AT&T to buy Time Warner for $85.4 billion
After no small amount of anticipation, it’s official: AT&T has announced that it’s acquiring Time Warner for the equivalent of $85.4 billion in cash and stock. The move gives one of the US’ largest telecoms control over some of the biggest names in movies and TV, including HBO, Turner and Warner Bros. That includes rights to broadcast MLB, NBA and NCAA March Madness games, we’d add. If you ask AT&T, this is a “perfect match” that mates top-tier content with a ton of distribution points. It can easily deliver quality shows over the internet (particularly on mobile), conventional TV or in theaters — it won’t have to jump through hoops to license material for playback on your platform of choice.
Developing…
Source: AT&T
Android and chill: The Pixel and exclusivity
The Pixel, phone by Google. Exclusively for Verizon. Not really.
I’ve noticed something during the past week. There are plenty of people who think the Pixel is a Verizon exclusive. This isn’t an accident, I’m sure.
I have no idea what language is on whatever piece of paper Google and Verizon execs signed about the Pixel. I’m pretty certain it wasn’t a note scribbled on a bar napkin and had enough lawyers look at it to make the room unhealthy, but nobody but those lawyers and a handful of others on the respective legal teams knows exactly what it says. But something in the wording apparently says Google had to say the Pixel was “only at Verizon” or other silly things.
They’re scaling that back. If you go to the Made by Google site it tells you that you can have “The best of Google on the next-gen network by Verizon” but it doesn’t say exclusive or only or anything of the sort anywhere on the page. Too bad it’s too late for some folks.
I’m not knocking on the other choices available that people have gone with because they thought they couldn’t use a Pixel. There are plenty of companies making phones that will appeal to plenty of people. The iPhone 7, the LG V20, the Galaxy S7 edge, hell even the Lumia 950 XL are great phones that nobody would have thought were possible just a few years ago. And there are plenty of people who would choose any of these over a Pixel. That’s a good thing. Having a choice is always better. But poorly worded advertising that takes a choice away is not.
Any Pixel, whether the smaller version of the XL model, will work with the SIM card you’re using now.
Let’s be clear — the Pixel is Google’s new phone that you can buy direct from the Google Store, Project Fi, Best Buy or Verizon. Any Pixel you buy from any of these places will work anywhere in the world. There are some differences that hardcore nerdly enthusiasts care about when it comes to bootloaders and update providers, but none of that will change the fact that any Pixel, whether the smaller version of the XL model, will work with the SIM card you’re using now.
I’m sorry if the wording Google used had you thinking that you couldn’t replace your AT&T Galaxy Note 7 with a Pixel. I want to hope that someone in a Google office somewhere is sorry, too. But there are definitely people somewhere who aren’t sorry because this is exactly what that wording was supposed to do. Google, Verizon, I get it. You’re both really good at making money and at the beginning of a newly rekindled relationship where the sex is awesome and you still like looking at each other. But that whole “exclusivity” thing was pretty lame.
Google Pixel + Pixel XL
- Google Pixel and Pixel XL review
- Google Pixel XL review: A U.S. perspective
- Google Pixel FAQ: Should you upgrade?
- Pixel + Pixel XL specs
- Understanding Android 7.1 Nougat
- Join the discussion in the forums!
Google Store
Verizon
The bottom line: Our quick verdict on the Lenovo Yoga Book
There’s nothing quite like the Lenovo Yoga Book. It’s a small, lightweight clamshell device running your choice of Android or Windows 10 as an OS. Take a tour of the hardware and you’ll find a 360-degree hinge, a screen and, uh, no keyboard. That’s right, instead of where the keyboard deck would be is a flat-touch sensitive surface that doubles as a digital notepad and sketchpad. It works as a keyboard too, except the buttons, as it were, are all virtual, ready to disappear when you’re done using them.
The design is nothing if not inventive, and Lenovo deserves credit for that, but it’s almost ahead of its time. That or just not very well executed. While digital artists might enjoy the doodling features, our reviewer was never able to master the keyboard. Even when she learned to type accurately, she could never do so quickly. And that’s a problem for a $500-plus device designed for being productive on the go. For that, you may as well buy, you know, a laptop.
Six futuristic designs that will change public transportation
By Cat DiStasio
As the world’s urban centers grow, getting around them becomes increasingly difficult. In some cities, traffic is congested all day long and rush hour can last for several hours. Fortunately, there are a number of innovations in public transportation specifically aimed at alleviating those woes. While traditional buses simply add to street traffic and subways aren’t feasible in all areas, engineers are looking to public transit options that can go over or around regular car traffic, making for some easier ways to get from Point A to Point B without spending hours sniffing exhaust. Elsewhere in the world, underwater floating tunnels will reduce the need for ferry rides, and a unique modular transport system could completely revolutionize long-distance travel for both people and cargo. Read on for all the details about the next generation of transportation, including some developments that will be up and running in less than five years.
The high-flying Caterpillar Train
This award-winning design for an elevated “Caterpillar Train” (cTrain) hints at a new era for mass transit. Rather than riding rails affixed to the ground level, the train car travels on an arch-shaped structure that carries passengers high above the street, leaving plenty of space for cars, trucks and standard street-level buses. Unlike typical raised rail transit, the cTrain’s thin arches wouldn’t block out the urban scenery, which is another added benefit. The design, developed by Jacob Innovations Inc., beat out 28 other entries to win the MIT Climate CoLab competition this year.
