You can also use the Android TV Remote Control app, which is great (especially for entering text) but requires your phone or tablet.

View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET

The optional clicker costs a whopping $50 or £40. It’s nice enough, as these things go, with a slick, touch-sensitive slider for volume control. I do wish the home key were more prominent and the voice-search button was less so. Dedicated controls for play/pause, rewind and fast-forward would be welcome too, but the cursor key works fine for those functions.

Just like the controller, the remote offers voice search via a built-in mic and a headphone jack for private listening. It’s also rechargeable, and had a tendency to go dead more often than I expected.

My main complaint about the remote and the game controller is that they had a tendency to become disconnected after awhile, so I had to wait for a second or two (or sometimes longer) before they could properly command the Shield. I’m guessing the idea is to save battery life, but it’s an annoying issue in a living-room device.

High-end hardware

Nvidia justifies the Shield’s high price with better specifications than any streaming box out there.

View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET

It starts with Nvidia’s latest Tegra X1 processor, 3GB of RAM and a 265-core Maxwell-generation GPU, for “raw performance” that’s 3x better than the 2015 Apple TV, 4x better than the 2015 Fire TV, and 10x better then the Roku 4, according to Nvidia. Those numbers deserve a healthy dose of salt, but you get the idea.

The box supports 4K video output with the potential for HDR. It has both fast 802.11ac dual-band Wi-Fi and an actual Ethernet jack — Gigabit, of course. For expansion, it has two USB 3.0 ports, a Micro-USB port and a microSD card slot that supports cards up to 128GB in size, to augment the built-in 16GB of storage on the standard Shield.

As I mentioned above, one of the chief features of the latest operating system update, Marshmallow, is to allow SD cards and USB devices up to 128GB to serve as internal storage. This feature replaces the clunky, buggy “Move apps to SD card” function. I upgraded a couple different Shield models, one with a 64GB SD card and another with a 128GB USB 3.0 stick, and it they worked fine. Nvidia’s support forum has a detailed walkthrough.

The Shield is easier to accessorize than any streaming box I’ve tested. The USB ports work with external USB hard drives and USB sticks for media playback. I connected a 2TB drive filled with photos and videos, including lots of 4K material, and it worked great once I installed the VLC Player app for playback (the default Photos & Videos app is terrible).

LG G5 vs Nexus 6P

Over the last couple of years, Android OEMs have moved on to using metal with their flagship smartphones, be it in the form of a metal frame, a metal and glass construction, or a full metal design. Plastic has quickly fallen out of favor, and while LG was seemingly the final holdout in this regard, the company has finally given in to the trend this year with the LG G5.

However, while the use of metal has generally implied a unibody construction, LG has found a unique was of continuing to offer staples like a removable battery, with this first of a kind modular smartphone bringing a few other interesting features to the table as well.

• LG G5 review
• Nexus 6P review

On the other hand is the Nexus 6P, the latest and greatest that Google has to offer. Manufactured by Huawei, the Nexus 6P does a fantastic job with combining Huawei’s penchant for great design and build quality with Google’s pure software package, and with some additional features and key improvements being made, what we finally have here is a Nexus smartphone that can give any other flagship device a run for its money.

How does the latest from LG compare to the best that Google has to offer? We find out, in this comprehensive comparison between the LG G5 and Google Nexus 6P!

Buy the LG G5
Buy the Nexus 6P

Design

As mentioned, both the LG G5 and Nexus 6P feature all-metal builds, but in the case of the former, an additional layer of primer coating, which has already been the cause for much controversy, does make the G5 feel a little less premium and plastic-y to the touch. The overall design and build quality of the LG G5 does feel a little unpolished, with something like the sudden breaks along the chamfered edges giving the appearance of the paint chipping, and the curves at the top and bottom giving it a bent look.

On the other hand, the Nexus 6P is truly the most well-built Nexus smartphone till date, with Google and Huawei paying a lot of attention to detail. The extra really makes a big difference, and the Nexus 6P certainly seems to be put together better than the LG G5. That’s not to say that there aren’t some odd choices here as well, with the black visor on the back – that houses the camera module – quite a polarizing design element.

