All Chromebook touchpads will soon be cute enough to pinch (to zoom)

Although many modern devices support gestures like pinch to zoom, Chromebooks have been one notable exception from that list. Not for much longer though: Following the introduction of pinch to zoom to a select few Chromebooks, there’s now a pretty hard suggestion that all Chromebooks will soon support the feature.

The only Chromebooks that currently support pinch-to-zoom functionality are the Google Pixelbook, Chromebook Pixel, Samsung Chromebook Pro, and Chromebook Plus. They didn’t necessarily have the feature from launch, though; before it was added, hints began appearing on the Chromium Gerrit — Chrome OS’s open source code contribution tracker. That seems to be happening once again with all Chromebooks.

A merged commit has appeared on the Chromium Gerrit with mentions of a test deployment of “Pinch” control to “device which doesn’t explicity [sic] have pinch enabled.” As XDA-Developers points out, this commit comes just a few weeks after Google added support for Direct Manipulation on Chrome, which makes it possible for more nuanced multitouch gestures on Windows laptops with Precision Touchpads. Although that doesn’t necessarily mean such support will be added to Chromebooks, it could suggest that Google is putting greater developmental muscle behind gesture control.

There’s no indication from this Chromium commit about when we can expect the pinch-to-zoom functionality to make its way to wider Chrombooks, but it’s clearly in the works. If previous implementations on specific Chromebook devices are anything to go by, it should be introduced sometime in the next few months.

If you want to see whether your existing Chromebook has the new pinch gesture support in the coming weeks or months, all you need do is head to “chrome://flags” and search for “pinch,” as ChromeUnboxed explains. If it is available, you should see a flag titled “pinch scale.”

Chromebooks and Windows operate very differently from each other. If you’d like to know more about their differences, here’s our handy guide to the biggest pros and cons of each. Don’t forget they’re somewhat interchangeable though. If you’d like to learn how to install Windows on a Chromebook, we have a guide for that, too.

Editors’ Recommendations

• Rumored Chrome UI update could use darker grays to make it look cleaner
• Google Assistant one step closer to marrying Chrome OS, report says
• Microsoft Office suite finally arrives on Chromebooks via Google Play Store
• Future Chromebooks could make use of the Snapdragon 845 processor
• The best laptops you can buy

Who is Satoshi Nakamoto, cryptocurrency’s elusive creator?

Cryptocurrencies have revolutionized the finance industry and the way people perceive the concept of money. Digital assets that use cryptography to secure transactions and creation, cryptocurrencies are the first form of decentralized currency — meaning no bank or middleman controls its use.

One of the best-known forms of cryptocurrency is bitcoin. Created in 2009 by Satoshi Nakamoto, bitcoin is the first (and currently most valuable) cryptocurrency in the world. December 2017 saw the highest recorded value of the currency at more than $19,000. While the price of a single bitcoin has since fallen to around $10,000, even that is incredibly impressive considering bitcoin was only worth $1,000 at the start of the year.

Unlike other forms of currency, bitcoin is not backed by any central organization (like a bank or country) or by a physical item (like gold). It sits atop a public ledger blockchain, where a highly sophisticated mathematical formula creates scarcity and allows users to “mine” portions of the currency.

Creator of bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, is also credited with the invention of the first blockchain database, which set the foundation for more forms of cryptocurrency to emerge like Ethereum and Litecoin. However, despite the fact that Nakamoto is such an important figure in the world of modern finance, not much is known about the elusive cryptocurrency creator.

Satoshi Nakamoto is believed to be a Japanese-born man in his 40s, but the thing is, no one really knows for sure. Whether Nakamoto is a man, woman, or group of individuals is unknown as well, because the mysterious creator has somehow remained anonymous — despite the rising popularity of the cryptocurrencies that Nakamoto helped create.

Which begs the questions: Where did the name Satoshi Nakamoto come from if no one actually knows who this person is? Even though the name Satoshi Nakamoto is being used a placeholder until the real creator(s) come forward, the name itself certainly didn’t show up randomly.

An online profile under the name Satoshi Nakamoto was first used on the P2P Foundation website in 2008, a peer-to-peer networking site where the first papers on bitcoin were released. Another account under the same name  released Version 0.1 of the bitcoin software on Sourceforge in 2009. It’s clear that whether or not Satoshi Nakamoto is the cryptocurrency creator’s actual name or not, it’s the name they want us to know them by.

