Prynt review: Augmented Reality comes to photos
Whether or not you are an avid photo social media user or poster, it’s hard to deny that photography is an intrinsic part of the smartphone life. But in the digitizing of our everyday lives, it’s easy to forget how nice it is to make this data physical. Then, it no longer isn’t just a representation of zeros and ones but instead a physical manifestation of a memory. Well, a Kickstarter campaign looked to do just that – bridge the gap between old and present, while adding a little bit of the future. This is our review of the Prynt photo case.
The Prynt case is, well, a printer – and that is why it is a little than a conventional case. It comes in a few different colors, but this while one is made entirely of plastic with all the bits and pieces needed to make small Polaroid like pictures. The main portion of the device is the mount that is detachable and can be changed depending on what phone is being used. In the Android world, the only phones that will work with Prynt are Samsung Galaxy S devices after version 5. Thankfully, a very recent update came out that added support for the Galaxy S7 – a bit too little too late, unfortunately, for my trip to Hawaii.
Loading up a phone into the Prynt requires the right bracket, but before any of that can occur, we have to load some Zink paper into the printer first. Zink paper is a fascinating technology – there is no ink involved because everything that is required to make the image is embedded into the fibers and layers of the paper itself, and the Zink printer will just make the magic come out from within. The printer comes with 10 sheets of paper already, and the instructions to load the paper are simple – just put the correct sheet and side down first and bring the hatch down. After a calibration sheet comes out of the printer, you’re good to go.
When mounted into the Prynt, the camera of the Galaxy device protrudes out just enough that you can hold the entire setup just like a normal point and shoot camera, complete with shutter button. The grip meaty enough that everything feel secure, but since the phone is being held by just the mircoUSB port in the bracket, it’s probably good idea not to put the rig in a position for the phone to slide top first out of the case.
So, you then fire up the Prynt app, available for download in the Play Store. The app requires a bit of setup and an initial connection to the case, but after that you are greeted with a viewfinder that can be used standalone on the smartphone yet is responsive to the shutter button found on the grip. And this is where the magic happens.
Whether in the case or not, hitting the shutter button on the Prynt app triggers the initial capture – unless you change it later, this is the frame that will be printed on the Zink paper and you will get a photo much like a Polaroid that can be physically shared or kept for tangible memories. Of course it is a bit more satisfying to have the phone in the case already, but this might not be ideal in every situation – more on that later. After hitting the shutter button, a six second video is recorded – that’s the futuristic part that Prynt, well, prints.
Prynts are stored in the phone that took them, and after the capture, a number of effects or filters can be applied to the pictures that are eventually printed out of the case. When ready, the phone needs to be connected to the case and then in the Prynt app the photo is selected and is rendered. There’s a really nice effect where the photo in question slides from the phone display in sync with the actual picture that is printed. Once it pops out, the photo is officially a physical memory – give it to the person you took the picture of or keep it for yourself!
But within the Prynt app is a special scanner that, when opened, can unlock more from the printed photo. That six second video that was recorded after the shutter press is actually embedded into the photo! The Prynt app – yes, even ones that are downloaded on other people’s phones, no matter what kind they have – can download the short video from the cloud and play the video based on the photo it is scanning. The best part – the video plays on the actual photo itself in augmented reality style! It’s not perfect – the photo needs to be plainly in view and slight skews in the angle can make the video clip and flip out. But when it works, it’s a wonderful effect that generally gets an awe-filled response. It’s also a nice way of showing off AR.
I used the Prynt case in Hawaii, hoping to get a few good memories on paper – but in using the Galaxy S7 at first, I ran into the compatibility roadblock. For the trip, I had to borrow a Galaxy S5 in the meantime. A few good clips came out of it, and it was definitely fun to get some pictures in this different way. That said, Prynt tends to be a bit too chunky and is quite clunky to use when out and about. It’s hardly pocketable and takes up a fair amount of space in a bag, which is less than ideal.
At the very least, the Prynt app can be used to capture and store clips it takes, meaning that it can be connected to the case later on to properly print each one out. That isn’t ideal for people who want to use the Prynt properly in the moment, but it is an option. In the case of my Galaxy S7, however, that meant that all of the clips I took that were not initially printable can now be created – how fortuitous.
But this all brings out another issue that we have with the Prynt case. It is a great idea that is actually executed fairly well – that is, if you have a Samsung Galaxy S device or an iPhone. We can’t help but think that this could have been a Bluetooth or Wi-Fi Direct enabled printer instead, meaning that the Prynt app could just transmit the data over a universal connection and make this an accessory with high compatibility. As it stands right now, the Prynt case is a concept made real by Kickstarter – it just needs that next evolution to bring it to the masses and to move it away from just the loyal following of backers it grew from crowdfunding.
And at $149, it is rather tough to recommend this as an accessory when it can really only be used by a particular segment of the Android population. Galaxy S users are an abundant bunch, don’t get us wrong, but in making this product more universal to the masses, the recommendation would then be a no-brainer. Thankfully film isn’t too huge a pill to swallow, with the price of Zink paper basically coming in at about 50 cents a pop. That might sound like a slight penny, but consider for a moment that Polaroid cameras require film at much higher prices and none of them have the cool AR capabilities of Prynt.
We hope to see more accessories like this in the future, especially in a wireless solution that brings the fun to more than just some of the smartphone populace. We need to see more fun products like this that don’t just think in one direction – and in bucking that trend, Prynt takes advantage of current smartphone photography, makes it old-school tangible, and adds in a touch of our undeniably cool future.
What do you think of Prynt and do you like the idea of bringing AR to photos? How else could companies combine the past and the future in the present? Let us know your views in the comments below!
