Acer Liquid Zest Plus Release Date, Price and Specs – CNET
Acer
For a phone that’s going to cost just $199 or £199 (around AU$275) Acer sure has tried put a lot into the 5.5-inch frame of the Liquid Zest Plus.
Big battery and big camera are the two initial stand outs. The 5,000 mAh battery is significantly bigger than some flagship phones that have been renowned for their lifespan: Samsung’s latest Note, for example, has just 3,000 mAh. Similarly the 13-megapixel rear camera isn’t what you’d expect from a sub-$200 phone.
But they aren’t the only tricks the Zest Plus has up its fairly plain sleeve. The battery has a quick charge system that’ll get it to 50 percent capacity in just one hour and it can even be used to charge other phones.
The camera has what Acer is calling a “hybrid tri-focusing system” which means it pulls focus fast: In just 0.3 seconds, in fact. Selfie fans (and aren’t we all these days) should get a kick from the 85-degree angle on the 5-megapixel front facing camera. There’s even an automatic selfie mode that uses face detection and you can shake the handset to start an automatic selfie timer.
Acer
The Liquid Zest Plus even comes with DTS-HD sound, dual-SIM capacity and a bluelight shield for night use. Of course, the real question is what did Acer leave out to get that low price tag?
We should get some deeper information on the Acer Liquid Zest Plus in a few days when Computex 2016 in in full swing, so stand by for some hands-on impressions later this week.
Fitbit Charge HR vs Garmin vívosmart HR
Fitbit vs Garmin: a battle between two fitness giants that’s been debated for quite some time.
Whether you simply need to keep better track of your daily activity or are looking to add something more to your workouts, the Fitbit Charge HR and the Garmin vívosmart HR are two of the best devices for the job. They have similar features and price points, but beyond that, these two devices have a number of notable differences. So which one is worth your hard-earned cash? Allow us to help you decide — read on for our full Fitbit Charge HR vs Garmin vívosmart HR comparison!
Buy the Fitbit Charge HR
Buy the Garmin vívosmart HR
Review notes: I’ve been using the Fitbit Charge HR for about 12 months, and the Garmin vívosmart HR for roughly two weeks. The Nexus 6P has been my smartphone companion of choice for the duration of the review period.
Design
The first thing you’ll notice when comparing these two devices are their displays. While Fitbit chose to employ a small OLED display on the Charge HR, the vívosmart HR comes with a much larger 1-inch LCD screen. You can cycle through your daily stats on the Charge HR by pressing the side button or tapping the display. It’s not a touchscreen, though, which means you’ll have to do pretty much everything else in the Fitbit app.
Alternatively, the vívosmart HR has a big touchscreen display that allows you to do much more on the device itself. Not only can you cycle through your daily stats, you can also change settings, manage Bluetooth connections, view past workouts, and much more.
The jury is still out as to whether or not a bigger touchscreen display is necessary on a fitness tracker of this size. While it’s a tad more convenient to be able to manage your Bluetooth connection directly from your vívosmart HR, I kind of prefer the simplicity of the Charge HR’s display. It just gives you what you need, and not a whole lot more. I know some people will have a different opinion, though.
Don’t miss: Fitbit Charge HR review3
Both of these devices come with standard watch-style clasp mechanisms, which I really like. They’re both incredibly easy to put on and take off, and once they’re on, they’re on.
Both devices’ straps are made of a soft rubber material, and both are incredibly comfortable to wear all day. The vívosmart HR is quite a bit bulkier, though. It sticks out from the wrist much more than the Charge HR does, which could prove to be an annoyance for some users.
On the design front, I don’t think there’s a clear winner here. Both are comfortable to wear all day, and both are pretty inconspicuous on the wrist.
Features and performance
Fitbit’s SmartTrack is one of the best features on the Charge HR
When it comes to activity tracking, the Charge HR and vívosmart HR both provide the essentials. They’ll track your steps taken, distance traveled, calories burned, stairs climbed, active minutes and even your sleep. The Charge HR offers one notable thing above the Garmin device, though, and that’s automatic activity tracking. Fitbit’s SmartTrack technology has been around for a while now, and it’s certainly one of the best features on the Charge HR. It will automatically track when it thinks you’re starting to exercise, and it’s pretty much spot on every time. Whether you’re going for an intense run, light jog or just a walk, all of your data will be there inside the app when you’re done. It’s a convenient feature that unfortunately isn’t offered on the vívosmart HR.