On the back of both smartphones is the fingerprint scanner, found below their respective camera setups. In the case of the LG G5, this is also quite the departure from the norm, and while the power button on the back remains, with the fingerprint reader embedded, the volume rocker has been moved to a more standard position on the side. However, fans of LG’s rear button layout will certainly miss this unique design aspect, and might even take some getting used to if you’re moving to the G5 from another LG smartphone.

Another design factor at play when comparing the two smartphones is size, with the Nexus 6P a whole 10 mm taller than the LG G5, while also being 4 mm wider. This is, of course, because of the fact that the Nexus 6P features a larger 5.7-inch display, compared to the 5.3-inch screen of the LG G5, and adding to the height of the former is its dual front-facing speakers as well. As such, the LG G5 does offer the better handling experience here, but when putting these two smartphones next to each other, users will likely gravitate towards the Nexus 6P when it comes to the design.

Display

The Nexus 6P comes with a larger 5.7-inch AMOLED display with a Quad HD resolution, resulting in a pixel density of 518 ppi, while the LG G5 features a 5.3-inch IPS LCD screen, also with a Quad HD resolution, with the smaller size resulting in a higher pixel density of 554 ppi. The difference in pixel densities are not going to be noticeable, and both screens are definitely as sharp as you could hope for them to be.

What is noticeable however, the differing underlying display technologies at play here. The AMOLED screen of the Nexus 6P brings with it all that we’ve come to expect from this tech, including deep blacks and vibrant, saturated colors, that allow for a great viewing experience. That’s not to say that the IPS LCD panel of the LG G5 isn’t good of course. The color temperature is much cooler on the G5, which does make the whites look nice.

That said, when comparing the two side by side, users will likely prefer the extra punch in colors that is available with the Nexus 6P. One aspect the LG G5 does have the Nexus 6P beat is brightness, with its much brighter display allowing for far better visibility outdoors.

Performance

With it being the newer release, it’s no surprise that the LG G5 features the latest and greatest that Qualcomm has to offer, being powered by the quad-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 processor, clocked at 2.15 GHz, and backed by the Adreno 530 GPU and 4 GB of RAM. On the other hand, the Nexus 6P comes with the older octa-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 processor, clocked at 2 GHz, and backed by the Adreno 430 GPU and 3 GB of RAM.

You can see the expected difference in performance between the two processing packages in the benchmark results above, and this translates to real world performance as well. The G5 always opens applications faster than the Nexus 6P, even if the difference is just a split second in some cases. When loading graphic-intensive games, the LG G5 loads them much faster as well, sometimes a good 5 seconds before the Nexus 6P. Both smartphones are incredibly fast, but the LG G5 is noticeably a lot faster.

Hardware

The Nexus 6P is available in 32 GB, 64 GB, and 128 GB storage options, and with no expandable storage available, users will have to pick up one of the higher storage versions to address any concerns they may have. On the other, 32 GB is only built-in storage option available for the LG G5, but you do get expandable storage via microSD card, for up to an additional 200 GB. Both devices come with a standard suite of connectivity options, including NFC.

The fingerprint scanner is found on the back with both smartphones, and embedded into the power button in the case of the LG G5. Both scanners are fast and accurate, and unlocks the device and takes you directly to the homescreen very quickly. The scanner of the LG G5 is a touch faster than that of the Nexus 6P, but certainly not enough to be noteworthy. As mentioned, the fingerprint scanner is embedded into the power button of the LG G5, so you certainly won’t have the opportunity to take a look at the lock screen for a quick glance at your notifications on pressing the power button, with the scanner unlocking the device and opening the homescreen instead. The workaround here is the availability of the double tap to wake feature, and of course, some very basic information can already be seen, courtesy of the G5’s Always On display.

The Nexus 6P comes with a dual front-facing speaker setup, allowing for a nice stereo effect when listening to music or watching videos. On the other hand, the LG G5 comes with a single bottom-mounted speaker, that is easy to cover up when holding the device in the landscape orientation. That said, the LG G5 speakers gets just as loud as the Nexus 6P speakers, but the audio quality itself isn’t as good.