Buy the Prynt now
Gaming headset review roundup: Five options, one favorite
As much as we’d all love surround sound in every room where we have a TV, it isn’t always feasible. Be it budgetary reasons or living in an apartment with roommates who don’t share your enthusiasm for late-night explosions, sometimes 5.1- or 7.1-channel audio is out of reach. Luckily, there are plenty of headphones to pick from. But that too comes with its own set of conundrums: Where does one even begin in that sea of choices?
We’ve rounded up five options at a variety of price points to help make your decision a little clearer. With this edition, we’re looking at the PlayStation Gold wireless headset, the Xbox Wireless Stereo Headset, the Astro A30 and A40 and, finally, the Blue Lola as a wildcard.
PlayStation Gold ($100)
The PlayStation Gold is extremely simple to set up: Plug the included USB receiver into an open spot on your PlayStation 4, power the headphones on and that’s it. Overall, the build quality is a little flimsy (one of the trim pieces on the headband fell off when I was unboxing the unit), and the hinges on the foldable portion of the band aren’t very firm. Add in the stiffness of the volume rocker and chat/audio rocker — not to mention the garish blue accents on the band — and it’s clear that the Gold won’t be winning any design awards.
Downloading the companion app from the PlayStation Store gives you access to custom presets for a smattering of games including Uncharted 4: A Thief’s End, Destiny, Batman: Arkham Knight and Ratchet and Clank. There are also some generic presets for shooters and fighting games, along with options for custom equalizer settings, movies and music.
The headset itself only has room for the built-in preset and one custom setting. That makes it cumbersome to swap from one game-specific setting to another. First you need to quit your current game, open the app, then wire the headset to the PlayStation 4 to transfer the new preset. It’s clunky, and honestly, the presets feel a little gimmicky anyway. Sure, some have more bass than others, or gunfire sounds a little different, but for me it wasn’t worth going back and forth. If there were room for more than one user-chosen EQ curve, it’d be a different story, but as it stands, I used the “Custom 3” setting for the majority of my testing.
How does the Gold actually sound? Pretty good. The virtual surround was plenty convincing, but at the highest volume, the ear cups were rattling on my skull. It was uncomfortably loud, even to my concert-deafened ears. The good news is that the sound field was detailed and there wasn’t any white noise at high volumes — an issue with other, more expensive headsets. As far as voice chat quality goes, my friends said I sounded distant, even though the built-in mic was only a few inches from my mouth.
My favorite feature is that the headset automatically turns off with the PS4 itself as a battery-saving measure, which is perfect for late-night gaming sessions when I fall asleep with the controller in my hands. The headset basically requires this: After two four-hour sessions I had to recharge it. It’s very much like the DualShock 4 controller in that respect.
Xbox One Stereo ($60)
Of all the headphones I tested, the Xbox One Stereo Headset surprised me the most. They’re the cheapest of the bunch, at $60, but for the money they offer well-balanced sound and solid build quality. Sure, they’re only two-channel, but a vast majority of (if not all) headsets boasting “surround sound” use software to simulate a 5.1- or 7.1-channel sound field from a few drivers. That’s because it’s tricky to cram multiple drivers into each ear cup while keeping the size, price and weight down.
Insert the relatively lightweight headset into the 3.5mm jack on your controller (or use the included headset adapter for older paddles) and you’re good to go. Unlike plugging a headset directly into the PS4’s DualShock 4, there are no momentary audio cutouts when onscreen action gets heavy. What’s more, the Xbox’s headset volume is incredibly loud.
I didn’t expect this amount of bass either. I’ll almost always ask for more, of course, but as I plumbed the depths of the research facility in Inside, the lab groaned pretty convincingly. Was the sound as deep as what my 12-inch Klipsch subwoofer reproduces? Of course not. But for a cheap pair of headphones, the Xbox One Stereo is impressive.
If I have one gripe, though, it’s that the highs sound clipped. In Forza Horizon 2, that makes squealing tires sound cheap and not nearly as distinct against the game’s rock and dance-music radio stations.
Astro A30 ($160) and Astro A40 TR ($250)
Astro has long made my favorite gaming and media headphones. The problem is price. With the home-theater-replacement A50s running $300, the number of people spending as much on headphones as they would on an Xbox One S is likely pretty low. For $160, though, you can get the A30 on-ear model with a Mixamp Pro. Or, for $250, the new A40TR and matching Mixamp Pro TR — which uniquely has a few streaming-specific audio options. These Mixamps are essential to Astro’s gear, as they’re an inline amp for the headset. They provide the power and sound processing and are basically what makes Astro’s gear sound the way it does. To bypass the Mixamp and plug either pair of headphones into a gamepad would be missing the point of why you bought Astro stuff in the first place.
As much as I love my pair of battle-worn MLG Edition A40’s from 2011, they had one problem that Astro still hasn’t solved: Each Mixamp or base station supports only one digital optical input apiece. The input situation is the lone caveat affecting anyone with more than one console, because switching between a PlayStation and an Xbox while retaining full audio fidelity means getting up and swapping fiber-optic cables. This quirk persists with the A30 and A40 kits I tested as well. Not only that, but the amps are powered via USB, which halves the number available on the PS4. This also means you’ll be stretching cables across the living room if you want to use either system from your couch.
The build quality on both headsets is top-notch, as always. But I had a hard time keeping the A30 from sliding off the back of my head unless I was sitting up straight. The ear cups also felt tight on my admittedly large skull. The bass response here never felt overbearing; rather, it complemented whatever was happening on-screen. Bass notes are deep and help round out the soundscape. Running around the Scottish countryside in Uncharted 4 with enemy dynamite exploding somewhere off in the distance sounded great, with tons of ambient detail standing out against thunderous booms.