Both devices do, however, support automatic sleep tracking. There’s no need to tap a sleep now button — just fall asleep with one of the trackers on your wrist, and your sleep data will be there in app when you wake up. Both seem to be very accurate, too. They had no problems recognizing when I went to bed, when I woke up, or how often I was restless. To take sleep tracking one step further, both the Charge HR and vívosmart HR support silent alarms. Once you set your alarm time, these devices will wake you up with a small vibration on your wrist. Well, the Charge HR will anyway. The vívosmart HR’s vibration motor is quite strong, and definitely takes some getting used to.
Auto Goal is a feature every fitness tracker company should adopt
While Fitbit has a leg up in automatic activity tracking, Garmin has a handy little feature called Auto Goal. Just about every fitness tracker out there lets you adjust your daily step goals, but the vívosmart HR will do it for you automatically. So when you meet and exceed your daily step goal for a certain amount of days in a row, your device will start to automatically adjust the number of steps required for that day. This is a really nice feature that more companies should adopt.
Garmin packed a ton of other features in the vívosmart HR that the Fitbit device doesn’t offer. The vívosmart HR has a waterproof rating of 5ATM (up to 50 meters), whereas the Charge HR is only splash and sweat resistant. The vívosmart HR also shows you the weather and lets you control your music right from the device itself. One other big difference in functionality – while the Charge HR will give you call notifications, the vívosmart HR can give you much more than that. Call, text, email, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and basically any other app that’s installed on your phone can give you notifications through the vívosmart HR. Of course, it’s not a mind-blowing experience since the screen is pretty small, but it sure is much more handy than what the Charge HR offers.
If you need a device that can track your steps accurately, both devices will do the trick. I’ve been using the Charge HR for about a year, and I’ve found step tracking to be one of its strong points. And when comparing the Charge HR’s results with those of the vívosmart HR, I didn’t find many differences at all. I took both devices out for a 5 mile run, and the Garmin was only about 90 steps off from the Charge HR when I arrived back home. That’s pretty good considering I took about 8,600 steps.
While the devices are very similar in some areas, that’s certainly not the case with heart rate tracking, though. Both the Charge HR and vívosmart HR have optical heart rate monitors that can record your resting and active heart rate. Throughout our testing period, both devices have provided similar resting heart rate results, but active heart rate numbers were all over the place. I went on a 5 mile run, and the vívosmart HR consistently recorded my active heart rate to be about 20 bpm higher than the Charge HR’s numbers. When the Garmin device said my HR was at 178 bpm, the Charge HR would tell me I was at 158 bpm. These numbers didn’t even out until after I got down to resting heart rate levels.
This was pretty much the only discrepancy between the two devices on the performance front, though it is one you should definitely keep in mind. It’s also worth noting that you shouldn’t be looking for a wrist-mounted activity tracker if you need accurate HR results. Chest straps are the way to go for all of your HR-tracking needs, though they are a bit more cumbersome to wear during a workout.
Both Fitbit and Garmin claim their devices can achieve up to 5 days of battery life on a single charge, and that’s certainly the case here. The Charge HR and vívosmart HR can last up to 5 days on one charge, and you might be able to squeeze a little more life out of them if you keep the HR monitors turned off.
| Display | OLED | LCD |
| Tracking | Steps, calories, distance, active minutes, stairs, sleep | Steps, calories, distance, intensity minutes, stairs, sleep |
| Heart rate monitor | Optical | Optical |
| GPS | No | No |
| Waterproof | No, splash and sweat proof | Yes, 5 ATM (up to 50 meters) |
| Battery life | Up to 5 days | Up to 5 days |
| Notifications | Call | Call, text, email and more |
| Music control | No | Yes |
| Compatibility | Android, iOS, Windows, web | Android, iOS, Windows, web |
| Colors | Black, Blue, Plum, Tangerine, Teal | Black, Imperial Purple, Midnight Blue |
| Dimensions | Small: 137mm – 157.5mm (21mm wide) Large: 157.5mm – 193mm (21mm wide) |
Regular: 136mm-187mm (21mm wide) X-large: 180mm-224mm (21mm wide) |
Software
I’ve said time and time again that Fitbit’s smartphone companion app is one of the best out there, and I still believe that to this day. It’s simple, easy to use, and gives you access to your most important stats right on the main screen. It’s a good thing, too — since you can’t do a whole lot on the Charge HR itself, you’ll be spending a good amount of time in the app looking through activity summaries. You can tell Fitbit spent a lot of time making its app clean and easy to use. It doesn’t bombard you with too much information at one time, and it certainly doesn’t seem cluttered at all.
