It’s saliva! A new ultra-thin battery is powered by spit

Why it matters to you

This unique battery tech could be useful in places where on-demand power is hard to find.

Having your smartphone run out of battery power at a crucial moment can make you mad enough to spit. Fortunately, new research coming out of Binghamton University, State University of New York suggests that could one day be the perfect solution. That’s because members of the electrical and computer science department have developed the next step in microbial fuel cells (MFCs): a paper-like battery that’s activated by saliva.

“[We have developed] a disposable, easy-to-use, and portable biobattery that can generate power from bacterial metabolism,” Professor Seokheun “Sean” Choi told Digital Trends. “This battery is ready to operate with human body fluids like saliva for on-demand power generation for other disposable low-power applications, such as biosensors. The battery includes specialized bacterial cells called exoelectrogens, which have the ability to harvest electrons externally to the outside electrode. For long-term storage, the bacterial cells are freeze-dried until use. This battery can be used even in challenging environmental conditions like desert areas. All you need is an organic matter — such as saliva — to rehydrate and activate the freeze-dried cells.”

As it turns out, this isn’t the first time we’ve written about the use of saliva in tech. Previously we’ve discussed smart mouthguards and even smartphone apps that are designed to monitor health and diagnose infections through small saliva samples. However, this is the first time we’ve written about saliva-powered batteries.

Binghamton University

While we hope to never live in a world in which our fellow commuters start the day frantically spitting (or worse) onto their iPhones to charge them up, as Choi points out, this technology could be extremely useful in certain extreme settings.

Right now, the bacterial electricity produced isn’t close to enough to power a phone. Testing of the device by the team demonstrated that it can achieve a power density of several microwatts per square centimeter, meaning that it can currently power an LED light using a single drop of spit. That means the technology is more likely to find use in powering low-energy disposable diagnostic devices in developing countries. But that’s not to say the tech won’t expand in the future.

“We are improving the power to have more applications,” Choi said. “Folding or stacking paper batteries will connect them in series or parallel for further power enhancement.” This could allow the researchers to expand the power of the batteries from a few microwatts into hundreds, or conceivably more.

A paper describing the work was recently published in the journal Advanced Materials Technologies.

Watch out, Skype! We tried Discord’s new video chat, and it’s awesome

In Redmond, Washington, a banshee was heard keening in the night. This morning, a somber quiet fell upon the Skype offices in Luxembourg. A chill wind rises, and grim tidings are on the lips of videoconferencing companies the world over. Discord’s video chat functionality is here, and it’s fantastic.

Clad in glimmering armor, violet banners snapping in the wind, the Discord development team gathers. They come bearing video chat and screen sharing, two features which will be rolling out to 5 percent of registered Discord users today, with that pool expanding in the coming months. We sat down for a hands-on demo of new Discord features which could — as prophecy has foretold — put an end to Skype’s reign of terror.

Witness me

What sets Discord apart from the competition is its emphasis on real-world use.

Okay, maybe we’re being dramatic. But who likes using Skype or Zoom? Nobody, that’s who. Not because there’s anything wrong with the branding, or the companies behind them. It’s just that neither app provides a good user experience, and both apps are at times reluctant to facilitate video conferencing — their sole purpose in this world.

Discord aims to change all of that with a pair of new features, video chat and screen sharing. What sets Discord apart from the competition here is its emphasis on real-world usability.

First up, video chat. All you do to get started is create a group direct message, and click the video icon. That’s it. Everyone in the chat will see the video, and currently up to ten users can video chat at once — but Discord CTO Stansislav Vishnevskiy warns quality will take a hit after the first five users.

Limiting the number of callers is a necessity at this point, in part because of the way Discord handles video chat. It puts a priority on security.

“Rather than go with peer-to-peer connections, which are easier to implement, Discord will continue using its client-server functionality,” the Discord team explained, “That way, users stay secure.”

The Discord team has done the impossible: They’ve made a video chat app that offers a seamless user experience.

By using a client-server architecture, you’ll connect to the server to communicate, rather than connecting directly to everyone else, which can sometimes compromise security or privacy. A client-server setup prevents that, with Discord’s servers acting as the intermediary.