Same goes for spelunking around a pirate cave full of dripping water and creaking suspension bridges in Uncharted 4. Both the A30 and A40 share another trait in that, in the Battlefield 1 alpha, the high-pitched brap at the end of a machine gun’s fire sounds a little crispy. Fully automatic weapons in Uncharted 4 sounded fine, however.
The over-ear A40 uses a different Mixamp that has an altogether unique sound versus that of the A30. Everything is deeper, with impressive dynamic range. For an A/B comparison, at one point I swapped the A30 into the TR amp and got an altogether different sound than I did with the stock Mixamp. Expectedly, they took on characteristics present in the A40, albeit a little less clear and defined. When plugged into their respective inline amps, both headsets sound great, and effectively block out the sounds of early-morning bird chirping and the fountain outside my window.
Neither is a bad choice; it’s just a matter of how much you want to spend.
Blue Lola ($250)
One of the best aspects of new video-game consoles is that you can simply plug a pair of normal headphones right into your gamepad. My coworker Billy was a big fan of the Blue Lola headphones, so I figured I’d give them a shot as a gaming headset. The biggest problem here is that on the PS4 the max volume level out of the controller is actually pretty low. That isn’t an issue with the Xbox One, however. The Lola accurately picked up subtle details like a hiss of white noise coming from behind a newly opened door in Inside, for instance. Meanwhile, the honk of a goose passing over France in Battlefield 1 alpha was distinct among the sounds of tanks, biplanes and other weaponry.
The plush over-ear design means that the relative quietness doesn’t detract from keeping ambient noise from polluting the onscreen action. Even better, the design and relatively light weight make the Lola comfortable for extended sessions. If you already own a pair, don’t hesitate to plug them into your gamepad of choice. That said, there isn’t a compelling reason to buy it specifically as a gaming headset — especially without a built-in mic for chat.
Wrap-up
Picking a “best headset” here is hard. That’s because the decision mostly comes down to how much you’re willing to spend. Each headset performs well and has its idiosyncrasies, but none are what I’d call bad. The Xbox headset happens to be my personal favorite, due to its sheer simplicity. But as you might expect, it’s at its best when paired with the Xbox One.
The overall crown ultimately goes to the Astro A30’s, on account of how versatile they are. Their lightweight, understated design makes them easy to wear outside of your living room, and at $160 you’re getting access to the best-in-class audio quality that Astro is known for.
LG LFXS30786S French Door Refrigerator with Bluetooth Speaker review – CNET
The Good Performance was very strong, even in the Door-in-Door compartment, where temperatures typically run a bit high. The built-in Bluetooth speaker is convenient and easy to pair with, and offers decent sound quality for kitchen listening.
The Bad The build looks a little basic, and doesn’t come in black stainless steel unless you downgrade to the model without the Bluetooth speaker. Also, the different settings in the Glide N’ Serve drawer didn’t actually do anything useful.
The Bottom Line This is a sensible high-end upgrade with no major weak spots of note. If you’re a fan of Door-in-Door fridges and you like listening to music or podcasts while in the kitchen, then it belongs on your wish list.
Visit manufacturer site for details.
Why doesn’t every fridge have built-in Bluetooth speakers? After all, plenty of us like to turn on NPR or a podcast as we’re cooking breakfast or washing dishes — packing speakers into an always-powered appliance seems like an obvious way to clear up precious counterspace.
All of which is to say that I like the LG LFXS30786S, a high-end French door model that does exactly that. It’s another one of LG’s Door-in-Door refrigerators, with a button on the right door handle that lets you open the door’s front panel to access the in-door shelves without actually opening the refrigerator. And, like most of the rest of LG’s Door-in-Door fridges, it’s expensive, retailing at a cool $4,000.
It’s a very good refrigerator, though. You can’t get it in black stainless steel unless you downgrade to a similar-looking, equally expensive model that doesn’t have a built-in speaker, but it still looks decent and feels sturdy to the touch. Speaking of that speaker, it’s convenient and easy to use, and its sound quality passes the ear test, at least for kitchen listening. Cooling performance was impressive, too, with fantastic accuracy and consistency in the body of the fridge, and better-than-average temperatures in that Door-in-Door compartment. Simply put, there’s a lot to like about the LFXS30786S, and not a lot of notable weaknesses. If a speaker fridge sounds like a smart upgrade to you, it deserves a look.
This LG fridge packs a set of speakers
See full gallery
1 – 5 of 16
Next
Prev
Design and features
The LG LFXS30786S looks like the rest of LG’s fleet of French door fridges. That’s not a bad thing per se, but given that LG hasn’t made any major design tweaks to its French door lineup since the debut of Door-in-Door a few years ago, it’s a look that feels slightly stale. Certain high-end LG models have started offering black stainless-steel finishes, which helps — but not the LFXS30786S.
Still it’s a decent design that feels well-built inside and out. The touch controls look classy and understated, with white LEDs that shouldn’t clash with your kitchen decor. The 19.5-cubic-foot fridge interior is spacious and well-designed, with drawers that glide smoothly in and out and spillproof shelves that were easy enough to rearrange for me to do it one-handed. Even the entire bottom shelf slides out to help you reach items stashed in the back — an especially nice feature for a fridge that’s as deep as this one.
With the Slim Spaceplus ice maker, there isn’t anything blocking off the door shelves.
Chris Monroe/CNET
I’m a fan of LG’s “Slim Spaceplus” ice maker, too. It’s packed entirely inside of the door — a nice differentiator from competing French door models like the Samsung Food Showcase refrigerator, which stick it up on the top shelf. That approach costs you storage space, and also typically means you’ll have an unsightly bulge in the door to catch the ice that falls from above. In a lot of cases, those bulges block off the door shelves below them. No such problem with the LFXS30786S.