While features like the fingerprint scanner and front-facing speakers are nice additions to the Nexus line, LG takes hardware capabilities in a whole new direction, with the G5 being the first smartphone to offer some form of modular capabilities. The bottom portion of the device disconnects from the main body, and attached to this part is the battery.

Not only do you get to replace the battery if required, but the battery can now also be plugged into a slew of modules that LG calls “Friends.” These include a camera extension with physical buttons and controls, and a Bang & Olufsen Hi-Fi audio module. This modular capability makes the LG G5 stand apart not only from the Nexus 6P, but rather, any smartphone currently available in the market, and with third-party accessory manufacturers able to get into the game, things should get quite interesting.

See also: Ears on with the LG G5’s Bang and Olufsen DAC58

The Nexus 6P comes with a larger 3,450 mAh non-removable battery, compared to the rather small 2,800 mAh unit of the LG G5. The battery life is as expected when looking at those numbers, with the Nexus 6P lasting quite a bit longer than the G5. With moderate use, the Nexus 6P can comfortably last through a full day, with around 4.5 hours of screen on-time, while the LG G5 usually ran out of juice before the end of my day, with around 3.5 hours of screen-on time. Of course, you do have the option of carrying around a spare with the LG G5, which might prove to be necessary for some.

Both smartphones come with USB Type-C ports, USB 3.0 and USB 2.0 in the case of the LG G5 and Nexus 6P respectively, and both devices also come with fast charging capabilities, to have you up and running in no time. Wireless charging isn’t available with either but quick charging makes it easy to top the battery up if you’re running low.

Camera

One point of contention with the Nexus line has always been the camera, but that all changed last year with the Nexus 6P. The Nexus 6P features a 12.3 MP sensor with an f/2.0 aperture, and instead of a larger megapixel count, the focus was on pixel size, 1.55µm pixels in this case. The pixels are larger and let in more light, making for faster shutter speeds, crisper images and vibrant colors. However, OIS has surprisingly been left out from Google’s flagship.

Must see: Camera shootout: LG G5 vs Nexus 6P vs iPhone 6S Plus vs Huawei P9 vs Galaxy S7 vs Lumia 950 XL vs HTC 10270

Smartphone cameras have always been one LG’s strengths, and that continues with the LG G5, which comes with a dual-camera setup on the back, with each sensor able to work independently from each other. The primary shooter is a 16 MP unit with a f/1.8 aperture, the secondary rear camera is an 8 MP unit with a wide-angle lens and f/2.4 aperture, and both cameras come with OIS, and can take advantage of the laser auto-focus system.

Taking a look at the pictures above, the first thing you will notice that the main LG G5 camera isn’t as wide-angled as that of the Nexus 6P. At the right side of the photos, the stop sign and tree are seen in the Nexus 6P image, but not with that of the LG G5. Of course, that’s where the secondary camera with the wide-angle lens comes in, which creates an amazing photo, with a lot more in the shot. With HDR off, the LG G5 takes the better shot, with the color reproduction more natural, and with better dynamic range.

With HDR on, or HDR+ in the case of the Nexus, both shots become much better. HDR is a lot more subtle with the LG G5, but with the Nexus 6P, it makes a huge difference. Colors come to life, and the blue of the sky really comes through, much more so than what is seen with the LG G5. That said, there is more contrast with the Nexus 6P, and with the G5, you can actually make out details in the shadows. Colors are a lot deeper on the Nexus 6P, while the G5’s are more bright and realistic. Exposure seems to be better with the G5 as well when HDR is on both. There’s also much more detail when zooming in with the G5 thanks to its extra megapixels.

The wide angle camera, although with it’s noticeable downgrade in megapixel count, creates stunning images. The LG G5 also has a full manual mode, which isn’t available with the Nexus 6P, but even without it, the LG G5 can get a lot closer to the subject, than what is possible with the Nexus device. Overall, the LG G5 is the camera that is more fun to use with all its capabilities.