Nakamoto also communicated with users via email for a few years after the software’s release, but as not been involved with bitcoin since 2011. Nakamoto’s anonymity hasn’t stopped people from trying to figure out their true identity. A feature in Newsweek, which was released back in 2014, claimed to have discovered the true identity of Nakamoto, and pointed to a retired Japanese-American man living in California named Dorian Prentice Satoshi Nakamoto.

Dorian Nakamoto denied any role in the creation of bitcoin and says that he is not Satoshi Nakamoto, but some people weren’t convinced. The day after the Newsweek piece ran, a comment from the original Satoshi Nakamoto on P2P posted simply “I am not Dorian Nakamoto.”

Another feature, this time in The New York Times, claimed the creator of bitcoin was an American man of Hungarian descent named Nick Szabo.  While Szabo’s career and interest in bitcoin might point to his involvement in the creation of the first cryptocurrency, he has denied that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, so the trail runs cold again.

But the search for Satoshi Nakamoto has posed more questions, like what the unmasking of the bitcoin creator would actually mean for the future of the currency and cryptocurrencies as a whole.

Many people don’t seem to care who Nakamoto is, and unless Nakamoto one day decides to step out from the shadows, there isn’t really much we can do to find out their identity — and probably not much to be gained from it either.

Bitcoin hasn’t and never existed in a vacuum. It wasn’t something that suddenly showed up out of the blue, but was created by building off the ideas of multiple people over several decades. And while Satoshi Nakamoto helped push the industry to new limits, they weren’t the only person/people capable of doing so.

Satoshi Nakamoto has been instrumental in the cryptocurrency market for sure, but they also haven’t really been involved in it in any meaningful way since 2010. Most of the open-source code has been rewritten by a group of programmers whose identities are known, drawing focus away from Nakamoto. So while it might be interested in finally learn who Satoshi Nakamoto really is, it wouldn’t likely have a big impact.

However, despite their anonymity, Satoshi Nakamoto is estimated to be worth upwards of $20 billion (although the exact number varies widely from $6-20 billion, but they’re still a millionaire whichever way you spin it) and could be the 44th richest person in the world, according to Forbes.

Knowing who holds that much money (5% of the entire bitcoin stash) could definitely have lasting implications, but won’t likely affect the future of cryptocurrencies as a whole.

So for now the identity of the “father of cryptocurrency” will remain a mystery. But bitcoin and other currencies like it will continue to have lasting impacts on money for a very long time.

Editors’ Recommendations

• What is a blockchain? Here’s everything you need to know
• Go ahead, pass laws. They can’t kill bitcoin, even if they try
• What is bitcoin? Here’s what you need to know about it
• Kasotsuka Shojo is the world’s first cryptocurrency-themed pop group
• Bitcoin miners have extracted 80% of all the bitcoins there will ever be

How much are you willing to spend on a smartphone?

Phones aren’t going to get any cheaper, but how much is too much?

New phone season gets heated up in a big way next week when Samsung shows us the Galaxy S9. Two things are guaranteed once we start to see whatever it is companies making phones want to show us: there will be something from some company we really want, and it will be expensive. More expensive than last year because that’s how anything that uses money seems to work. That got me to thinking; how much is too much? How much money will you spend on a phone?

We all have our own limit on what we’ll pay. It’s going to be higher for some than it is for others but I think 2017 got close to everyone’s limit with phones like the Galaxy Note 8, Pixel 2 XL, and iPhone 8/X in range of a $1,000 price. I know it reached mine. Even mid-range phones are getting more expensive, as companies like OnePlus have higher prices. I have two thoughts on all this and wanted to share them and see what others think.

Phones got better

One thing positive we saw were phones in the middle of the price spectrum get “better”. The OnePlus 5 and 5T are the company’s best phones yet, and not by just a little bit. The same goes for high-profile companies like Motorola and for names we don’t hear as often like Alcatel.

I’m not saying this made any price increase worth it because that’s something everyone needs to conclude for themselves. Better internal specs (because companies like Qualcomm also made better stuff) and better construction from better materials and even better software don’t come free, though. Add in inflation, higher component costs because of trade policies and preparing for new trade policies and prices had to go up.