As for the Bluetooth speaker, you’ll find it on the front of the refrigerator’s top rim. There’s a single button on it — give it a press, and the speaker will go into pairing mode, allowing you to discover it on your phone and sync things up.
The speaker runs the near-width of the fridge, but the doors close over top of it. I was worried the sound quality would be a bit muffled as a result, but that wasn’t the case. Voices came through crisp and clear as I listened to a podcast in our fridge testing lab, and music sounded good to me, too (and to my co-workers when I sought out second and third opinions). You won’t quite get the rich fidelity and depth of sound that you’d expect from a larger, fancier speaker, but it sounds a lot better than you’d probably expect from a refrigerator, and certainly good enough for casual kitchen listening.
Cooling performance was steady at the default, 37-degree setting. The body of the fridge (blue lines) stayed right on target.
Ry Crist/CNET
Chris Monroe/CNET
Performance and usability
LG fridges have fared particularly well in our performance tests, and the LFXS30786S was no exception. At the default, 37-degree setting, the main shelves were dead-on, holding to an average temperature of 37.4 degrees F. That’s about as good a result as we’ve seen, and one that’s well below the FDA’s food safety benchmark of 40 degrees F. The drawers and the left door shelves performed well, too, averaging out to 36.6 and 37.5, respectively.
Kodak Pixpro SP360 4K review – CNET
The Good The Kodak Pixpro SP360 4K is a clear improvement over the original’s video quality. Single-camera 360-degree video and photos don’t require stitching. A Dual Pro Pack of cameras makes it possible to create spherical video with its bundled basic stitching software. Videos can be uploaded to YouTube and Facebook. Mobile app makes it easier to change settings and gives you a preview of your shot.
The Bad The Dual Pro Pack is priced for serious hobbyists and pros and will require better software than Kodak’s included solutions for the best results. Included stitching software is for video only. The bundled dual-camera mount is a pain to use and no simple tripod mount is included.
The Bottom Line The versatile Kodak Pixpro SP360 4K is a 360-degree camera and 4K-resolution action cam rolled into one. You’ll need better software than what’s provided to get the most from it, though.
Several of the companies rolling out consumer 360-degree cameras this year are new to the category, but not JK Imaging. The global licensee of the Kodak brand released the Pixpro SP360 in 2014, a tiny camera with a single big fisheye lens that can capture a 360-degree view on the horizontal axis and 214-degree angle of view to cover the vertical axis.
For 2016, the Pixpro SP360 4K widens the field of view to 235 degrees and ups the resolution for better detail than its predecessor. Plus, with just one lens, you get immersive content without needing to stitch together two or more images. And if you want full spherical imaging, Kodak makes that possible, too — for a price.
At $900 (£750 and about AU$1,200 converted) for the SP360 4K Dual Pro Pack, it’s not for someone who wants to casually shoot a few seconds of 360-degree video to post to Facebook or YouTube. Not that you couldn’t do that, just that there are less expensive and easier-to-use options like the Ricoh Theta S. What the SP360 4K Dual Pro Pack buys you is shooting flexibility in one box.
View full gallery
The SP360 4K Dual Pro Pack.
Sarah Tew/CNET
With two cameras, you can mount them back to back and then stitch the video together with software to create 3,840×1,920-pixel resolution spherical video. Or you can use them separately to capture two different 360×235-degree videos. Or, because each camera can shoot flat 16:9-aspect video at resolutions up to 4K UHD (2160p), you can use them like you would regular cameras and mount them at different angles to create more compelling videos.
This flexibility is what you don’t get with single-body cameras such as the point-and-shoot Ricoh Theta S or mountable models like Samsung’s Gear 360. The other nice part of the SP360, you can always start with the $500 single-camera Premier Pack, which comes with a bunch of mounting accessories, and then add another SP360 4K for $450 if you decide you want to make spherical videos. Again, if you want a simpler — and possibly cheaper — camera for spherical video you’ll want to look elsewhere, but if you want the potential to do more, consider the SP360 4K.
View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET
The Premier Pack’s accessories are geared more for action cam-type uses including suction cup, handle bar/pole and helmet mounts. The Dual Pro Pack, on the other hand, will set you up for more stationary use with its selfie stick that can be mounted on a tripod as well as the suction cup mount and a mount to hold the kit’s two cameras back to back.
This dual-camera mount is, unfortunately, a pain to use. It firmly holds the cameras, but to attach or remove them from the mount you’ll need a screwdriver or a coin because I guess thumbscrews would’ve been too easy. The main issue is you need to remove the cameras to charge them or swap their batteries, connect them to a computer, or access their microSD card slots.
You can modify the included mount or pick up this 3D printed one to make the ports and card slots accessible. Also, since the cameras have standard 1/4-20 tripod mounts, you can create your own for your particular application. The cameras can actually be spaced pretty far apart because of how wide its lens is. So wide, in fact, Kodak was able to create a mount for 3DR’s Solo drone that puts a camera on the top and bottom. (You can check out a video playlist using the mount on YouTube.)
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet review – CNET
The Good Lenovo’s ThinkPad X1 Tablet offers modular add-on options, and has a sharp display and a great keyboard.
The Bad The Intel Core m3 base model is not the fastest machine around, and adding faster parts and optional modules can get expensive. There’s no slot or magnetic anchor for the optional stylus.
The Bottom Line The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 tablet isn’t as slick as some other Windows tablets, but its modular add-ons give it a cool built-to-order feel.
Lenovo’s ThinkPad brand is best known for professional-grade laptops, but it also includes hybrids and even tablets. The latest is the high-end ThinkPad X1 Tablet, which stands out by offering not only a standard keyboard cover, but also a series of modular add-ons (some available now, some coming later), making this potentially a very flexible system.