China’s “traffic-straddling bus”
In 2010, concept designs for an amazing “straddling bus” emerged, and the project was met with a mixture of awe and disbelief. Chinese developers actually built a prototype of the Transit Elevated Bus, and put it to the test on busy road. The electric bus is designed so that its undercarriage creates a tunnel through which regular car traffic can flow, eliminating the need for cars to stop behind the bus at every passenger stop. The TEB is two lanes wide, and up to four of the straddling buses can be linked together for a combined passenger capacity of 1,200. Although the bus requires a special track on either side of the roadway on which to run, its developers say the TEB can be road-worthy in less than a fifth of the time and cost of a typical subway line.
Mercedes-Benz’s self-driving Future Bus
Earlier this year Mercedes-Benz unveiled a futuristic self-driving bus that promises a safer, more efficient commute. The semi-autonomous Future Bus uses cameras and radar to navigate the roadways while giving the human driver a bit of a break. Its predictive driving style also lowers fuel consumption, which helps shave greenhouse gas emissions at the same time. So far, the Future Bus has only driven itself on a test track, but Mercedes-Benz is working hard to polish the technology so the bus can embark on the open road.
Hyperloop
While a full-fledged Hyperloop track from San Francisco and Los Angeles is many years away, the list of advantages is already miles long. Initially conceived by Elon Musk, the Hyperloop promises an ultra high-speed passenger and cargo transportation option that can travel up to 700 miles per hour. Last year, Hyperloop Transportation Technologies CEO Dirk Ahlborn said the ride might even be free for passengers, instead drawing income from cargo shippers and passenger upgrades. The pod-like transit system could be operational as early as 2019, when it would reduce the 380-mile trip from San Francisco to LA to a cool 30 minutes. If the ride happens to be free, that would just be icing on the cake.
Norway’s underwater floating tunnels
Norway is a land of innovation in many ways, and the country’s plan to build the world’s first floating underwater tunnels is just one example of how clever design is being put to use to solve everyday problems. Norway is a land of 1,100 fjords, and most people rely on a network of ferries to travel, but those are time-consuming and inconvenient. Now, the country is gearing up to add submerged floating bridges to the country’s already extensive network of underwater tunnels. These would be suspended 100 feet below the water’s surface and wide enough for two lanes of traffic. Floating the underwater tunnels is a smart response to the difficult terrain that makes traditional stationary tunnels a challenge to construct. The $25 billion project is expected to be open for traffic by 2035.
Clip-Air’s modular transport system
Perhaps the most amazing of all designs in this collection is Clip-Air, a modular transportation system comprised of capsules that can carry passengers or cargo, depending on their configuration. The modules can be transferred from truck to train to airplane, making for a seamless journey from origin to destination, without the need to haul tail across busy airport terminals in order to make your next connection. For passengers, the Clip-Air system would turn long-distance travel into a real dream, making it possible for people to relax, eat, and sleep while en route to the other side of the world. Cargo transport could be simplified as well, with less energy and time wasted unloading one form of transportation (like a semi truck) and reloading another (like a freight airplane).
Apple’s October 27th event is reportedly all about laptops
We hope you weren’t expecting a new iMac or Mac Pro at Apple’s “Hello Again” event… you might be disappointed. KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo (who has a mostly good track record for Apple rumors) now expects that the October 27th media gathering will focus solely on MacBooks. The highlight would be a long-rumored MacBook Pro redesign with USB-C ports and OLED touch strips. They would use Intel’s Skylake-based processors, he says (what, no Kaby Lake?), but they’d get longer battery life, up to a 2TB solid-state drive and a possible “MagSafe-like” power adapter from either Apple or a third party.
And those rumors of a refreshed MacBook Air? They’re on the right track, if you ask Kuo, but it’s not clear that you’ll get the same ultraportable with a few tweaks. He simply says that there will be a “13-inch MacBook” — it could be a slightly larger, hopefully more capable version of the 12-inch MacBook you’ve known since 2015. While there could be a spruced-up Air (particularly if Apple wants to court the sub-$1,000 crowd), it seems unlikely that Apple would reserve stage time for an update minor enough that it could be covered by a press release.
Everyone else would have to be patient. Kuo believes that new iMacs and a stand-alone 5K display are in the cards, but not until closer to the middle of 2017. There’s no mention of Mac mini or Mac Pro updates, either, although those could conceivably arrive without taking up any event time. Whatever happens, the absence of desktops would make sense. Intel isn’t releasing desktop Kaby Lake processors until January — Apple can’t use chips that aren’t ready yet. If MacBooks are all you see, though, it’ll still show that Apple hasn’t forgotten its original business.
Source: MacRumors
New MacBook Pro and 13-Inch ‘MacBook’ Coming Next Week, iMac and Display Not Ready Yet
KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo has released a new research report outlining his expectations for next Thursday’s “Hello Again” event where Apple is expected to make a number of Mac-related announcements.
In line with long-standing rumors, Kuo believes the highlight of the event will be a redesigned MacBook Pro in both 13-inch and 15-inch sizes, adopting an OLED touch bar and Touch ID sensor, USB-C, Thunderbolt 3, and the same butterfly keyboard design introduced on the MacBook in 2015. Kuo also adds several new tidbits to the rumor mix:
Our new predictions also include: (1) Intel’s (US) Skylake processor; (2) the same panel resolution but better display quality and energy efficiency thanks to an oxide panel; (3) a new option of 2TB SSD storage capacity; (4) adoption of a similar processor as Apple Watch to control the OLED touch bar more energy-efficiently in the new MacBook Pro models; and (5) a Type-C & MagSafe-like adapter rolled out by Apple or a third-party supplier, given positive reviews for the MagSafe charging design.
Beyond the MacBook Pro, Kuo says Apple will also be introducing a “13-inch MacBook,” a claim he has shared previously. Rather than being a slightly larger version of the current 12-inch MacBook, however, this is likely to be a MacBook Air, which would align with other rumors claiming that only the 13-inch MacBook Air will be seeing an update with new USB-C ports.