The same is true for the other big feature in today’s Discord update — screen-sharing.

Anyone can now video chat with one another, and they’ll be able to stream their gameplay to small groups of friends.

It’s not unlike Steam’s screen-sharing functionality. During our hands-on it was quick, crisp, and very easy to setup — which sets it apart from Steam’s often-temperamental broadcasting feature. You can even switch to screen-sharing during an existing video chat, to show friends what you’re currently playing.

“Basically, the source can come from your webcam or your screen, and you can flip between them seamlessly during a call,” said the Discord team.

Discord the Conqueror

If you’ve ever tried to set up a video call in Skype, Facetime, Zoom, or any of the other video chat apps and services out there, you’re well aware of what a pain it can be. Adding participants can mean having to quit and re-start the video call, and you may have to send around a long conference call code to make sure everyone can connect. Then, once connected, reliability is an issue. It’s not great.

People will migrate to the best service, and that’s now Discord

Discord’s thinks it has the superior option, but knows there’s a lot of technical hurdles that make video conferencing a difficult feature to handle.

“Compared to voice data, video data is a behemoth, and transmitting it across the intertubes takes way more bandwidth,” the Discord team said,

“We’re doing this test to see how our servers handle the increase in bandwidth — we want to iron as much as we can before launching to everybody. We’re suckers for quality and want to make sure we end up launching the most polished experience we can.”

The Cwn Annwn howl for Skype

Simplicity is the real accomplishment here. There’s an elegance to Discord’s solution we haven’t seen elsewhere, and that’s the component that has been missing from other video chat and teleconferencing solutions.

Just getting a three-way video call up and running with an app like Skype, Facetime, or Zoom can be an exercise in frustration. Getting it right on the first go is a small miracle. Discord eliminates that uncertainty by streamlining the whole process.

Just click. That’s it. Discord changed the game for voice chat apps by offering a single-click solution, and it’s that design philosophy which makes the new video chat functionality stand apart from the rest. You don’t need to create a separate contact list, or juggle a bunch of separate apps and web services. You just fire up Discord, use your existing contact list, and drop into a call. It’s that simplicity that made Discord easy to recommend on our list of the best chat apps.

That’s the simple reason why Skype, Zoom, and others should be worried. Discord’s solution is better. Full stop. People will almost always migrate to the app with the best service — and as of today, that’s Discord.

Want to drive for Uber or Lyft but need a car? Rent one from GM’s Maven Gig

Why it matters to you

Need a car for just a week or so? Rent it through Maven Gig, the car-rental service, which caters to the gig economy.

Want to drive for Uber or Lyft but don’t have a car to call your own? Maven Gig wants to help.

The weekly car-rental service from GM is looking to supply the vehicles for the 21st-century gig economy, in which an increasing number of workers are making a living not at a desk, but rather on the move. Beginning Thursday, freelance drivers — those who drive for ridesharing services or deliver goods for companies like Postmates or GrubHub — will have access to Maven Gig vehicles throughout Los Angeles. Reservations for these cars can be made through the Maven app, which provides potential renters with such information as vehicle availability, pricing, and location. Pickup date and time can also be scheduled through the app.

“Freelancers want freedom and flexibility, and Maven Gig provides both,” GM said in its announcement. The car-rental service allows renters to rent cars when they need them, without the hassle of a long-term lease. So if you only need a car for a week, that’s just fine. The flat weekly fee covers insurance (minus the deductible), unlimited miles, and regular maintenance — all you need to pay for is gas. Prices start at $189 a week plus tax.

The most popular car in the Maven Gig program is the slightly more expensive Chevy Bolt EV, which comes in at $229 plus tax. More than 100 of these electric cars are currently available in LA, and that number is expected to double by the end of 2017. GM claims Maven Gig Bolt EVs have driven 1.4 million all-electric miles in California since February, saving an estimated 50,000 gallons of gas in the process. So not only is this good for the gig economy, but it’s good for the planet, too.