See also: Which Fitbit is right for you?14
There’s a slide-out menu on the left side where you can view your Challenges, Friends, Account and manage alarms. The Fitbit app is pretty good at giving you daily, weekly, monthly and yearly challenges, and will let you know when each challenge is met. You can also connect with friends who are in the Fitbit community. Finding new friends with which to connect is as easy as tapping the FAB at the bottom of the screen, and selecting which people in your contact list have Fitbit accounts.
Speaking of cluttered fitness applications, Garmin’s Connect app is what you’ll be using to sync all of your vívosmart HR’s data with your phone. It’s not a bad app, not in the slightest. It’s just confusing to navigate at times. Once you learn to use it, though, it will provide you with some incredibly detailed information that not many other apps provide.
The app is divided up into a few main sections: Snapshots, Leaderboard, Calendar, News Feed and Insights. Snapshots features all of your stats for the current day. When viewing your Snapshots, swipe left or right to navigate through your steps, sleep, and other stats. The Leaderboard is where you can connect with friends who also have Garmin devices, and Calendar gives you a detailed view of your stats for each day you’ve worn the device. News Feed is where all of your workouts are listed, and the Insights page houses a list of tips and tricks from Garmin that will help you make the most of your workouts.
Which comes out on top?
Right now the Fitbit Charge HR is sitting at around $130 on Amazon, while the Garmin vívosmart HR can be yours for $150. Are all the extra features on the vívosmart HR worth $20 extra? I’d say yes, most definitely.
Buy the Fitbit Charge HR
Buy the Garmin vívosmart HR
I love both of these devices. They’re great workout companions, they look good, and they can both last 5 days on a single charge. The vívosmart HR just offers more for the money, though. It’s waterproof, its screen can feed you more information, and the Auto Goal feature is great for those who are looking to improve on their past workouts. Fitbit’s Charge HR is easier to use than the vívosmart HR, and the fact that it can track your activity automatically is just great. If you’re spending over $100 for a fitness tracker that will help improve your workouts, I’d have to recommend the vívosmart HR.
What are your thoughts? Have you used either of these devices? Let us know what you think in the comments below!
Read more reviews:
- Fitbit Alta review
- Fitbit Blaze review
- Withings Activité Steel review
- Jawbone UP3 review
- Withings Go hands-on
HomeKit does indeed make the August Smart Lock more useful
The August Smart Lock is not new. We reviewed it way back in 2014, and for the most part, everything we mentioned then still applies. The lock is still super easy to install, and it still works with deadbolts, not knobs. Most importantly, using an app instead of physical keys can still be an adjustment, but being able to control your lock remotely really is an interesting convenience. So why bother revisiting, then? Because two years post-launch, it’s finally been upgraded with HomeKit integration. Since Engadget hasn’t actually tested many HomeKit devices yet, we thought this one was worth a second look.
For those not in the know (this won’t be many of you), HomeKit is a home automation framework created by Apple that developers can use to send data across applications and devices. It means that information from your thermostat, light switches, lightbulbs, blinds, locks and other smart-home devices can be shared using a common standard and with approved security practices. For now, the only way to interact with HomeKit is through Siri, but rumors suggest that the system may soon be getting a dedicated app. In the case of the Smart Lock, upgrading to HomeKit actually means buying a new device; the hardware differs slightly from the original model introduced two years ago.
Thanks to HomeKit, one can control the August Smart Lock by speaking to the phone and saying things like “Close the door” or “Is the back door open?” and have it react accordingly. This is precisely what technology is supposed to do: make our lives easier. Am I lazy for opening my door from the couch? Maybe, but I’m fairly certain most people would do it if they had the option.
Regarding the installation, well, there’s no need to repeat all the instructions from our original review, but basically, you mount a plate to the door, adjust it according to the deadbolt’s brand and mount the Smart Lock to the plate. If you’ve ever installed a doorknob before, this shouldn’t take you too long, and the instructions are easy to follow. I’ll focus instead on the integration with HomeKit, which was fairly painless to configure. Just open the August app, select the option to set up Siri, scan the code included with the lock and… that’s it. After tapping through four screens and waiting a few seconds, my phone was ready to use the smart lock as a HomeKit device.