On the desktop side, rumors have indicated that Apple is working on updated iMac models with discrete AMD graphics options, as well as a new standalone external 5K display, but Kuo says those products will not be ready until the first half of next year. It is still possible, however, that Apple could announce them at next week’s event.
We also expect Apple to launch new iMacs (21.5-inch and 27-inch) and Cinema Display (27-inch) in mid- 1H17. We cannot say for certain whether Apple will announce the new iMacs and Cinema Display on October 27 as the shipping schedule is not imminent.
Apple’s event is being held at the company’s Cupertino campus and kicks off at 10:00 AM Pacific Time on Thursday. MacRumors will have full coverage both here on the site and on our @MacRumorsLive Twitter account, and Apple will be offering a live video stream of the event.
Related Roundups: iMac, MacBook Air, Thunderbolt Display, MacBook Pro, Retina MacBook
Tag: Ming-Chi Kuo
Buyer’s Guide: iMac (Don’t Buy), MacBook Air (Don’t Buy), Displays (Don’t Buy), Retina MacBook Pro (Don’t Buy), MacBook (Neutral)
Discuss this article in our forums
A Guide To Waterproofing Your Google Pixel
So the Pixel’s not waterproof — there are workarounds!
For most people, the Google Pixel’s lack of waterproofing isn’t a total dealbreaker, and most folks will pick up a Pixel or Pixel XL without giving waterproofing a second thought.
Then there are those of us who have dropped our phones in the toilet at some point or have a loved one who has (like a certain writer’s wife), so we know the perils that can come from a not-so-waterproof phone. Even if you’ve had cell phones since the 90s and have never had a phone damaged by water, you might believe waterproofing your phone is just good sense.
And it is, just in case.
Get a waterproof case
The most logical option for waterproofing your Pixel is to slap on a waterproof case. This way you still get full use of your phone without having to hide it away from the elements. Here are some of the best waterproof cases you can get:
LifeProof FRĒ
The LifeProof FRĒ is your answer to protecting your Pixel or Pixel XL from everything. LifeProof claims these cases are waterproof, dirt-proof, snow-proof, and drop-proof (from up to 6.6 feet), so you’ll never have to worry about your Pixel — it’s in good hands.
LifeProof’s FRĒ is rated IP68 for ingress protection, which is as high as it gets, meaning that you’ll have to work pretty hard to get any dirt or dust in there, and your Pixel would have to be submerged in 3 feet of water for more than half an hour to risk damage. Each case also passes the U.S. Military Standard test for drops and vibrations, so you’d be hardpressed to rattle your Pixel’s cage.
This is likely the best case for you if you’re looking to waterproof your Pixel and protect it from whatever else might befall it.
For now, the FRĒ only comes in Asphalt Black.
See at LifeProof
Grab a sack… A waterproof sack!
Universal waterproof phone bags are an awesome way to keep your Pixel totally dry and are perfect for folks living the active life or vacation. Waterproof bags aren’t practical solution, so you likely won’t use one every day, but for times when you’re at the beach, hiking, or know you’ll be out in heavy rain, they’re excellent for keeping your phone a phone and not a brick.
JOTO universal dry bag
JOTO’s waterproof bag is rated IPX8, which is as good as it gets for ingress protection. It basically means that your phone can be safely submerged in this bag for an indeterminate amount of time. JOTO even says it’s good to 100 feet deep!
There’s a clear window on the front and back, so you can continue to use your Pixel and even take photos with the case/bag on. These bags fit phones up to 6 inches diagonally, so your Pixel XL is good to go, but you might have to remove a protective case if you have one on already.
The snap and lock closure is easy to use, and while securing your Pixel tightly, it’s easy to put it in and take it out without much fuss. There’s also a handy lanyard attached, so you can secure it to your swim trunks or cargo shorts and off you go!
See at Amazon
Best practices
If you don’t feel like shelling out $90 for a LifeProof case and a waterproof bag doesn’t really suit your lifestyle, then you’ll just want to do your best to your keep your Pixel as dry as possible.
Don’t take it out in the rain
This may seem like a no-brainer, but the urge to check a text while walking down the street on a rainy day can sometimes overcome you. Yes, the Pixel has an IP53 rating, so a little rain won’t bring it down, but if you’re looking to keep it pristine, inside and out, then keep it pocketed in the wet weather.
Bring a comic book!
Don’t bring your Pixel into the bathroom with you. Yes, playing Two Dots on the can is a great way to… “pass” the time (badum tshhh!). Not only is it grody, but what if you’re running a bath while you’re on the John? You rest your phone on the edge of the tub just for a second so you can finish off and wash up. As you stand, you knee grazes your phone. Splash! Au revoir, Pixel.
OK, so maybe it’s not that dramatic, but just leave your phone outta the bathroom and bring a comic book instead, huh?
If it gets wet, dry it off
That may seem like another no-brainer, but if your Pixel gets a little wet, wipe it down with a soft cloth or, at the very least, the sleeve of your shirt, especially if your phone’s in a case. No, it’s not likely that that water will get inside and do any damage, but do you want to take that chance?
Having water air-dry off of your phone is generally a bad idea anyway, since water dries things out as it evaporates, so if there are any plastic components that get wet, the air-drying can make them brittle in the long run.
Front pockets only
If you have to pocket your Pixel, make sure it’s the front pocket only. There seems to be this trend (especially among women) or folks keeping their phones in their back pockets. My wife kindly explained to me that women often do this because their jeans aren’t made with big front pockets because they’re so tight. Fair enough. Put it in your purse or anywhere else that’s not your bra (#cancerawareness).
If you go to sit on the toilet with your phone in your back pocket, you may just drop it in when you pull your pants up or down. Trust me. It happens. And you might have even just bought her an awesome case that was probably a little more expensive than cool phone cases should be, and when she got a new phone, she got the next iteration, so the awesome case didn’t fit.