L.A. is the first new launch city for the rental service. Maven Gig will be made available in Boston, Phoenix, Baltimore, and Detroit, and Washington, D.C., in the coming months as well.

“We are committed to bringing Bolt EVs to all Maven Gig markets. Drivers want the Bolt EV because of cost savings, as well as helping with energy and environmental goals,” said Rachel Bhattacharya, chief Growth Officer for Maven. “The freelance economy is growing, and Maven Gig is growing along with it to provide transportation solutions for freelance drivers.”

AMD vs Intel: Does Threadripper mean it’s time to root for the underdog?

When you decide to build a PC for the first time, or the first time in a long time, you are embarking on an epic journey into the unknown. There are hundreds, even thousands, of different components to choose from, but the first and most important question you should ask yourself is a simple one: AMD or Intel?

Yes,  like Apple vs Microsoft or Quake vs Unreal Tournament, AMD vs Intel is one of the great debates for PC users. One of these two companies, these two purveyors of finely-wafered silicon, will produce the beating heart of your new PC. Intel and AMD are just as different from one another as the products they produce, however, so let’s dig into the details to find out which one would be the best choice for your new PC.

Intel vs AMD: Value

With cost being such a major factor in PC building, choosing the right CPU often comes down to finding the one that offers the best bang for your buck. Just looking at price, AMD’s chips are generally cheaper than comparable Intel chips. Low-end, dual-core AMD Sempron, Athlon, or A-series dual-core processors start at about $30. In comparison, a low-end Intel chip, like the G3930 dual-core processor will cost around $40.

You’ll find similar pricing as you climb the performance ladder, with Intel’s offerings almost always coming in a little higher than AMD’s.

This is the typical scenario that most PC enthusiasts have been used to for the better part of a decade, but AMD’s new Ryzen CPUs shook up that formula when they debuted early in 2017. At the top of the consumer-focused end of AMD’s spectrum, the new Ryzen 7 1800X stands out. It’s an eight-core behemoth with a turbo-clock of 4.0 GHz, and even for $460, it’s among the least expensive eight-core processors on the market today. The Ryzen 7 1700 is even more affordable, at $300. In comparison, Intel’s most affordable octo-core costs $600.

Although not aimed at most consumers, new Intel Core i9 and AMD Threadripper CPUs offer even more performance and continue to shake up the traditional bang for buck dynamic of the processor market. Intel’s currently available i9-7900X offers 10 cores, with 20 threads, and a boosted core clock that maxes out at 4.3GHz. Its price tag is set at $1,000.

In comparison, AMD’s previewed Threadripper 1950X has 16 cores with 32 threads and a boosted core clock that reaches 4.2GHz with extended frequency range (XFR) overclocking. Its price is also $1,000. More cores at the same price gives AMD the edge in most scenarios.

What does all that mean for you? In short, it means that the age old Intel vs AMD contest is much more competitive than it’s been in years and offers much more choice for the consumer. Both companies are producing processors that are within striking distance of one another on nearly every front — price, power, and performance. Intel chips tend to offer better performance per core, but AMD is compensating with more cores at a given price.

Intel vs AMD: Gaming

Gaming is one area where picking a CPU can get tricky. AMD offers many processors which are sold as APUs, which means they combine the processor with Radeon graphics on the same chip. These offer excellent value for low-end gaming. Intel also has on-die integrated graphics, but its performance isn’t up to par with AMD’s Radeon video cards in that respect.

That said, those who take their gaming seriously don’t tend to use on integrated graphics, they use an add-in graphics card. In those scenarios, Intel tends to win out in gaming performance because of the way the two chip giants build their processors. AMD’s chips, and specifically its latest Ryzen CPUs, are excellent at multi-threaded scenarios and good at running applications that support multiple cores. Intel’s chips almost offer the reverse of that, losing out in heavy multi-threaded settings, but excelling in more restricted thread settings.

Games, although much more multi-threaded today than they were in the past, still rarely use more than two to four threads, which typically gives Intel the edge — even with Ryzen’s optimizations.