The X1 Tablet starts at $1,029 in the US, which gets you an Intel Core m3 processor and the keyboard cover. Similar configurations start at £1,049 in the UK and AU$1,899 in Australia. Upgrades are available for the processor, storage and other components, and you can also swap Windows 10 for Windows 10 Pro. We tested a version with a Core m5 CPU, which costs $1,300.
View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET
There’s no shortage of Windows tablets these days. The Huawei MateBook comes to mind, as do the Surface Pro 4 and even Lenovo’s hybrid Yoga line. And while ThinkPads have always been geared toward enterprise or business users, many recent ThinkPads are sharp-looking enough to appeal to consumers as well.
The Core M processor means the device can go fanless, and while the Core m3 is not as powerful as the Core i3/5/7 CPUs in mainstream laptops and tablets, it still performs well enough for most mainstream tasks. For storage, the base model has only a 128GB SSD, although a microSD card slot is there for expansion.
Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet
| 12-inch, 2,160×1,440 touchscreen display |
| 1.1GHz Intel Core m5-6Y57 |
| 8GB DDR3 SDRAM |
| 128MB (dedicated) Intel HD Graphics 515 |
| 256GB SSD |
| 802.11ac wireless, Bluetooth 4.0 |
| Windows 10 Home (64-bit) |
If you want a device that will have people stopping and staring when you take it out in public, this is not that device. It’s built more for productivity and completing tasks than looking good and garnering attention. The design is almost industrial, in matte black with sharp angles rather than smooth curves.
View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET
Like the Surface series from Microsoft, the X1 Tablet has a kickstand. However, the Lenovo version is hinged on the bottom, and opens into an L-shape, where most other tablet kickstands are hinged midbody. This makes the X1 Tablet feel more like a traditional laptop, plus it makes it easier to use on your lap.
Those who don’t like having only USB-C ports and who don’t want to carry around dongles will be happy with the port setup. The X1 does charge through its USB-C port, but it also has a regular USB port, DisplayPort, headphone jack and microSD card slot. It is pretty nice to have a regular USB port in a sea of devices that are opting for just USB-C. The bottom of the device has a proprietary port for the keyboard attachment or for the different modules.
Moto G4 and G4 Plus review: Bigger and (mostly) better
When it comes to getting the most smartphone for your dollar, the Moto G line has been your best choice for the past few years. We adored the previous model, which came in at a mere $180. Now with the Moto G4 and G4 Plus, Motorola is literally aiming to make its budget lineup bigger and better. They’ve got larger and sharper screens, improved cameras and, of course, speedier processors. With those upgrades come compromises, though. For one, they’re more expensive: The G4 starts at $200 and the G4 Plus at $250. Motorola also made some curious design decisions, which in many ways feel like a step back. Still, they both manage to carry the mantle of Smartphone Value King.
Hardware
You won’t find any premium aluminum or chamfered edges on the G4 and G4 Plus. They’ve got practical and simple plastic cases. Still, they don’t feel like budget phones. Their curved edges make them easy to hold, and the slightly textured rear cover feels a bit luxurious against your palm. Both phones are also noticeably larger than any previous Moto G, thanks to their 5.5-inch 1080p screens. At least they’re thinner than their 11.6mm thick predecessor, clocking in at just 7.9 millimeters to 8.9 millimeters. Strangely enough, they weigh the same 155 grams (0.34 pounds) as before.
The G4 and G4 Plus feel pretty solid for plastic encased phones. There’s little flex or creaking when gripped tightly. Long-term durability might be a concern though — somewhere during my week of testing I nicked the top of the G4 Plus’s plastic edge. I never dropped it, so your guess is as good as mine as to how it got damaged. It does make me worried about how well they’d stand up to months of everyday use.
Both phones sport removable back covers, just like all the previous Moto G models. In addition to the nano-SIM slot, there’s a microSD slot for up to 128GB of additional storage. They pack in 3,000mAh non-removable batteries, a nice bump from the last Moto G’s 2,470 mAh offering. It’s a shame that the battery can’t be swapped out, but it’s also large enough that that shouldn’t be a huge issue. (We didn’t have a problem with it last year, either.)
Powering all of this budget goodness are 1.5GHz Snapdragon 617 octa-core processors. Both phones offer 16GB of storage by default, but you can bump up to 32GB with the G4 (a no-brainer $30 premium) or 64GB with the G4 Plus (for another $100). They come with 2GB of RAM, though the 64GB G4 Plus gives you a luxurious 4GB of RAM.
Given that they both share so much hardware, you’re probably wondering what makes the G4 Plus, well… Plus? The most obvious difference is the fingerprint sensor on its front, which sits right below the software home button. The G4 Plus also packs in a 16 megapixel rear camera with phase detection and laser autofocus. The G4, on the other hand, has a 13 megapixel shooter without the added niceties.
One unfortunate downgrade from last year: Neither phone is waterproof. Instead, Motorola is calling them “water repellant,” thanks to a “nano-coating” technology that protects them from spills. That means they should be fine during light rain, or if you spill coffee on them. Just don’t go fully submerging them in anything.
Display and sound
There’s nothing budget about the 5.5-inch 1080p displays on the G4 and G4 Plus. They’re not quite as fancy as the quad HD displays we’re seeing in some flagships, but they still pack in 401 pixels per inch, which is plenty sharp for typical usage. Colors were bright and bold, even in direct sunlight, and viewing angles were surprisingly great. I didn’t notice much of a difference between my iPhone 6S while reading long articles from Pocket and the New York Times app. Videos also looked uniformly great. The big downside is that they’re less capable when it comes to mobile VR. It’s no wonder they’re not Google Daydream ready (though nothing is stopping you from plugging them into a Google Cardboard headset).