People we’re not afraid to spend a lot more

Three phones stand out when talking about the price tag: The Note 8, the Pixel 2 XL, and the iPhone X. All three approached or exceeded $1,000 depending on options included, and all three outsold projections of the companies that made them. But other phones, including the Galaxy S8 which is the driving force of the Android ecosystem, also got more expensive and sold amazingly well, too.

I’ll admit I was a bit concerned that the price hikes would make a difference in sales all around, but I was wrong and phones flew off of shelves the same as they have in previous years.

Following my train of thought (sometimes a dangerous practice but whatever), I have to wonder when we’re going to see a price that’s just too much for most people, if ever.

1,000 is a magic number

From people I’ve spoken to as well as my own thoughts, $1,000 is a limit. No matter how good a phone is or how bad we want it, spending more than a grand just won’t be happening. Of course, it depends on the phone, too. A phone had better be damn good if I’m going to spend $999 on it. Magical, even.

We all have that magic number in our head and just aren’t going to go past it. So let’s hear it: if someone makes a phone that is exactly what you want and need, how much are you willing to spend? Jump in the comments and let your voice be heard, because you never know who is reading.

Every Android phone with ARCore right now

Google’s AR platform is now available to more than just the Pixels.

You don’t need to own a Pixel from Google to take advantage of ARCore anymore! The platform has now been released to version 1.0, and with that comes a lot of exciting news for developers and users alike.

ARCore apps will start showing up in the Play Store soon, but what phones will be able to enjoy this new tech? Check out the list here, which we’ll be keeping updated as frequently as possible!

Phones with ARCore support

Google

• Pixel and Pixel XL
• Pixel 2 and Pixel 2 XL

Samsung

• Galaxy S7 and S7 edge
• Galaxy S8 and S8+
• Galaxy Note 8
• Galaxy S9 and S9+

LG

• V30
• V30+ (Android O only)

Asus

• Zenfone AR

OnePlus

• OnePlus 5

Excited to get started with ARCore? Make sure you have the framework app installed and get ready for some exciting new apps to head your way!

‘Ghostbusters World’ AR game is coming to Android and iOS this year

Using AR to promote movies isn’t entirely new. We’ve already seen official movie tie-in augmented reality apps for Spider-Man: Homecoming and the Jon Hamm vehicle, Marjorie. Now, though, Sony Pictures is taking things a bit farther with Ghostbusters World, a mobile AR game based on the popular film, television and comic book franchise. The title is currently in development with 4:33 Creative Lab and should launch sometime this year on iOS and Android.

Sony’s announcement comes just as Google released more information on its own official augmented reality toolkit for Android developers, ARCore 1.0. Similar to Apple’s own ARKit, Google’s version provides a framework to allow app makers bring virtual objects into the real world via compatible phones. Ghostbusters World will apparently get you out and about, battling and capturing hundreds of ghosts, Pokemon Go-style. The ghosts will come from all the different Ghostbusters media, including films, TV shows theme parks and video games.

“The Ghostbusters universe is rich in characters and Ghostbusters World is the perfect medium to get to know these characters in a whole new dimension,” said the original film’s director, Ivan Reitman, in a statement.

Source: Sony

Android’s official augmented reality toolkit is available to the public

Google’s take on a mobile augmented reality framework is no longer limited to a modestly-sized preview. It just released ARCore 1.0, letting anyone publish Android apps that take advantage of the toolkit to meld virtual objects with the real world. To no one’s surprise, Google has already lined up apps from big-name brands to take advantage of the new platform. Snapchat has an AR “portal” that takes you inside FC Barcelona’s Camp Nou stadium, while Porsche lets you explore the Mission E Concept as if it were parked in front of you. A number of games (such as Ghostbusters World and a range of titles from NetEase) and home furnishing apps (Sotheby’s, JD.com, Easyhome and Otto) are also on tap.

There is one catch, and it’s a significant one: you need a compatible phone. The 13 devices that support ARCore right now are common devices like Google’s Pixel phones, Samsung’s Galaxy S7/S8/Note 8 lines, LG’s V30, ASUS’ Zenfone AR and the OnePlus 5, but you’re out of luck if you have anything else. It will get better, though. Google is teaming with these and other brands (including Huawei, Motorola, Nokia, Sony, Vivo and ZTE) to bring ARCore support to their upcoming handsets.