That gap is less pronounced than it used to be thanks to improvements in the new Ryzen architecture though. We saw a net loss of about 10 FPS when running Civilization VI‘s internal benchmark on the Ryzen 7 1800X, compared to the i7-7700K. The gap narrowed when running a more graphically-demanding game like For Honor, with the Ryzen CPU providing an average of 109 FPS, while the Intel Core i7 averaged 110 FPS.

As for Threadripper and Core i9 — there, too, Intel has a small edge. With that said, we wouldn’t recommend either for a gaming system. Games don’t benefit from the extremely high core counts in these processors.

Ultimately, Intel chips tend to be better for gaming of today. That doesn’t mean you should count AMD out, though. It does have processors that can be a great gaming value. The Ryzen 5 chips stand out, in particular. Check out our Ryzen processor buying guide for details, including benchmarks.

Remember, though — the CPU is rarely the limiting factor in games. Springing out for a more powerful graphics card — if you can find one at a good price — will usually yield better results than doing so for a more powerful processor.

Intel vs AMD: Overclocking

One of the first figures you might look at to compare one processor to another is its clock speed — 2.7GHz, 4.5GHz, etc. It’s a good metric to compare processors, but it’s important to keep in mind it’s not a fixed figure. Boost clocks offer temporary performance gains under specific scenarios, but if you delve into the realm of manual ‘overclocking’ you can net yourself a nice bump in performance, too.

Overclocking a processor is straightforward, depending on your chosen method, but not every processor can do it. Most CPUs ship with “locked” multipliers, which prevent users from overclocking them.

Luckily, both Intel and AMD offer unlocked CPUs at a variety of price points. If you opt for an Intel CPU, look out for those with a “K” or “X” after their name. In comparison, all of AMD’s Ryzen chips support it — though not all have full support for the automated overclocking, XFR feature.

Overclocking, in general, is very much dependent on the chips themselves . In our tests, the Ryzen 7 1800X performed well after an overclock, but we weren’t able to squeeze too much extra power out of AMD’s octo-core processor. The more mid-range 1700 and 1700X chips, however, are said to be much better overclockers.

Intel’s latest generation chips that do allow overclocking are a little more even in their potential, though their maximum is very much down to luck, as some chips can go further than others. You’ll also need decent cooling for most overclocking scenarios.

If you’re buying a chip exclusively to overclock it, then Intel’s higher-end solutions have a more established overclocking scene. Ryzen and Threadripper chips have strong potential too, though, and with a host of new memory options, may be more suited for those looking to deep dive into pushing their chip to its maximum. And you can overclock affordable AMD chips, while most affordable Intel chips don’t offer that option.

AMD vs Intel: Who wins?

During an everyday workload, a top-end AMD chip and a top-end Intel chip won’t produce radically different outcomes. There are clear distinctions in specific scenarios and benchmarks, but the CPU isn’t the keystone of PC performance that it once was.

That said, AMD’s CPUs, especially at the mid-range and lower-end of the spectrum, do tend to offer slightly better value than Intel’s. Conversely, Intel chips have stronger single core and gaming performance than even AMD’s best Threadripper CPUs. In return, those looking to use applications with a heavier multi-threaded focus, should derive more benefit from a modern AMD CPU.

When it comes to choosing your next upgrade, looking at the individual performance numbers of the chip you have your eye on is still your best bet, but considering these general guidelines will give you a good foundation of where to start. Thanks to Ryzen’s leapfrogging of previous AMD chips in terms of power and value, this is the most competitive the CPU market has been in years.

Arguably, Intel is still the safe bet, especially for gamers, but AMD’s alternatives are more viable than ever. If you’ve got deep pockets too, its Threadripper chips are incredibly powerful, so keep your eyes peeled on upcoming benchmarks.

AMD’s older FX and A-Series chips, meanwhile, are not competitive with Intel, and at this point never will be. So if you’re looking to older generations of hardware for whatever reason, our Intel recommendation is far more firm.

Thermaltake’s new Floe Riing cooling loops turn your PC into a disco

Why it matters to you

All-in-one water-cooling loops are rarely this pretty out of the box. Thermaltake’s new design offers deep and broad lighting options and smartphone control of everything.