On the sound front, Motorola made the curious decision of replacing the last Moto G’s solid stereo speakers with a single one. It’s plenty loud, but it doesn’t sound nearly as good as before. Now that Bluetooth speakers are cheap and small, I’d recommend just snagging one as an accessory.
One nice feature that I never thought I’d have to call out in 2016: both phones have headphone jacks! For the uninformed, you use them to connect a wide variety of audio devices, including headphones. Someone should tell Motorola that these audio ports, which have been universally supported for decades, would be a nice addition to their flagship Moto Z lineup. That’s especially true for the Z Force, which is thick enough to fit a headphone jack. (Yes, the Moto Z comes with a dongle, but that comes with plenty of compromises. You won’t be able to charge the phone when the dongle is plugged in, for example.)
Software
Motorola delivered a nearly stock OS on the G4 and G4 Plus, specifically Android 6.0.1. Marshmallow. The phones are devoid of the junkware and sponsored apps you often find on budget devices. None of this is new for Motorola, it’s been trying to deliver vanilla versions of Android since it was under Google. But it’s nice to see the company stick with that philosophy under Lenovo.
Motorola’s unique gestures, which made their debut on the original Moto X, once again make an appearance. Twisting either phone twice, similar to turning a door handle, quickly loads up the camera from anywhere in the OS. Making a double-chopping motion turns their flashlights on and off. What’s particularly nice is that both features work consistently even when the phones are in standby mode.
Camera
This is where the Moto G4 and G4 Plus truly diverge. Should you settle with a 13 megapixel camera, or spend the extra cash for the G4 Plus’s 16 megapixel one loaded with autofocusing upgrades? Based on my testing, the G4’s camera is a bit hit or miss. Sometimes it delivered sharp and vibrant photos, but sometimes its color rendering was all off. It was also a constant disappointment in low light. The G4 Plus was a lot more consistent — it was able to lock onto subjects much more quickly, and it was actually useful in low light. Looking at both phones shows how far we’ve come in the world of mobile cameras. But, if I had to choose, I’d opt for the G4 Plus’s shooter without any hesitation.
While Motorola used a light touch with most of the software, its camera app is a very different experience from Google’s stock entry. There’s a radial exposure meter right next to the focusing ring, which lets you lighten or darken the image by dragging it up or down. Flash, HDR and timer settings are also on the left side of the screen, instead of the top. If you want to take panoramic photos, or simply want manual controls, you’ll have to use a separate app, like ProShot or Open Camera.
Performance
While I was bracing for a slow experience with the Moto G4 and G4 Plus (due to increased rendering demands for 1080p screens, last year’s display was only 720p), both phones surprised me with their relatively smooth performance. Sure, they’re not as instantaneously zippy as expensive flagships, but they also don’t feel like “budget” devices. Browsing around Android Marshmallow, launching multiple hefty apps like Pokemon Go, and juggling through them was relatively painless. There was the occasional slowdown on the G4, but nothing show-stopping. If anything, their performance feels more in line affordable mid-range phones like the Nexus 5X.
And when it came to demanding usage, I was surprised by how well both phones held up. I was able to capture 1080p videos of both phones’ displays using the AZ Screen Recorder app while running Pokemon Go and jumping through several apps. The Moto G4 showed a bit of slowdown, but Pokemon Go was still totally playable. And the resulting video didn’t have any major hiccups or dropped frames. The Moto G4 Plus with 4GB of RAM fared even better, with no slowdown during screen recording.
Moto G (2014)
AndEBench
16,159
16,371
4,259
3,929
Vellamo 3.0
2,762
2,819
1,992
1,669
3DMark IS Unlimited
9,841
9,851
4,518
4,679
GFXBench 3.0 Manhattan Offscreen (fps)
6.6
6.6
1.7
N/A
CF-Bench
61,030
60,998
20,999
14,470
The benchmarks for both phones reflect the strong performance I saw. Compared to last year’s Moto G, they scored four times higher in AndEBench, three times faster in CF-Bench and they were more than twice as fast when it came to the 3DMark Ice Storm Unlimited. Of course, benchmarks aren’t everything, but huge performance bumps like these are noteworthy. I wouldn’t have dared play a complex 3D game on the last Moto G, but the G4 and G4 Plus ran games like Racing Rivals without any issue.
The fingerprint sensor on the G4 Plus was easy to set up, and it had no trouble accurately recognizing my fingers. Its placement on the face of the phone is confounding, though. Motorola would have been better off placing it on the rear of the phone like LG, or making it an actual home button like Samsung and HTC.
As for battery life, neither phone disappointed. Their 3,000mAh offerings had no trouble lasting me throughout a full day, even when I decided to go on some impromptu Pokemon hunts. In our test, which involves looping an HD video at 50 percent brightness, they both lasted around 12 hours and 30 minutes. The previous Moto G, lasted 10 hours and 40 minutes.
The competition
At $200 for the Moto G4 and $250 for the G4 Plus, both phones are practically in a class of their own. There are cheaper phones out there, including Motorola’s own Moto E and HTC’s $179 Desire 530, but they all have significantly worse performance in every respect. If you wanted a big upgrade, you could step up to the Nexus 5X, which currently sells for between $280 and $350, and remains one of the best Android phones on the market. Beyond that, there are the affordable high-end options like the $399 OnePlus 3.
If you’ve only got $200 to spend, there’s no better option than the Moto G4 right now. Stepping up to the G4 Plus gets a bit more confusing. If you want the 64GB version with 4GB of RAM, you’d have to shell out $300. At that point, the Nexus 5X is more tempting thanks to its faster hardware, though you’d have to live with its smaller 5.2-inch screen.