However, when it comes to low light conditions, the story is quite different. With HDR off, the G5 is a clear winner with it’s brighter image, much better colors, and less noise. But with HDR on, while the G5 creates largely the same image, the Nexus 6P boosts brightness, really saturates colors, and gets rid of all that noise. Granted, the G5 still creates a sharper image, and you could probably end up editing it to make it better, but when taking the shot, the Nexus 6P has the G5 beat in this area.

The selfie camera is another area where the Nexus 6P beats the G5, especially when HDR is on. The G5 struggles with dynamic range with the front facing camera, while the shot taken with the Nexus 6P was perfect. In the image above, where I am standing in the shadow, the LG G5 had to brighten the entire image to capture my face, losing lots of the background. With the Nexus 6P, the detail is a lot better, and the brightness is turned up only around the focal point of the shot.

Nexus 6P camera samples

LG G5 camera samples

When it comes video capture, the LG G5 comes back as the winner, courtesy of the fact that the LG G5 camera comes with OIS, allowing for smooth video recording. Colors are also a lot better, and the overall image is brighter. The LG G5 does hunt around a lot for focus though, and is prone to this weird glitch, where it seems to hunt for the focus every few seconds, though it doesn’t happen often enough to be a major problem. You can also record video using the wide angle lens camera, which is a nice touch and great for vloggers or sharing wide scenes – such as a stadium or conference – with your friends.

Software

Both smartphones are running Android 6.0.1 Marshmallow, but the experience couldn’t be more different. While the Nexus 6P comes with the purest version of Android available, the LG G5 features a heavily skinned iteration that is quite different. With the Nexus 6P, we see the Android experience Google intended it to be, with the UI following Material Design guidelines, and including only the features that Google deem are worth having.

Nexus 6P

The LG user interface may be a lot cleaner and more toned down this time around, but comes with a few features that aren’t available with the Nexus 6P, such as the ability to change the navigation buttons, and even their color. However, the app icons on the G5 look a little outdated, the folder opening animation comes from the middle of the screen, instead of where the folder is, and the settings menu can be quite hard to navigate through, with its four sections. There’s also no app drawer here, leaving users dependent on folders to stay organized, although LG has made a version with an app drawer available for users to download.

LG G5

Of course, the main selling point with having a stock Android experience also has to do with the ability to receive timely software updates. The Nexus 6P will be one of the first devices to get the next iteration of Android, whenever it is available, while any official update for the LG G5 will take some time. Deciding between the two software packages comes down to personal preference, but if simplicity, and timely updates, are key aspects for you, the Nexus 6P has the leg up here.

Specs comparison

Display	5.3-inch IPS LCD display Quad HD resolution, 554 ppi	5.7-inch AMOLED display Quad HD resolution, 518 ppi
Processor	2.15 GHz quad-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 Adreno 530 GPU	2 GHz octa-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 Adreno 430 GPU
RAM	4 GB	3 GB
Storage	32 GB expandable via microSD card up to 200 GB	32/64/128 GB not expandable
Camera	16 MP rear camera, f/1.8 aperture 8 MP rear camera, wide angle lens, f/2.4 aperture 8 MP front-facing camera	12.3 MP rear camera, f/2.0 aperture, 1.55µm pixel size, dual LED flash 8 MP front-facing camera
Connectivity	Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac Bluetooth 4.2 GPS + GLONASS NFC USB 3.0 (USB Type-C 1.0)	Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac Bluetooth 4.2 GPS + GLONASS NFC USB 2.0 (USB Type-C 1.0)
Battery	2,800 mAh removable	3,450 mAh non-removable
Software	Android 6.0 Marshmallow	Android 6.0 Marshmallow
Dimensions	149.4 x 73.9 x 7.7 mm 159 grams	159.3 x 77.8 x 7.3 mm 178 grams

Gallery

Final thoughts

So, there you have it for this in-depth look at the LG G5 vs Nexus 6P! This has been a very back and forth comparison, with one superior to the other in some areas, and vice versa in others. The Nexus 6P remains consistently good across all aspects of the smartphone experience, and while the LG G5 excels in some aspects, it under performs in others, such as battery life.