Front pockets or purses only (or jacket pockets or whatever; just no parking in rear)!
In summation
Your best option for waterproofing your new Pixel or Pixel XL is the LifeProof FRĒ, but if that’s too expensive for you, get a waterproof bag for traveling, and just be careful otherwise.
Google Pixel + Pixel XL
- Google Pixel and Pixel XL review
- Google Pixel XL review: A U.S. perspective
- Google Pixel FAQ: Should you upgrade?
- Pixel + Pixel XL specs
- Understanding Android 7.1 Nougat
- Join the discussion in the forums!
Google Store
Verizon
Camera comparison: Google Pixel XL vs. Galaxy S7 edge
Google has made a huge stride in camera quality, but can it take on Samsung head to head?
Though Google’s new Pixel phones have seriously impressive imaging that put its previous Nexus phones to shame, we have to remember that before they arrived it was well-observed that Samsung led the pack with the camera on the Galaxy S7 edge (and of course Galaxy S7 and Note 7).
Now that we’ve had a Pixel for a little while, it was only natural to compare it head-to-head with the camera that is leading the pack among all Android phones. Here’s how the camera experience on the Pixel XL and Galaxy S7 edge compare.
Performance and interface
Pixel XL (left) / Galaxy S7 edge (right)
Before you even get to looking at photo quality, it’s important to have a camera that can open quickly, perform well and have an intuitive camera interface. Both phones have the speed part down, with a double press of the power button (Pixel XL) or home button (Galaxy S7 edge) taking you to the camera in about a second. Shot-to-shot performance is on par between the two, and extremely fast — even when shooting in HDR or taking burst shots. This is how every phone should perform.
Both UIs get the job done, but Samsung offers many more options.
Google’s camera interface is still pretty simple. To many people that means it’s lacking features, but it definitely hits on the points most people need. You can use tap to focus and now adjust exposure with a slide, as well as toggle on grid lines, switch between HDR modes and swap to the front camera with a double flick of your wrist. Google’s implementation of switching to lens bur, slow-mo and panorama modes is super simple as well — I don’t have any complaints there.
Samsung’s main camera interface is just as simple as Google’s, but wins hands-down when it comes to the ability to tweak your shots, offering a full Pro mode with complete manual control over the camera. That’s a big differentiator for some who want to make changes to very specific parts of the camera or perhaps mount the phone to a tripod for interesting shots. Samsung also has a larger array of shooting modes available by default, with even more waiting to be downloaded — but nearly everyone will stick with the main modes in either camera.
Camera quality
Now let’s look at the output. As I do with all of my camera comparisons, I keep things smple to help reflect how the cameras perform in the hands of the average user. I kept both the Pixel XL and Galaxy S7 edge with their respective “auto” HDR settings turned on — then I took out one, snapped a photo, took out the other, snapped a photo. No tripods or lighting or burst mode or editing; just the direct output from the camera as it shot it.
You’ll also notice a variety of situations in the samples below; indoors, outdoors, dark, light, the whole spectrum. Here are my results, set side-by-side.
Pixel XL (left) / Galaxy S7 edge (right) — click images to view larger
In general, the Galaxy S7 edge still tends to take warmer and more saturated photos, which is something we’ve expressed in previous critiques of its camera and is just as apparent here next to the cooler, less-saturated and slightly more natural Pixel XL camera. The Galaxy S7 edge also tends to over-smooth certain parts of images, which comes across a bit more pleasing to the eye at a glance but isn’t as impressive as the sharp lines the Pixel XL was able to produce. Most of the differences really aren’t noticeable until you zoom way in on photos, though.
The biggest thing that stands out is how similar the photos are between the two.
When it comes to low-light performance, the Pixel XL seems to have jumped past the Galaxy S7 edge if only because of its consistency. The GS7 edge’s tendency for warmer photos is more pronounced at night, and its smaller pixels don’t take in as much light as the Pixel XL’s, which leads to a bit more grain and chroma noise in really dark parts of photos. The Pixel XL isn’t immune to grain and noise of its own, but the grain feels a bit more “natural” in these shots, rather than being over-processed and blotchy. Both phones were definitely still capable of taking a slightly blurry shot if you didn’t keep your hands steady at night.
Across this variety of situations, the biggest thing that stands out to me is how similar the photos are between the Pixel XL and Galaxy S7 edge. I don’t think there was a single photo I took in this comparison with either camera that wouldn’t be considered a “good” (or better) photo if I had shown it to someone on its own. It’s only when you start to set the photos side-by-side that you notice a few differences.
I’m personally a bigger fan of the way the Pixel XL tends to be a bit more natural, cooler and sharper, but the GS7 edge takes photos that are arguably more pleasing to the eye with their more-saturated and warmer colors. The only true “win” for the Pixel XL here is in its consistency of handling low-light photos with its HDR+ software … everything else is basically a wash.
Bottom line
These are two expensive phones with impressive cameras worthy of the price, that much is clear. Both can launch the camera in the blink of an eye, take great photos in just about every situation and manage even the toughest scenes. They trade punches in certain areas of emphasis, but the end result in either one is a great photography experience.
Samsung has a slight advantage in terms of its camera interface when it comes to customizations, shooting modes and full manual controls. Google is catching up in this respect, and offers a slick experience for just about everyone — save for those who need those extra tweaks.
Each phone can take amazing photos, and you have to zoom in, analyze and nit-pick in order to find issues in either one. Google may have a slight advantage in its tendency to keep things looking more natural and sharper, but how much that matters is basically a personal preference at this point.
Both the Pixel XL and Galaxy S7 edge have fantastic cameras — you can’t go wrong here.