All-in-one water cooling systems can now offer PC beautification as much as convenience thanks to the new, oddly named, Thermaltake Floe Riing TT Premium Edition closed loop. Coming with a variety of radiator size options, the new Thermaltake cooling loops pack a number of RGB LEDs into their cooling fans, lighting up your PC’s interior in any color combination you can think of.

Although traditional water cooling loops were custom built by hardware enthusiasts with patience and a trust in their own ability to safely seal the loop, all-in-one, closed loop coolers make water cooling a PC much more convenient. Traditionally, they are not too pretty though, with matte-black the color of choice for most of them. Thermaltake does that with its new design but spices it up with some RGB lighting.

Available in 360mm, 280mm and 240mm radiator sizes with three and two cooling fans, respectively. The former two utilize 140mm impellers, while the latter comes with 120mm versions. Although there is going to be a performance difference between them, and the ones with larger fans should have a lower noise output, the look of each is similar.

The all-in-one’s pump is built into the back of the copper water block, keeping the loop simple and streamlined and all piping is braided with a fabric sleeve to make management easy and to reduce the impact on the case interior’s airflow.

They are all connected to the same CPU block, which along with the cooling fans has its own set of RGB LEDs. They can all be controlled through Thermaltake’s Riing Plus RGB software and smartphone application, which lets you tweak color outputs, lighting options, add effects, and keep track of information like fan speed, even controlling it manually, if needed.

Along with the option for a lighting thermometer function, the app can also issue a warning should certain temperature or fan-speed thresholds be breached, helping you stay on top of any issues with your system while it is in use.

The software is linked up with a specialized digital lighting controller box, which can be connected to five devices. They are all controlled by a single lighting controller but you can maintain as many as 16 in the software, so you can easily switch between different lighting modes and profiles.

We were so impressed with the features of Thermaltake’s Floe Riing system, that we incorporated one in our brand new AMD Ryzen Threadripper test rig.

No U.S. pricing information is as yet available, though Hexus lists system at 225 euros ($265) for the 360mm version, 185 euros ($218) for the 280mm, and 180 euros ($212) for the 240mm.

Our nearest sun-like star just got a bit more interesting

Why it matters to you

Two of Tau Ceti’s planets orbit in the star’s habitable zone and may support liquid surface water.

Four Earth-sized planets orbit our nearest sun-like star, Tau Ceti, according to a new study from an international team of astronomers. With masses as low as 1.7 the mass of Earth, the exoplanets are the smallest ever discovered around a nearby sun-like star, and two orbit within the star’s habitable zone.

What’s more, the detection method used by the research team represents a milestone in scientists’ ability to detect exoplanets by picking up on extremely slight movements in stars.

“We detected the planets by measuring the tiny periodic wobbles caused to the host star, Tau Ceti, by the gravitational pull of the planets orbiting it,” Mikko Tuomi, an astronomer from the University of Hertfordshire and coauthor of the study, told Digital Trends.

Fabo Feng

Astronomers use a handful of techniques to spot exoplanets, including direct imaging and measuring the decrease in brightness as a planet passes in front its star.

Toumi and his team used a method called radial velocity, which detects a star’s subtle movements caused by the tug of an exoplanet. But, since radial velocity relies on the pull of a planet, it is typically used to detect relatively massive planets.

“A real breakthrough [in this study] is that we were for the first time able to
detect periodic movement of a sun-like star of only 30 centimeters per second,” Toumi said. “This is the current record in precision and means that we are only a factor of three away from the ability to detect Earth-like planets orbiting such stars. Plenty of work is needed, but we are now finally approaching the ability to detect other Earths in the solar neighborhood.”

Tau Ceti is so similar to our sun that Toumi says, “they might as well be twins.” At just twelve light years away, the discovery of these exoplanets makes the system a place of increasing interest.

But, even though two of the planets are in the star’s habitable zone, it’s unclear whether they’re actually habitable or support liquid surface water. To find out, astronomers would need to use direct imaging to study the objects. That is beyond our current reach, but Toumi is optimistic that future giant ground-based telescopes or next-gen space telescopes will make that possible.