Of course, one of the big selling points of the G5 is its modular nature, so if that is something you feel like you will use a lot, the choice is obvious. However, if the LG G5’s special features aren’t as important, the Nexus 6P makes for a solid alternative, that is also quite a bit cheaper as well.

Buy the LG G5
Buy the Nexus 6P

Whichever handset you go for, you’re getting one of the best Android experiences available on the market at the moment and if you’re struggling to decide which to buy, check out our LG G5 review and Nexus 6P review for a more in-depth look at each. Which of these would you pick and why? Let us know your views in the comments below!

Gmail on Android is ready for your Exchange account

Gmail threw the doors open when it added support for non-Google email accounts, but there was one glaring omission: you couldn’t get Microsoft Exchange support on all devices. Not consistently, anyway. What if you want to get your work email without turning to another app? Relax. Google is trotting out an update to Gmail for Android that supports Exchange on all devices, so your corporate reports can live in the same app as your personal messages. The update isn’t available for everyone right away, so be patient if you’re eager to move your correspondence.

You’ll at least have something else to try while you’re waiting. An update to Google Drive on the web has introduced Chrome notifications that let you know whenever someone either shares files or requests access. It’s a small thing (you’d ultimately get these notifications one way or the other), but it could save valuable time when you’re waiting for that all-important document.

All your mail in one place. An update to the Android Gmail app is now rolling out with support for Exchange accounts pic.twitter.com/yV6zjI0e6U

— Gmail (@gmail) April 25, 2016

Rolling out: Get Drive notifications in Chrome when people share a file or request access. https://t.co/XCC2esV5OM pic.twitter.com/ky1KMzEpU6

— Google Drive (@googledrive) April 25, 2016

Source: Gmail (Twitter), Google Play, Google Drive (Twitter)

​Here’s what all those Snapchat emojis mean – CNET

Those emoji beside friend’s names come and go and change as you use Snapchat — sometimes daily.

From double pink hearts to flames, every emoji has a special meaning. If you don’t like the default emojis, you can change each to fit your own personality, too.

In addition to ones outlined below, there are others reserved for verified accounts, with each verified account getting a different emoji. For example, Rihanna has a red ballon emoji and Jared Leto has a cactus. Snapchat has a list of verified accounts and their emojis to make things a little easier.

Friend emoji meanings

Each emoji meaning is preset by the Snapchat team. Here’s what each one means:

• A baby face next to someone’s name means you just became friends.
• A gold heart means you are best friends. Best friends on Snapchat means you send the most chats to this person and they send you the most chats too.
• A red heart means you have been each other’s best friend for at least 2 weeks.
• Pink hearts mean you have been each other’s best friend for at least 2 months.
• A simple smiley face means you send a lot of snaps to this person, but they’re still not best friend status.
• A smirk means that best friend status is unrequited. You’re their best friend, but they aren’t someone you send snaps to the most.

Change your friend emojis to whatever you like.

screenshot by Alina Bradford/CNET

• A grimace means there’s competition. Your best friend is also that person’s best friend.
• A smiley face with sunglasses means that you and this person share a close friend.
• Flames beside someone’s name means you’re on a snapstreak. You have to send a snap every 24 hours to keep up your snapstreaks. The symbol will appear next to the numbers of days that you and a friend have snapped each other.
• An hourglass appears next to someone’s name to remind you that your snapstreak is going to end soon.
• A 100 emoji means that you’ve been on a snapstreak with this person for 100 days.
• A star means that one of your friend’s snaps was replayed by you or another snapchatter within the last 24 hours.
• A birthday cake means it’s your friend’s birthday. This emoji could be wrong though, if your friend entered a fake birth date on their profile.

How to change friend emojis

Want your best friend emoji to be a surprised cat face? No problem.

Emojis aren’t set in stone and you can change them to whatever you like. Go to Settings > Additional Services > Manage > Friend Emojis. Next, click on the default emoji in this list. A menu with new emoji choices will appear. Tap on the emoji you like and tap the back button to set your new emoji.

Don’t worry: Only you can see your emoji changes. If you don’t like your new emojis, you can change them back to the default emojis by clicking Settings > Additional Services > Manage > Friend Emojis > Reset to Default.