Once the initial excitement of having a smart lock wore off, I had a hard time getting used to the idea of using my phone to unlock the door. For more than 30 years, I have trained my brain to use a key, and honestly, pulling your phone from your pocket, unlocking it, finding the right application, connecting to the lock and clicking the button takes much longer than the old-fashioned key-in-hole process. However, asking Siri to open the door is in fact faster and more convenient, especially if you’re already wearing headphones with a button.
In addition, August offers geofencing, which means the door will open when I’m nearby. After enabling this feature, I didn’t mind my wife telling me she knew when I got home from work because the door unlocked itself. What bothered me was the admittedly unfounded idea of the lock misidentifying somebody else’s device and opening the door. So, I disabled the functionality.
I’m no security expert and haven’t researched possible vulnerabilities with the August Smart Lock, so I’ll refrain from weighing in there. What we do know is that door locks in general are not safe to begin with. Lock-picking can be learned in a few minutes watching YouTube videos and with some practice one can get really good at it. The fact is, if somebody really wants to get into my house, they can just disable the alarms, break a window and steal my outdated TV. So, hacking the lock should not really be a worry, even though it’s the first question I get asked when I show August off to my friends.
While I enjoy checking the lock’s status from the couch, my mother, who is staying with us for a few weeks, doesn’t find it convenient. She doesn’t like speaking to Siri to begin with, and pulling up the app is a hassle. Also, I wasn’t aware my wife hadn’t been using the back door for a few days because she didn’t have the phone with her. It was my mistake not explaining that the Smart Lock can be opened by hand. After I saw her avoiding the back door I realized I hadn’t properly explained how to use the app.
I mention this to demonstrate that we still have to get used to home automation, and retraining everyone is not an easy task. If the August Smart Lock looked more like a regular lock, maybe people would be more keen on using it.
After a few weeks using the August Smart Lock, I must say it’s a great product. I love it, just not enough to pay $200 to replace a perfectly good old-fashioned deadbolt. It works great, is convenient, and it looks futuristic. I would even consider installing one permanently if it didn’t cost so much. The fact is, I have been unable to sell the product to my wife, who makes most of the purchases for our home.
While doing some informal polling among my friends about whether or not they would use this smart lock, the answers varied. Money was not a huge concern, but security was. Can somebody else use it if they have my phone? Yes, but also they can open your door with your keys. Can August or somebody else use it to track me? Can it be hacked to be controlled remotely? Does it leak information inadvertently? Those are questions that I hope the security community can answer in a timely fashion.
People might be wary of using smart locks because humans have been using regular locks and keys for hundreds of years, and they mostly work OK. This new class of device could be a tough sell, if only because we’re afraid of new things. Regardless, for people like me and you (you are interested in technology, aren’t you?), the August Smart Lock is great because it works as an extension to old locks, offering added convenience. The addition of HomeKit makes the Smart Lock even more user friendly than before. Considering the integration with partners such as AirBnB, I can see a bright future for smart locks, if companies like August are able to educate more people about the benefits.
Epson Expression Home XP-430 review – CNET
The Good Along with remote printing, the space-saving Epson XP-430 “Small-in-One” can also print from a variety of mobile devices including iOS, Android and Amazon Fire tablets. It features reliable output quality and a large color screen for making simple photo edits before sending a job through.
The Bad It doesn’t offer two-sided printing and the cost per page for the ink cartridges is slightly higher than average.
The Bottom Line The Epson Expression Home XP-430 combines reliable do-it-all multifunction printing and a space-saving design at an ultra-affordable price.
Every inch of space is essential for modern desks cluttered with devices, charges, and accessories. And unless you’re a productivity powerhouse or operating a business out of your home, there’s no reason why you need a giant printer taking up half your work space.
Epson XP-430 (pictures)
See full gallery
1 – 5 of 9
Next
Prev
That’s why the Epson Expression Home XP-430 multifunction printer is great for families and students: with a compact form factor and trays that fold into the device when it’s not being used, it really earns its “Small-in-One” nickname. The fact that it can print from nearly any device — PCs, Macs, iPhones, iPads, Android devices and Chromebooks — amps up the convenience factor. And the low price — it lists for $100, £90 and AU$129, but is available online for less — clinches the deal.
Design
The XP-430 replaces 2015’s XP-420 — which we loved for the price — and has a very similar list of features but boosts the size of the color display and updates the ink cartridges to Epson’s new model 288 tanks. The DuraBrite Ultra Inks work to reduce smudges immediately after you print a document or a photo and actually adds a bit of water resistance on both plain and glossy photo paper.