On top of this, Google is promising a few upgrades to Lens… most notably, the chance that you can actually use it. The AR-based discovery feature will soon roll out to anyone using Google Photos in English, whether you’re using Android or iOS. At the same time, you’ll see Lens appear in Google Assistant on phones from Huawei, LG, Motorola, Nokia, Samsung and Sony. The AI-guided image recognition should receive its own boost, with better recognition for living creatures like dog breeds and flowers.

The ARCore launch is particularly important for Google. It’s widely considered the company’s direct answer to Apple’s ARKit, with a similar ability to convincingly place objects without needing special sensors or custom software. If Android didn’t have a ready-to-go AR platform, there was a chance Apple might dominate the category. We’ve already seen apps where clever AR features were iOS-exclusive simply because ARKit was the only standardized framework available. This levels the playing field, and that’s good news for AR apps as a whole — creators may be more likely to support the technology knowing they can bring it to a wide range of devices without having to write elaborate code.

Source: Google

Samsung revives Opera’s data-saving app as a Galaxy exclusive

Opera Max was a great way to keep track of what apps were siphoning data in the background and keeping (some of) your privacy intact. Then Opera announced it was shuttering the app. There’s a sliver of silver lining to that though: Samsung has stepped in and rescued the application from the great smartphone in the sky, renaming it to Samsung Max in the process. The downside? If you were a fan and using the app on something other than a Galaxy handset, you’ll have to say goodbye once Max drops its Opera branding.

As VentureBeat reports, the application has gotten a bit of a UI refresh, but also isn’t a VPN anymore. Instead, the app has a DNS masking feature that keeps your IP address intact. Samsung promises to keep updating Max’s data-saving and privacy protection measures. The app will come pre-installed on certain devices in developing nations including Argentine, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Mexico, South Africa, Thailand and Vietnam.

Of all of Samsung’s branded apps, this might be the most helpful and useful. After all, plenty of people already have a platform-agnostic mobile email client they like, or set of productivity apps. At least Max is useful for a broader set of users.

Via: VentureBeat

Source: Google Play

Android Go phones will be available soon

Android Oreo had quite the interesting feature lurking in its software: Go Edition, which was designed for smartphones with 1 GB of RAM or less. Today, the company announced that the first set of Android Oreo (Go Edition) phones will be unveiled next week and be available for purchase soon after that.

Over the last few months, Google has been introducing lightweight “Go” editions of its popular apps, such as Gmail and Google Assistant. It’s a concerted effort and catering to a traditionally underserved market in tech: Those who have older phones and who have purchased newer, but cheaper, phones. It’s especially important in developing areas, where people might not be able to afford the newest, most powerful phones. Now Google will give those users hardware that is dedicated to and optimized for Android Oreo (Go Edition).

Source: Google

In search of pixel perfection with the Analogue Super NT

The 16-bit aesthetic is the new vinyl. It taps into a growing vein of ’90s nostalgia, and it also reflects a longing for a tactile past world that just predates full-scale digitization. Fat, colorful sprites represent an era when technology was still analogue and full of exciting possibilities. The Super Nintendo is as much an emblem of this retro near-futurism as it is a game machine. But boy, is it also a great game machine.

Hence, nostalgia for the Super Nintendo is currently at its absolute peak. There are half a dozen or so clone consoles on the market and advanced emulators such as Higan that run with near-cycle perfection on high-end PCs. Then there’s Nintendo’s own incredibly popular SNES Mini. In short, there is no shortage of ways to play these classic games right now. All options have their strengths and drawbacks, but Analogue’s new Super NT retro console easily blows them all out of the water, delivering sprites with pixel-perfect accuracy, zero lag and considerable polish.

For years, Analogue has been delivering high-end retro consoles that run original carts and deliver pixel perfection seamlessly to modern televisions. The Super NT is the culmination of these efforts: a 99-percent-accurate recreation of the Super Nintendo in a consumer-friendly package. Analogue achieves this magic via field-programmable gate array (FPGA). Nearly all purpose-built consoles, including Nintendo’s own SNES Mini, run retro games through software emulation, which means they’re using a program to simulate the original Super Nintendo. But FPGA is an integrated circuit that is coded to recreate the architecture of the original Super Nintendo hardware itself.