Google Pixel + Pixel XL
- Google Pixel and Pixel XL review
- Google Pixel XL review: A U.S. perspective
- Google Pixel FAQ: Should you upgrade?
- Pixel + Pixel XL specs
- Understanding Android 7.1 Nougat
- Join the discussion in the forums!
Google Store
Verizon
Razer’s Blade Stealth and ‘Core’ add up to the gaming laptop I always wanted
For as long as I can remember, I’ve dreamed of a computer that didn’t exist: something that could get me through the work day but also transform into a gaming powerhouse at home. It’s taken decades, but that old fantasy is finally starting to coalesce into reality. Laptops from Alienware and MSI can be bought with an external graphics dock that lends them the power of a desktop-class GPU. Earlier this year, Razer even made a bid for my dream laptop — but its Blade Stealth stumbled with middling battery life and by launching before its companion GPU dock hit the market. Recently the company updated the ultraportable with more storage and memory, a faster processor, a higher-capacity battery and the graphics extender that makes it so special: the Razer Core. Now that we finally have the complete package, it’s time to revisit the Stealth and see if it makes good on its promise.
Hardware
Like every Razer Blade laptop before it, the updated Stealth is a study of black, anodized aluminum accented with the glow of a customizable LED keyboard. This is hardly a surprise — the new Stealth is less a “new laptop” than a modestly updated version of the ultraportable Razer that came out earlier this year. Yes, there’s a new processor inside and a bit more memory, but all of that is contained in the same chassis as the original Stealth. Not that I’m complaining: Razer’s first take on the Ultrabook was thin, light and well built. This one is too.
The Blade Stealth ticks every box it needs to in order to qualify as an ultraportable. It measures just a half-inch thick at its fattest point, with a silhouette that gently tapers toward the palm rest. Its weight is almost negligible; it’ll add less than three pounds to your bag (2.84 pounds, to be precise). At 12.5 inches at its widest point, it won’t take up much space either. It’s solid and durable, too — there’s nothing like a CNC milled aluminum chassis to lend a device a high-end feel.
As for looks, Razer has always walked a fine line between subtle design and conspicuous branding. Like all Blades before it, the Stealth is draped in an attractive matte black finish and adorned with a glowing Razer logo. And it’s kind of cool. Maybe too cool. For Razer’s line of thin gaming laptops, the standard Blade design language looks sleek and almost sophisticated. But in a professional environment, the Stealth will stand out. Folks thinking about picking up the machine to double as a work and gaming machine should ask themselves, does the Stealth look too awesome for you to be taken seriously in next month’s board meeting? If the answer is “yes,” consider turning off the backlight behind the Razer logo and covering it with a sticker.
There isn’t a lot of room for connectivity on the Blade Stealth’s thin frame, but there’s enough. Each of the laptop’s sides houses a single USB 3.0 port, as well as an HDMI socket on the right, and a 3.5mm headphone jack and a Thunderbolt 3 connection on the left. Short of adding a built-in memory card reader, you can’t expect too much more from an ultraportable. Still, that Thunderbolt 3 connector adds some versatility; Stealth users who buy the Razer Core GPU dock will gain four additional USB 3.0 ports.
Keyboard and trackpad
Like the Stealth’s chassis, the keyboard here is one we’ve seen before — but it may also be the last time we see it. Don’t misread me: The Stealth’s keyboard is quite good. Its full-size keys are well spaced, comfortable to type on and even feature Razer’s Chroma backlighting, which allow the keys to glow in any of 16.8 million colors, with up to six accompanying animations, to boot. It’s not a bad keyboard, but Razer itself has already shown that it could be even better.
Just before Razer announced the refreshed Blade Stealth, it unveiled an iPad case that featured new low-profile mechanical keys. It’s a new kind of key technology that could potentially give laptops keyboards the feel of a full-size mechanical keyboard — complete with defined actuation and reset points and up to 70 grams of pushback force. Razer told us the new key technology was developed too late to make it into this generation of Razer laptops, but we might see it in laptops later down the line. It’s something I’m looking forward to; the Blade laptops already offer a great typing experience, but I won’t say no to something even better.
For years, I searched for the Windows-user’s answer to the MacBook Pro’s excellent trackpad — and Razer nailed it with the original Blade Stealth. The company’s trackpads were always pretty good but tended to suffer from mushy buttons. The Stealth got rid of those, and the mousing surface has been perfect ever since. It’s smooth, spacious and handles multi-touch gestures with aplomb. I couldn’t ask for more.
Display and sound
Perhaps nothing better exemplifies Razer’s attitude toward laptop design than the Blade Stealth’s screen options. The laptop’s 12.5-inch display can be had in two flavors: a 3,840 x 2,160 4K panel with a 100-percent Adobe RGB colorspace, or a 2,560 x 1,440 QHD screen with 70-percent RGB color gamut. Our review unit came with the latter, but both panels represent what seems to be the unspoken philosophy of Razer’s design process: gorgeous at any expense. Both of these display options are indeed stunning, with vibrant colors, deep blacks and wide viewing angles — but the cost is real. These beautiful screens bestow the laptop with the burden of short battery life.
To be fair, this problem isn’t unique to the Stealth — the next generation of high-resolution displays are killing laptop battery life across the board — but Razer’s latest portable was advertised as having longer battery life than the previous generation. It doesn’t (more on that later), and the display is the likeliest culprit. The Stealth’s screens are touch sensitive, too.
As standard as touchscreens have become on Windows systems, reaching across the keyboard to tap the screen still feels odd to me. That said, you have to give the company some credit: The Stealth’s display is beautiful. Movies, web pages and apps all look great, but the screen was at its best when the laptop was hooked up to the Razer Core GPU dock; playing The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt on maximum settings at 2,560 x 1,440 is a thing of beauty.