A paper detailing the research, which was accepted by the Astronomical Journal, is available online.

AdventureUltra is a USB battery pack for the outdoors that fits in your palm

Why it matters to you

This USB battery pack isn’t just built to survive in the outdoors. It also comes equipped with a standard AC wall outlet for keeping larger devices charged while you’re on the go.

USB battery pack manufacturer MyCharge has introduced a line of power banks designed specifically for use in the outdoors and other demanding environments. The new Adventure Series includes four models, each of which feature rugged cases and rechargeable batteries of varying size to help keep gadgets powered while you’re on the go. One of those portable chargers stands out from the others thanks to some unique features that will likely make it a favorite among frequent travelers and outdoor enthusiasts.

The AdventureUltra, which features a 13,400 mAh lithium battery, comes equipped with two USB-A (2.4A) and one USB-C (3.0A) ports for recharging smartphones, tablets, and other small electronic devices. As with most power banks these days, the charger is equipped with smart-sensing technology that allows it to automatically detect the fastest possible charging speed to provide just the right amount of energy for the gadget that is plugged into it. This helps prevent overcharging, which could potentially damage a mobile device. It also comes with a built-in LCD screen that indicates the current charge level of the onboard battery and which charging ports are active.

But what really separates the AdventureUltra from most other USB battery packs is that it also comes standard with a built-in AC power outlet. This allows users to power and charge a wider range of electronic devices, including LCD television sets, small laptops, drone batteries, and portable fans. It’s like having a lightweight (1 pound), portable generator that fits right in the palm of your hand.

MyCharge says the AdventureUltra is capable of putting out up to 45 watts of power. That translates to running a 42-inch flat-panel TV for up to three hours at a time, making it a great option for tailgaters. The portable charger is also compatible with laptops like the 12-inch MacBook or notebook/tablet hybrids such as the Microsoft Surface, making it handy for road warriors looking to extend the use of their computers while working remotely.

When creating the AdventureUlta, MyCharge chose to make it rechargeable only with its included AC adapter. That means that if you take it with you on the road, you’ll have to carry this adapter as well, rather than just relying on a standard USB wall adapter as most other power banks do. There is no doubt that using the AC adapter is faster and more efficient, but it would have been nice to have had another option for charging on the road.

The AdventureUltra is available now for $130. Visit MyCharge.com for more information.

Consumer Reports slams Microsoft’s Surface line, cites 25-percent failure rate

Why it matters to you

Microsoft is fairly new to PC manufacturing, so it’s only natural that it would have some growing pains. Still, it wouldn’t be a bad idea to keep that warranty handy if you own a Surface.

Microsoft’s Surface family suffered a major blow Thursday, August 10, as Consumer Reports not only pulled its recommendation for all Surface-branded products, but moved them into the dreaded “not recommended” category. The consumer watchdog publication cited concerns over longevity and a remarkably high failure rate in its statement summarizing its decision.

“New studies conducted by the Consumer Reports National Research Center estimate that 25 percent of Microsoft laptops and tablets will present their owners with problems by the end of the second year of ownership,” Consumer Reports said.

To clarify, it’s not just the new Surface Laptop that has drawn criticism from Consumer Reports, but the entire lineup — the Surface, the Surface Pro, Surface Book, and the new Surface Laptop. These products are now “not recommended” by the consumer watchdog publication, but a few products in particular received even more devastating news, in that their previous recommendations are being reversed.

Both the Surface Laptop, 128GB and 256GB versions, and the Surface Book, 128 and 512GB versions, are losing their previous recommendations on account of their unusually high failure rates.

Microsoft defended its products, stating that the Surface lineup is more reliable than Consumer Reports claims.

“Microsoft’s real-world return and support rates for past models differ significantly from Consumer Reports’ breakage predictability,” Microsoft told Consumer Reports. “We don’t believe these findings accurately reflect Surface owners’ true experiences or capture the performance and reliability improvements made with every Surface generation.”

Microsoft’s statement very carefully maneuvers around the Consumer Reports data, stating that the Surface improves with each generation, and that should be taken into account when considering failure rates.