To look at it another way, software emulation is like streaming a recording of a classic song while FPGA is playing the original vinyl on a modern turntable with digital outputs. For most consumers looking for a quick hit of nostalgia, software emulation is just fine. Many emulators deliver a mostly accurate and quality experience. But for enthusiasts seeking purity, software emulators just can’t compare to what the Super NT’s FPGA chip delivers.

To be clear, the Super NT is not the “perfect” SNES experience for purists. The absolute gold standard is to locate an original Super Nintendo 1CHIP console (a rarer revision of the hardware that outputs video over RGB) and either wire it into a high-end CRT monitor or run it through an expensive Framemeister or Open Source Scan Converter in order to hook it up to a modern TV. It’s a deeply nerdy experience that is time-consuming and space prohibitive, and it requires a strong knowledge of how old consoles work. But the Super NT is about as close to this gold standard as you could possibly get — plus, it is a pretty piece of hardware, and it plugs in with only an HDMI cable. For anyone who has spent weeks tracking down a good CRT or tweaking the settings on a Framemeister, the act of plugging the Super NT into a 4K TV and receiving pixel perfection with the click of a button is a magical experience.

As simple as it is to get started, the Super NT has a deep well of options that you can modify on the fly through a menu that has been cleverly programmed to run on the Super Nintendo CPU. You can adjust the resolution, the refresh rate and the aspect ratio. In my experience, 1080p output delivers the sharpest pixel-perfect image, and 720p is better suited for turning on scan lines (there are several options to customize your scan line thickness and improve brightness, which dulls when using scan line effects). Buffer-mode adjustments are available. Normally, the Super Nintendo runs at 60.09Hz, but with the zero-delay buffer option, you can adjust this to 60Hz, which removes any latency in the gaming experience (or there are options that more closely replicate the original experience).

Other adjustments available to tinkerers include interlacing options; pseudo high-res blending, which simulates certain techniques that made use of CRT monitors to create special “high-res” effects; and 64-sprite mode, which enables more sprites on-screen and fixes flicker in certain classically problematic games. These modes will give hobbyists plenty to play with, though they only really apply to select games. In my experience, 64-sprite mode eliminated a lot of the notorious flicker from R-Type III. I suspect that in time, retroheads will discover all kinds of new applications of these features, and recommended-settings regimens for each game will begin circulating.

It also works with all Super Nintendo peripherals (except light guns, which will require a CRT), such as Super Game Boy. And you can toggle regions and frequency to play PAL carts (though I didn’t have any on hand to verify this). In short, as Analogue founder and CEO Christopher Taber told me, the Super NT was “literally designed to be the end all, be all.”

The range of visual options are stunning (and a tad overwhelming), but for me the real “wow” moment came from the sound. Strictly in auditory terms, switching between the SNES Mini and the Super NT is night and day. SNES audio has always been notoriously difficult to emulate on the software level, but the FPGA chip’s hardware mimicry achieves the best achievable sound quality from games. It hits the difficult notes in Yoshi’s Island or Final Fantasy III perfectly.

Analogue

The Super NT is suffused with other quality touches. The interface’s font and colors are customizable, and even the dang LED power light is adjustable (rainbow throb is my jam)! In terms of product design, the console is wonderfully tactile. Made with a compact plastic shell a tad thicker than an original Super Nintendo and with a weighted base and rubber mat on the bottom, the console has heft and presence. I tested the black model, which felt perfectly at home with all the other sleek black boxes that live under a modern TV. The console feels good to touch, and touch it you will: Swapping carts is a tactile pleasure in its own right.

And the carts are probably what will make your mind up here, as you need Super Nintendo carts to play on this console. While the SNES Mini comes with 21 games pre-installed (including many of the best), you will need to head to eBay, Craigslist or your mom’s basement to hunt down your own carts to use with the Super NT. This will deter the casual nostalgia seeker. (However, the console does come with two pre-installed titles, Super Turrican: Director’s Cut — an extended edition of the original — and Super Turrican 2. Both are wonderfully frenetic action games.)