I’ve consistently found nothing to complain about when it comes to the Razer Blade line’s audio quality, and that’s true of the new Stealth too. The laptop’s stereo speakers live on either side of the keyboard and push out balanced sound with no noticeable distortion and minimal tinniness, but there’s not much depth to the sound either. Razer recently bought THX, so the audio quality could one day improve, but for now these are merely good speakers. Not great, but good. And for laptop speakers, that’s more than enough.
Performance
| Razer Blade (Fall 2016) (2.7GHz Intel Core-i7-7500U, Intel HD 620) | 5,462 | 3,889 | E3,022 / P1,768 | 4,008 | 1.05 GB/s / 281 MB/s |
| Razer Blade (Fall 2016) + Razer Core (2.7GHz Intel Core-i7-7500U, NVIDIA GTX 1080) | 5,415 | 4,335 | E11,513 / P11,490 | 16,763 | 1.05 GB/s / 281 MB/s |
| ASUS ZenBook 3 (2.7GHz Intel Core-i7-7500U, Intel HD 620) | 5,448 | 3,911 | E2,791 / P1,560 | 3,013 | 1.67 GB/s / 1.44 GB/s |
| HP Spectre 13 (2.5GHz Intel Core i7-6500U, Intel HD 520) | 5,046 | 3,747 | E2,790 / P1,630 / X375 | 3,810 | 1.61 GB/s / 307 MB/s |
| Huawei MateBook (1.1 GHz Core M3, Intel HD 515) | 3,592 | 2,867 | E1,490 / P887 | 2,454 | 538 MB/s / 268 MB/s |
| Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Tablet (1.2 GHz Core M7-6Y75, Intel HD 515) | 4,951 | 3,433 | E1,866 / P1,112 | 2,462 | 545 MB/s / 298 MB/s |
| Dell XPS 13 (2.3GHz Core i5-6200U, Intel Graphics 520) | 4,954 | 3,499 | E2,610 / P1,531 | 3,335 | 1.6GB/s / 307 MB/s |
| Razer Blade Stealth (2.5GHz Intel Core i7-6500U, Intel HD 520) | 5,131 | 3,445 | E2,788 / P1,599 / X426 | 3,442 | 1.5 GB/s / 307 MB/s |
| Microsoft Surface Pro 4 (2.4GHz Core i5-6300U, Intel HD 520) | 5,403 | 3,602 |
E2,697/ P1,556/ X422 |
3,614 | 1.6 GB/s / 529 MB/s |
| Lenovo Yoga 900 (2.5GHz Core i7-6500U, Intel HD 520) | 5,368 | 3,448 |
E2,707 / P1,581 |
3,161 | 556 MB/s / 511 MB/s |
Razer calls the Blade Stealth the “ultimate Ultrabook,” and as far as light, powerful laptops go, it fits the bill. I brought the Stealth with me when I covered Oculus’ Connect 3 conference earlier this month, and it didn’t let me down. For three days, the Stealth juggled multiple active browser windows with half a dozen open tabs apiece, a mess of disorganized Google Drive documents, multiple social media streams, video and image capture and editing tools and a handful of team messaging apps. Yes, my workflow is a complete disaster, which makes the Stealth’s tolerance of it all the more impressive. The Intel Core i7-7500U CPU and 16GB of RAM shrugged off everything I threw at it.
Unfortunately, killer performance is only half the puzzle. Ultraportable notebooks are supposed to be able to handle a full day’s work on a single charge, or at least something close to it. I just couldn’t get that kind of longevity out of the Blade Stealth. Engadget’s standard battery test (looping an HD video at a fixed brightness) exhausted the Stealth’s 53.6Wh battery in a little over five and a half hours — far short of the nine hours promised on the laptop’s product page. A second test, simulating an active browser workflow, lasted just 10 minutes longer.
Battery life
Razer Blade Stealth (fall 2016)
5:36
Surface Book (Core i5, integrated graphics)
13:54 / 3:20 (tablet only)
HP Spectre x360 (13-inch, 2015)
11:34
Surface Book (Core i7, discrete graphics)
11:31 / 3:02 (tablet only)
Apple MacBook Pro with Retina display (13-inch, 2015)
11:23
iPad Pro (12.9-inch, 2015)
10:47
HP Spectre x360 15t
10:17
Chromebook Pixel (2015)
10:01
ASUS ZenBook 3
9:45
Lenovo Yoga 900
9:36
Apple MacBook (2016)
8:45
Samsung Notebook 9
8:16
Dell XPS 13 (2015)
7:36
Microsoft Surface Pro 4
7:15
HP Spectre 13
7:07
Huawei MateBook
6:35
Razer Blade Stealth (Spring 2016)
5:48
Dell XPS 15 (2016)
5:25 (7:40 with the mobile charger)
It’s actually not uncommon for laptops to fall somewhat short of their promised battery life, but the Blade Stealth’s failure stands out because the refreshed model was advertised as having longer battery life than the original. Our review unit didn’t. Not only did it fall 10 minutes short of the first-generation Stealth in our standard test, but it did so with a lower-resolution display than the 4K model we reviewed in the spring. To get the Stealth to run for more than seven hours on the battery, I had to reduce its screen brightness to its absolute minimum, disable all keyboard lighting features and turn off the sound completely. It’s a manageable problem, but I also didn’t see the improvement I was hoping for.
The Razer Core
If you can accept the Stealth’s middling battery life, you’ll have yourself a rather nice ultraportable — but you won’t get the full Stealth experience unless you pick up the Razer Core. This $500 accessory dock lends the laptop the power of a desktop-class graphics card, and it’s what makes my modular gaming laptop dream possible.