Wrap-up
Motorola’s big problem with these new phones is that the last Moto G was simply too good. In pushing for larger screens and other upgrades, it also introduced some compromises. Ultimately though, the good outweighs the bad. The Moto G4 and G4 Plus offer plenty of power and versatility without breaking the bank. And they show that, once again, nobody does budget phones better than Motorola.
Cyclotricity Stealth review – CNET
The Good The Cyclotiricity Stealth’s powerful motor turns a country ride into an exhilarating race and its suspension forks make for a comfortable journey.
The Bad The motor has to be limited to be legal for use on the road, at least in the UK. The brakes and gears need improvement and the battery doesn’t last long at full pelt.
The Bottom Line If you want a bike for an extreme adventure rather than a city commute, the Stealth’s high-powered motor and burly suspension makes it a hell of a lot of fun on hillside tracks.
The Cyclotricity Stealth is for the adrenaline junkies among you.
It’s a mountain bike at its heart, complete with 26-inch wheels and springy front suspension that easily absorbs stones on rough off-road surfaces. It looks every bit as aggressive as you’d want a serious off-road mountain bike to look. Made in Britain, it costs £1,295 from the company’s website, which roughly converts to around $1,720 or AU$2,260. Cyclotricity ships around the world.
In the rear wheel is the electric motor, which provides a massive 1,000 watts of power. That’s enough to propel you to 30 mph (48 kph) which, I can assure you, is an exhilarating speed when you’re belting down gravel trails.
View full gallery
Andrew Hoyle/CNET
The motor can provide assistance to your pedalling, but there’s a throttle too, which you can push down to ride the e-bike on the motor’s power alone. You can use it if you’re feeling lazy, but I found it immense fun to tear around hills purely powered by the throttle — it turns mountain biking into something approaching motorcross. The Stealth is comfortable to ride on- or off-road, and even without motor assistance it’s not difficult to get up to speed.
Withings Body Cardio Scale review – CNET
The Good The Body Cardio can measure weight, BMI, body fat and body water percentage, bone mass, muscle mass, standing heart rate and arterial stiffness. Sleek design, long battery life, works on hard floors and carpets.
The Bad Expensive. Its chief selling point is cryptic, and the “arterial stiffness” measurement doesn’t always work.
The Bottom Line The Body Cardio provides a new way for measuring heart health, but it’s not worth the time or money over a simpler connected scale.
Visit manufacturer site for details.
The Withings Body Cardio isn’t your typical smart scale. While it can measure weight and sync its data online like Withings’ other scales, this new version’s selling point is being able to measure cardiovascular health. This is the first scale that can measure Pulse Wave Velocity, a term I wasn’t even aware of before. It’s a measurement used to determine arterial stiffness and is said to be a key indicator of heart health.
In addition to this new metric, the Body Cardio can also measure weight, Body Mass Index (BMI), body fat percentage, total body water percentage, muscle mass, bone mass and standing heart rate. And since it’s a smart scale, there’s Wi-Fi and Bluetooth to automatically upload your information to the Withings HealthMate app on Android and iOS.
This smart scale measures your heart health…
See full gallery
1 – 5 of 8
Next
Prev
All of this sounds appealing, until you you consider the $180 (£140, AU$290) price tag, which makes the Body Cardio one of the most expensive consumer scales on the market. After using it for close to a month, I wasn’t sold on its value.
The scale failed to measure my Pulse Wave Velocity on numerous occasions, and even when it worked, I still found it hard to decipher what its value was to my everyday health. I recommend the more affordable Withings Body smart scale for $130 (£100). It’s essentially the Body Cardio, but without the standing heart rate data and the finicky Pulse Wave Velocity measurement. Trust me, you won’t miss them.
What is Pulse Wave Velocity?
Pulse Wave Velocity is used in clinical tests, research labs and some hospitals. My personal cardiologist and three others I called in New York City didn’t measure it, but studies have found it to be a reliable measurement for heart health.
View full gallery
James Martin/CNET
To determine your Pulse Wave Velocity, the scale is equipped with special sensors that are said to be able to determine the exact moment when blood is ejected from the aorta and when it reaches blood vessels in the feet. The time between the two is then compared to your height (which you provide during the initial setup of the scale) to determine your Pulse Wave Velocity, a number that is measured in meters per second. If your eyes glazed over during that explanation, you’re not alone.
The entire process of measuring this and all other metrics takes about 30 seconds from start to finish. Unfortunately, it didn’t always work. About one out of every five times I received an error that stated the scale was unable to measure my Pulse Wave Velocity, but I didn’t know this until I opened the app on my phone. That’s because the small display on the scale only shows weight, BMI, bone mass, muscle mass, standing heart rate and a timeline of past weigh ins. It doesn’t actually show the Pulse Wave Velocity measurement.
2016 Volkswagen Golf TSI S review – Roadshow
The Good Its styling won’t age quickly and butcher resale value, its infotainment loadout is impressive on lower trims and its hatchback layout provides ample rear-seat and cargo space.
The Bad Its five-speed manual is old and seemingly fragile, and its fuel economy isn’t exactly all that and a bag of chips.
The Bottom Line For those that prefer to fly under the radar, the 2016 Volkswagen Golf’s practicality is sure to charm.
For those who err on the side of caution, the Volkswagen Golf has always been a pillar of sensible vehicle ownership. Not everybody needs to be flashy. Most people just want a car that doesn’t look bad, has competitive equipment and won’t be worth $1,000 in six months’ time. In that sense, the Golf is a damn smart purchase.