This fact belies the hidden costs of the console, one of its bigger drawbacks. You will likely need to buy not only carts but also a controller. You can plug in an original pad, but Analogue recommends the 8Bitdo SN30 wireless Bluetooth controller ($25) and Retro Receiver ($20), which are available in matching colors. The 8Bitdo feels very much like the original SNES controller and can be synced with other devices, such as PCs, Macs and even the Nintendo Switch — it’s a good standalone product in its own right but works extremely well with the Super NT.

These hidden costs add up. The console itself is $190, but add on one or two 8Bitdo pads and shipping fees and you’re looking at around $250 to $300. If you also need to build a library of carts, your total expenditure can swiftly hit $500. Stack this up against the SNES Mini, which delivers 21 top-shelf games and two controllers for $79, and it’s clearly the premium option. But if you want to track down a SNES 1CHIP, that’ll run you about $175 on eBay, and if you’re going that far, you’ll want to get a high-end CRT monitor. A 20-inch Sony PVM will set you back around $200. Considering this, the Super NT is the more affordable option.

There’s one other glaring drawback: The console currently only supports HDMI, so there is no way to output to a CRT monitor. Analogue says it will release an adapter that converts the digital signal out to RGB, component, S-Video and all those geeky options “in a month or two.” For a device that is built on retro fidelity, the lack of analog outputs out of the gate is disappointing.

So who is this console for? If you’re still here and you’re still interested, then chances are it’s for you. It’s for the hipster geek who loves retro games but not quite enough to track down a Sony PVM and a bunch of cables and rig up a 1CHIP SNES. Surprisingly, this is a bigger market than one would think. Demand has already far outstripped Analogue’s expectations: Pre-orders sold out before release, and the next run of pre-orders may follow suit, so keep a close eye on the stock if you’re on the fence.

Personally, the Super NT has focused my attention on Super Nintendo games in a way that the SNES Mini simply couldn’t. The play experience is far more accurate, but more importantly, the possibilities are far greater. Though I only tested the Super NT with about a dozen SNES games, Analogue says that it’s tested it with practically all 2,200 SNES and Super Famicom games ever made.

The SNES library is deep and contains some of the best games of all time. That library is well represented on the SNES Mini, but what grabs my interest are the games that for whatever reason didn’t make Nintendo’s cut. Chrono Trigger, Demon’s Crest, Blackthorne, R-Type, even Uniracers — a game that literally haunted my childhood with fever-dream nightmares of disembodied unicycles — are all on the menu. For me, the Super NT represents the possibilities of a deep dive into the richest and most varied video gaming catalog in existence.

The Super NT is a retro machine that somehow does not wallow in nostalgia — it looks and feels like it belongs under a flat panel in 2018. The design is thoughtful, tasteful and unobtrusive. Analogue has miraculously achieved a rare alchemy: 99-percent-perfect Super Nintendo accuracy, with zero hassle. The nerdy stuff about cabling and Framemeisters is gone, and the distracting intangible factors that come along with nostalgic consoles have been nullified too. Who touched these controllers before, and why are they so gummy now? Did this yellowing console come from a smoke-filled home, and what was that like? Why is life so much more complicated now anyway? With the Super NT, these questions are moot, leaving the games to speak for themselves.

Images: Analogue

The best 4K Blu-ray player

By Chris Heinonen

This post was done in partnership with Wirecutter. When readers choose to buy Wirecutter’s independently chosen editorial picks, it may earn affiliate commissions that support its work. Read the full article here.

After researching every currently available 4K Blu-ray player, and spending more than 20 hours testing the features and performance of six contenders, we’re sure that the Sony UBP-X800 is the best for most people. All the players we tested had indistinguishable 4K disc performance, but the Sony’s disc-loading speed, snappy menus, and superior 4K upscaling of DVDs and non-4K Blu-rays set it apart from the pack.

Why buy a 4K Blu-ray player

If you have a TV that can show off 4K resolution with true HDR and wide color gamut support, 4K Blu-ray discs will outperform any video you’ve watched at home and look more dynamic and colorful than what you’ll see in almost any movie theater. Although the majority of 4K video content comes from streaming services, 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray discs offer the highest video quality you can get at home today. A Netflix 4K HDR stream has a maximum speed of 15.6 megabits per second (Mb/s), while a 4K Blu-ray can average 100 Mb/s. This means more fine detail, less compression, fewer artifacts, and a better-looking image. Most 4K Blu-rays also contain lossless Dolby Atmos or DTS:X soundtracks, providing better audio quality than any streaming service.