The GPU accessory dock is built from the same high-quality black aluminum as the Stealth itself; it’s heavy, durable and looks like a miniature desktop tower. The solid metal body is only broken by stylistic grooves on its front and top sides, a Razer logo on the left and a grated window on its right. On the back, the Core features four USB 3.0 ports, an Ethernet jack, a single Thunderbolt socket for connecting to the laptop and an AC power plug. Just don’t plan on lugging the Core around: It weighs a hefty 11 pounds.
Lifting a recessed handle from the dock’s back panel unlocks it and allows you to slide the Core’s internal components out of the metal chassis. Inside, the Core is as simple as it gets, offering users nothing more than two power supply cables for the graphics card and single PCI-E port in which to install it. Even if you’ve never installed a desktop GPU before, setting up the Core is straightforward; there’s only one place for the card to go.
Using the Core with the Stealth is easy too: As soon as you plug it in, the Core automatically installs its own drivers. I fed the Core an NVIDIA GTX 1080, which it recognized almost instantly. After it finished installing, a new NVIDIA GPU activity monitor appeared in my system tray. “There are no applications running on this GPU,” it told me. Well, let’s change that.
I challenged the Razer Core-equipped Stealth to run two of my library’s most intensive games: Just Cause 3 and The Witcher III: Wild Hunt. Both were playable at the laptop’s native 2,560 x 1,440 resolution, even tuned to their highest graphic settings, but neither performed quite as well as I expected. The Witcher III looked gorgeous at 40 frames per second, as did Just Cause 3 running at a steady 50 — but with a GTX 1080 calling the shots, those numbers should have been higher.
At first, I thought the Stealth’s dual-core processor might be holding the Core’s performance back, so I switched to a less CPU-intensive game to double check. Sadly, Overwatch was underperforming as well, struggling to break 50 fps on multiple graphics presets. Eventually, I figured it out: The Core’s Thunderbolt 3 connection simply doesn’t have the bandwidth to pass the graphics processing to the external GPU and pipe the results back to the laptop. Hooking up an external monitor directly to the GTX 1080-equipped core yielded much better results: 76 to 100 frames per second in Overwatch and 60+ in Just Cause 3. The Witcher III still hovered around 40 fps at 2,560 x 1,440, but that might be the processor’s fault — that game is a CPU beast.
And there, we have the rub: The Razer Core can absolutely turn the Blade Stealth into a gaming machine, but it won’t quite match the performance you’ll get with a desktop. It’s also a segmented experience; the Core performs better when it’s outputting games to an external monitor, making games on the Stealth’s gorgeous display a worse experience by comparison. Frankly, I expected that: Thunderbolt 3 is fast, but asking it to farm graphics rendering out to an external dock and pipe those results back to the laptop eats up a lot of bandwidth. That isn’t to say the Core is underperforming, but it’s limited by today’s technology. No matter what GPU you install into Razer’s Core, it won’t be living up to its potential — but to realize the dream of an external graphics dock, you have to be OK with that. That’s where the technology is right now.
Beyond the technical bandwidth limitation, I experienced one other issue with the Core: It got a little confused when I tried to switch graphics cards. Specifically, the GPU dock failed to automatically recognize my AMD Radeon R9 Nano the same way it did with the GTX 1080. It still installed the drivers right away, but the Radeon control panel didn’t realize the graphics card was installed. When I tried to reinstall the drivers manually, the machine suddenly recognized that the Radeon software was already installed, at which point it started working.
Despite these hiccups, the Core works as promised. Getting into a game is as simple as plugging a single USB-C wire into the Stealth, which piped in the GPU, power and any accessories I hooked up to the Razer Core. Going back to mobile mode is just as easy; you can unplug the Core (even while in a game!) without restarting the laptop, and everything works fine. It’s a dead-simple plug and play experience. And it needs to be: The Core’s $500 price tag wouldn’t be tolerable if the machine were hard to use.
Configuration options and the competition
Choosing a Razer Blade Stealth configuration is mostly a question of screen resolution and storage space. The $999 base model will get you a 2.7GHz Intel Core i7-7500U dual-core processor (3.5GHz with Turbo Boost), integrated HD 620 graphics, 8GB of RAM, a 128GB PCIe SSD and a QHD (2,560 x 1,440) display. Tacking on an additional $250 or $400 will net you 16GB of RAM and 246 and 512GB SSDs, respectively. The 4K Stealth starts at $1,599, also with 512GB of storage. Finally, the $1,999 configuration steps up to 1TB SSD.
The Blade is a decent value for an ultraportable with a seventh-generation Intel Core i7 CPU, but if you need something with better battery life, you may need to look elsewhere. Dell’s XPS 13 is still a good option, starting at $800 with an Intel Core i3-7100U, 4GB of RAM and over 10 hours of runtime, and can even be upgraded to match the Stealth’s Core i7. But if you’re dead set on a 4K display, you’re out of luck — the new XPS 13 tops out at 3,200 x 1,800. If you’re not married to Microsoft’s platform and don’t mind having only a single USB-C port for connectivity, you might consider Apple’s latest MacBook, which can handle 4K resolution for more than eight hours.
If you’re looking at the Blade Stealth in the first place, however, that Razer Core GPU dock is probably part of the reason why. Technically, the Core should work with any Thunderbolt 3 equipped laptop that supports Intel’s switchable graphics standard, but it’s only officially supported on Razer’s Blade and Blade Stealth machines. It works great on those, but at $500 it’s hardly the most affordable external graphics dock on the market. Alienware’s Graphics Amplifier sells for about $200 less but only works with Dell’s own gaming laptops, which are significantly bulkier than the Blade Stealth. MSI’s $1,300 GS30 Shadow is a thin and light laptop with an external GPU dock, but it’s stuck with a fourth-generation Intel processor.