Two-door cars aren’t the most sensible vehicles, and Volkswagen does offer a four-door Golf variant, but this Golf I tested made up for its lack of doors with a rear hatchback, providing more than enough space for both cargo and rear passengers. Most competitors don’t even offer coupe variants of their vehicles, nevertheless hatchbacks, and especially not two-door hatchbacks (VW doesn’t call this a three-door, for whatever reason). The only one that comes to mind is Mini.
So if you are looking for a small hatchback, options are limited. Thankfully, the Golf won’t really leave you wanting for more. It’s not loaded with standout equipment, but based on what you get for the price you pay, it’s a solid bet.
Straightforward and easy on the eyes
If you’ve seen one Golf, you’ve seen them all. It doesn’t matter if it’s an old one or a new one, the formula hasn’t really changed in decades, and neither has the design language. There’s no flash here, like there is on a Civic Coupe. It’s restrained, it’s approachable.
You won’t be breakin’ necks in this car, that’s for sure.
Andrew Krok/Roadshow
Volkswagen’s conservative design is largely a good thing, as cars with fantastical elements and sharp creases from fore to aft don’t age well, which can affect resale value. The Golf doesn’t have that problem.
The Golf maximizes the feeling of usable space by keeping the dash nice and thin, too. I don’t like excess dashboard real estate — if I can’t reach the area where dashboard and windshield meet, that’s interior space wasted.
Overall interior layout is ace. HVAC and seat-heater switches live in one area, and the touchscreen infotainment system and its corresponding buttons and dials (hooray!) live above that. I found it easy to commit everything to muscle memory in a short time.
A monochrome information display tucks in between the straightforward black and white gauges, which you peruse with the help of buttons on the steering wheel.
The cloth seats feel rugged and waxy. Personally, I prefer this kind of material, but other editors have called it out for being a bit too hard. The leather-wrapped steering wheel isn’t too chunky, but also not thin enough to belong on a 1994 Buick.
While I usually associate coupes with cramped rear seats, the Golf’s hatchback shape works wonders. My 6-foot frame fit easily in the back, with loads of headroom and a front seat with a built-in handle for quick ingress and egress. It also benefits cargo volume, and with the rear seats stowed flat, I wasn’t exactly hurting for storage space.
The
2016
Volkswagen
Golf
is
sensibly…
See full gallery
1 – 6 of 36
Next
Prev
Tech: Pretty fly for a car this cheap
Infotainment is slowly expanding beyond the head unit and incorporating smartphones, and it’s encouraging to see Volkswagen at the forefront of this trend. Even on the next-to-base TSI S model, the Golf comes equipped with a 6.5-inch touchscreen display that includes both Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, along with Volkswagen’s own App-Connect system.
The Golf’s screen contains a proximity sensor, adding more options to the display whenever your hand draws near.
Andrew Krok/Roadshow
The infotainment system itself is a breeze to use. Navigation buttons on the side make switching from page to page a low-distraction affair, and it even features a proximity sensor, hiding the icon dock from view until your hand nears the screen. It’s a pretty trick feature on a $20,000 car.
Oddly enough, this is actually the first year that Volkswagen offers a USB port on the Golf. Before this, it relied on a proprietary cable system, which was both expensive and annoying for families with multiple brands of phone. I wish there was more than just the one port in the center stack, but it’s better than nothing.
A backup camera is also standard on this trim level. Its resolution is high, which is an issue with not just competitors, but certain automakers in general.
The information screen between the gauges is absolutely loaded with information. Unlike others, the music tab will actually tell you what song is playing, not just the radio station you’re tuned into. Once I got a feel for the steering wheel buttons, I found it easy to flip between pages without even looking. Much of the Golf’s information can be easily accessed with a minimal amount of distraction.
Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Olympic Games Limited Edition Release Date, Price and Specs – CNET
If Olympic fever is upon you, then pay close attention. Samsung is selling its splashily colorful, Games-inspired phone starting July 18 for a sum we still don’t know. It’s a bummer not to have a price yet to pair with the Samsung Galaxy S7 Edge Olympic Games Limited Edition, as it’s laboriously known, but at least we’ve now had a chance to see the phone in the flesh.
A variation on the Galaxy S7 Edge, this special-edition handset just happens to be the same one Samsung (as an official Olympics partner) is giving to all 12,500 or so athletes. But the company is whipping up excitement by also making 2,000 of these handsets available in select countries, like the US, Brazil, Germany and South Korea.
Samsung’s Olympics phone goes for gold: Check…
See full gallery
1 – 4 of 31
Next
Prev
What you get is simple, but fun. Tiny statements of color dress up the black phone and correspond to colors on those iconic Olympic rings — you get blue on the back, a red power button, green volume rocker, and yellow-gold front. Inside, a software theme surprises with lots of green, gold, blue and red tones on common screens (but not for third-party apps.) You’ll also see a small echo of white rings on the lock screen, which you can display on the home screen if you apply some optional wallpaper. Other than all that, the Olympic edition is the same as the regular S7 Edge, hardware composition and all.
The jazzed-up phone comes in a sporty case with thick, sturdy zippers. You’ll find headphones, a SIM card tool and the charger inside, but no surprising goodies like a case or VR games (the phone works with Samsung Gear VR) That’s fine with me, but part of me always hopes for unexpected extras. We don’t know what Samsung will charge, but if the phone winds up costing more for a few color accents, you’d be better off with a regular S7 or S7 Edge.
If you’re itching for an even moodier take on the S7 Edge, check out Samsung’s other summer spinoff, the one I like to refer to as…the Batphone.
In the US, Samsung’s Galaxy S7 Edge Olympic Games Limited Edition sells exclusively through Best Buy.
AIVAnet 