How we picked and tested

Photo: Chris Heinonen

Right now there are only a handful of 4K Blu-ray players on the market. We evaluated what was available and called in almost every player we could. All the players included must-have features like dual HDMI outputs so that you can use them with older receivers that can’t pass 4K signals by passing audio to the receiver and video directly to the TV.

We tested the players using Samsung MU8000 LCD and Sony A1E OLED TVs. When we needed to test Dolby Vision, we used the Vizio P65-C1 that was our pick for best TV in 2016. Each TV was calibrated to be as accurate as possible, so we could see exactly what the disc was outputting on the screen.

Unfortunately, measurement hardware and software to ensure that each player is objectively outputting the correct data isn’t currently available. In lieu of objective measurements, we used multiple copies of the same UHD disc in different players plugged into the same TV (using different HDMI inputs). This allowed us to compare still images sourced from each player side by side.

Our testing showed that all players look identical when displaying 4K footage, as long as you leave them in their standard image mode. If there were small differences, we didn’t notice them, and we don’t think you will either. However, picture performance differed noticeably when playing back non-4K Blu-ray and DVD discs, so we focused much of our evaluation on the ability to upconvert legacy formats to 4K resolution.

Our pick: Sony UBP-X800

Photo: Rozette Rago

The Sony UBP-X800 4K Blu-ray player combines fast disc loading, a responsive interface, great Blu-ray and DVD upscaling, streaming content you can organize, and solid build quality to make it the best 4K Blu-ray player for most people. It plays Ultra HD discs as well as any player, but more important than that, it will make your existing Blu-ray and DVD discs look better than most other 4K Blu-ray players will, and it loads as fast as any player we tested.

The Sony does a better job scaling HD and SD content to 4K resolution than other players, which is important because there are a whole lot more non-4K discs than 4K ones. In comparison with the other 4K players, the Sony produced smoother curves, more readable text, less shimmer, and fewer edge enhancement artifacts with DVD and Blu-ray content.

Using the Sony UBP-X800 is easy, with settings clearly labeled to explain what they do. The main screen gives you a selection of all the source options. Everything is right up front so you don’t need to hunt around in hidden submenus. However, the menus themselves aren’t displayed in 4K, so they look softer and display less information than on competing players.

Runner-up: Samsung UBD-M8500

Photo: Rozette Rago

If our main pick isn’t available, the Samsung UBD-M8500 is a good alternative. It offers the same quality playback for 4K Blu-ray discs, a good section of streaming content, and an improved user interface that takes full advantage of the high resolution of 4K. The remote is small but easy to use and fits nicely in your hand, although like the Sony, it requires line of sight to work because it uses IR and not RF.

However, the Samsung’s upscaling of DVD and Blu-ray discs produces more artifacts and more jagged-looking curves compared with the Sony. It also doesn’t support playing 3D Blu-ray discs. This won’t matter to most people, but it will make it a worse choice for those with a library of those titles.

Upgrade pick: Oppo UDP-203

Photo: Rozette Rago

If you want even better looking upscaling of DVD and Blu-ray discs, or want Dolby Vision support and are willing to pay for it, the Oppo UDP-203 is the best 4K Blu-ray player available. It outdoes the competition by scaling lower-resolution video with fewer artifacts. It also offers an analog audio output if you need it for an older system that can’t handle audio over HDMI. However, it lacks any streaming service support, so you’ll need an additional 4K media player in your system. The UDP-203 also costs far more than any other player tested and, to our eyes, looks the same when playing 4K UHD discs.

If you need Dolby Vision or want the best player overall, the Oppo UDP-203 is it, but for most people paying two to three times as much for it compared with our main pick won’t be worth it. Although, Oppo does offer excellent service and support for its products if you do decide to invest, with a stronger warranty than Sony or Samsung.

This guide may have been updated by Wirecutter. To see the current recommendation, please go here.

Note from Wirecutter: When readers choose to buy our independently chosen editorial picks, we may earn affiliate commissions that support our work.