Ironically, the best alternative to the Blade Stealth’s GPU dock might actually be a desktop computer. If you’re willing to learn to build a PC yourself, $500 can go a long way toward building a killer desktop gaming setup — one that won’t throttle the potential of your GPU the same way the Core does. In fact, taking this route won’t even hamper your ability to play high-end PC games on an ultraportable laptop: Steam in-home streaming can easily bridge the gap for most games.
Wrap-up
The Razer Blade Stealth initially caught my eye for its potential to fulfill a long-dormant dream: a portable, powerful laptop that could borrow the power of a desktop-class graphics card to transform into a gaming powerhouse. I’ve waited decades to realize this fantasy, and the Blade Stealth finally made it a reality… with some caveats. While the Stealth is indeed a powerful, thin and gorgeous laptop, its battery life keeps it from living up to Razer’s claim of the “ultimate Ultrabook.” The shadow of compromise hangs over the Core as well. At a high level, the GPU dock delivers on its promise, but today’s technology simply can’t siphon the full, unadulterated power of a desktop GPU through a single Thunderbolt 3 cable.
Still, I love the Razer Blade Stealth and Core combo. It’s not the best ultraportable, and it won’t make the most of your desktop graphics card — but it’s one of those products that “just works.” For gamers without the patience to maintain a desktop but aren’t willing to sacrifice size, weight and battery life for a full gaming laptop, it’s worth all of the tradeoffs. Ultimately, the Razer Blade Stealth isn’t for me, but the Stealth is nonetheless going to make a very specific niche of laptop-loving PC gamers very happy.
Plum is a smart but expensive gadget for the wine-obsessed
Wine has a culture all of its own, steeped in tradition and practices passed down over the years. But wine experts will tell you it’s also a science, with precise measurements and conditions required to make that perfect bottle. The new Plum wine fridge stands firmly on the side of science. The $1,499 device can hold only two bottles at once, but Plum’s creators say it can make just about every aspect of serving wine better. It’s a lofty claim, but after seeing what Plum can do, I’m intrigued.
I really enjoy a good glass of wine — but aside from knowing the few varietals I enjoy most, I’m fairly clueless. I don’t understand what differentiates a pinot noir from a cabernet, and I don’t know the ideal temperature for serving wine. White goes in the fridge, red stays on the counter. Plum CEO David Koretz says there are millions of people like me who could better enjoy wine and learn a lot more about it with this product.
That’s because the Plum is packed full of technology you don’t typically see in most wine-serving devices. It’s connected to the internet, and there are cameras inside each of the wine-bottle chambers. Once you insert a bottle of wine, the cameras scan the label and upload it to Plum’s database. After about 30 seconds, the 7-inch touchscreen on the front of the fridge tells you exactly which wine you’ve loaded up.
From there, Plum will adjust each of the wine chambers to the proper temperature for the bottle you’ve put in. Each compartment is totally sealed off from the other, so you can chill a white wine while slightly cooling a red at the same time. Koretz says Plum can recognize 220 different varietals of wine and adjust to the optimal serving temperature for whichever bottle you have.
If you don’t care much about wine, this certainly won’t persuade you to spend $1,499 on the Plum (though you probably weren’t in the market for such a device in the first place). But Koretz says that in a taste test with a dozen ordinary wine-drinkers, every single one was able to recognize that a wine tasted best when chilled to its ideal temperature.
And that’s not Plum’s only trick, either. There’s also an intriguing internal setup that lets you pop in a bottle of wine and have it stay fresh for about 90 days. Sure, most people don’t need that long to drink a bottle of wine, but there are circumstances when this could come in handy (for example, if you have a particularly high-end bottle you sample only on special occasions). David Koretz says the idea is to let you drink wine at your own pace and not worry about the bottle going bad. People pour out wine all the time because they open it, want just a glass or two, and never get around to finishing the bottle. Plum’s preservation system means you can crack open a bottle and drink at your own pace.
The system preserves wine by first puncturing the cork or cap of a bottle with a dual-core, stainless steel needle. Puncturing the closure rather than removing it entirely keeps the wine from oxidizing. Plum then pumps in argon gas to pressurize the bottle. From there, the wine travels through stainless steel to the tap (using steel throughout the process is another way to keep wine from oxidizing). When you’re ready to actually drink the wine, you just tap the “pour” button on the touchscreen, which lights up when you’re nearby, thanks to a proximity sensor. You can either pour a small 1-ounce sample or a full 5-ounce glass, and the system lets you adjust each of those sizes to suit your taste.
Indeed, Plum is pretty customizable overall — if you prefer your wine a little warmer or cooler than the recommended temperature that the device pulls down, you can adjust it as you see fit. The system then remembers that you like your chardonnay a few degrees cooler than the default setting and will set all future bottles to that temperature.
Plum’s internet connectivity comes into play in a few other ways. Once you have wine loaded into the machine, you can tap the screen to get details about the varietal and winemaker — there are reviews, info on where the wine came from and info on what to look for while you’re drinking. The Plum also saves your wine-drinking history and uploads it to an account you can create, so if you particularly enjoy a certain bottle, you can go back and find it. For someone like me who regularly enjoys a wine and then promptly forgets about it, this would come in pretty handy.
That seems to be the entire premise of the Plum. It’s clearly a luxury item, meant for wine drinkers who are at least semiserious about the experience. At $1,499, this isn’t going to be a mass-market device — but there are already plenty of wine-dispensing and preserving systems out there. As someone who enjoys both wine and technology, using Plum sounds like an intriguing proposition, even if it’s out of my price range. Having something that uses the internet and its technology to make wine taste better and make me more knowledgeable would be great — and even though I can’t justify its cost, there are plenty of people who can.
AIVAnet 