Even if true, that avoids the question of current reliability. Stating that a product’s failure rate goes down with each successive generation doesn’t exactly speak to the core issue — that Surface products reportedly have a reputation for failing the people who buy them. The fact that they might fail less than they used to isn’t going to matter to someone who just shelled out upwards of $1,000 on a product that might only last around two years.

One reason for the reportedly high failure rates could be that Microsoft is relatively new to PC manufacturing.

“The reality is that Microsoft has very little experience in some of the newer categories it’s entering very rapidly, which may expose it to more risk of problems in manufacturing,” a chief analyst at Jackdaw Research, Jan Dawson, told Reuters.

The problem here is that Consumer Reports and Microsoft each have their own data supporting their respective conclusions. Of course, only one of these two companies actually has a vested interest in people believing the Surface products are reliable. The other just wants to make sure you’re able to make an informed decision about which products you buy.

This is Fitbit’s upcoming smartwatch

Fitbit is nearing the release of its next fitness-focused wearable.

Fitbit went on a bit of a spending spree late last year, purchasing both wearable-veteran Pebble as well as nascent smartwatch maker, Vector. With both companies under its roof, a lot of users were curious to see just what Fitbit would do with them. We’re now one step closer to knowing.

Wareable posted various photos of the upcoming watch from different angles, and it looks nice. There’s a huge heart rate sensor on the underside of the watch, and the watch will also feature GPS and water resistance up to 50 meters. Wareable speculates the heart rate sensor may use a unique pulse oximeter to measure how much oxygen is in the user’s blood, as well as a red sensor to provide a more accurate heart rate.

All of these components will be key to helping Fitbit compete with the Apple Watch and Garmin VivoActive line. There isn’t any mention of battery life, but previous Fitbit fitness trackers have advertised five days of use, so we’ll hopefully see close to that, too, especially given Pebble’s legacy in that regard.

The photos show a silver case with navy strap version, as well as a rose gold case with lighter blue strap. There will also be a darker case with black strap option. While these don’t look nearly as stylish as the round Vector Luna watch, they don’t look bad.

I’m sure most folks could get away with wearing these to work to count their steps throughout the day. In fact, the smartwatch resembles the Fitbit Blaze, which debuted a couple years ago.

The fitness band market is crowded with Android Wear and the Apple Watch and the high end, Fitbit, Garmin and others in the middle and devices like the Xiaomi Mi Band at the low end. Time will tell how successful Fitbit’s new watches are.

Are you looking forward to Fitbit’s next watch? Let us know down below!

Netflix increases Canadian prices by up to $2 a month

Netflix is taking a gamble that Canadian customers are addicted enough to eat the extra cost.

Netflix is increasing prices for Canadian customers between $1 and $2 depending on the plan. From Canadian Press (via CBC):

The popular video streaming service is hiking prices for new members effective immediately. It will do the same for existing users after notifying them by email in the coming weeks. Netflix’s standard plan will now cost a dollar more — or $10.99 a month — to watch content on two screens at a time.

The basic plan, which does not offer high definition video and only permits one streaming screen at a time, also goes up a dollar to $8.99 a month. Premium plan subscribers will pay $2 more for up to four simultaneous streams and ultra high-definition 4K content. It will now cost $13.99 monthly.

It’s the first price increase in nearly two years that affects subscribers in Canada.

What’s interesting here is that Netflix is announcing this price increase only days after it became clear that competitors like CBS and Disney, which owns ABC, Marvel, Disney and the Star Wars brand, sees the potential for significant market share in Canada as more people cut the cord.

Netflix used to have a significant disadvantage here in Canada, but since it pivoted to a lineup that emphasizes its own licensed and commissioned content, that content divide with the U.S. has largely faded. Netflix is still the only streaming service in Canada to offer Star Wars: The Force Awakens as well as the standalone Rogue One, and that relationship, despite Disney announcing its plans to pull its content from Netflix U.S., won’t affect Canadian customers anytime soon.

Some of the price increase can be attributed to continued weakness in the Canadian dollar, which is hovering around $0.80 USD.