View full gallery
Epson’s XP-430 is a combination ink-jet printer and scanner with a small form factor.
Sarah Tew/CNET
Like the previous model, the XP-430’s space-saving design is the machine’s main focus, measuring just 15.4 inches wide, 20.8 inches deep, and 11 inches tall (39.1 x 52.8 x 28 cm) when the printer is ready for action: that’s with both paper trays fully extended; when they’re closed, you can fit the printer into a space that measures just 15.4 inches wide, 11.8 inches deep, and 5.7 inches tall in storage (39.1 x 30 x 14.5 cm).
Epson XP-430
| $99.99 MSRP, $70 online |
| £90 MSRP, £50 online |
| AU$129 MSRP |
| 15.4″ x 20.8″ x 11.0″ (39.1 x 52.8 x 28 cm) |
| Print/Copy/Scan |
| 4-ink tank (Black, Cyan, Magenta, Yellow) |
| No |
| No |
| Yes |
| USB 2.0, Wi-Fi, Airprint, Google Cloud Print, Epson Remote Print, Epson E-mail Print |
| 100 Sheets |
| 2.7″ (6.9 cm) Color LCD |
The paper input tray can hold 100 sheets of plain paper, but it’s able to accept all different kinds of paper including Epson’s own Iron-on Cool Peel Transfer Paper, Ultra Premium Presentation paper, and more. There’s no auto-document feeder for batch copying and scanning, but I wouldn’t expect a $99 device to include one anyway.
View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET
Regardless, 100 sheets is certainly a suitable capacity for the average student or office worker, but small businesses looking for a high-volume printer will probably want to step up to a larger unit like the ET-2550 EcoTank that also happens to feature DIY ink refills.
The center control panel sits within a console that rotates up to view the 2.7-inch (6.9 cm) mono LCD display at a suitable viewing angle. Though I usually prefer printers that use mechanical buttons, I like that the XP-430’s directional buttons have a tactile click so you know when a press is registered.
View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET
The front has a memory card reader that lets you walk up and print from an SD card without actually touching a computer. Unlike previous models, however, you don’t have an open USB input to connect a flash drive; if you want to upload your photos, you’ll need to do so by extracting your SD card from the camera and popping it into the machine. That’s not a big deal either, especially now that Epson now offers one-touch photo uploads to Facebook and cloud-based services.
You can preview your photos on the LCD and even make simple adjustments to crop dimensions, resize, or perform one-button touch-ups.
Features and setup
Epson gives you the option to connect the printer to your computer using direct USB (you need to supply the cable), Wi-Fi or — if your router supports it — Wi-Fi Direct.
Smart setup on the touch panel is a two-part process: turn on the machine and click Network Setting, then designate your wireless network and enter its password, and that’s it. The entire setup from start to finish, with a connection established on our lab network (which uses a home-style Verizon Fios router) took us less than 5 minutes.
View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET
The installation process also includes a step that asks if you want the system to automatically hunt and install firmware updates, and we recommend you click “yes” when prompted; the appeal of Web-connected printers like the XP-420 means you don’t have to wait for Epson to ship you software updates, so take advantage of it.
B&O Play Beoplay A1 Portable Bluetooth Speaker review – CNET
The Good The dome-shaped, aluminum-clad Beoplay A1 speaker looks sleek, delivers relatively high-quality sound for its very compact size, has excellent battery life and works well as a speakerphone. A leather carrying strap allows you to hang the speaker from a hook, loop or branch.
The Bad It’s fairly pricey and heats up a little when played at high volumes for long periods. Also, no protective carrying pouch or case is included.
The Bottom Line The Beoplay’s strong design, sound and batter life make it a worthy premium mini Bluetooth speaker contender.
Credit B&O Play for creating a Bluetooth speaker that doesn’t look like anything out there already. The new dome-shaped Beoplay A1 is not only the smallest wireless speaker from the Danish company, but also the most affordable at $249, £199 in the UK and AU$379 in Australia.
Designed by well-known Danish furniture designer Cecile Manz, the aluminum-clad A1 is clearly meant to take on Bose’s popular SoundLink Mini II wireless speaker, and it’s one of the best-sounding mini Bluetooth speakers I’ve heard, though it better be considering its elevated price point.
The Beoplay A1 charges via USB-C and has an audio input.
Sarah Tew/CNET
While it looks sleek and has no protruding buttons B&O Play says it’s “robust enough to handle the bumps and scrapes of everyday use.” It comes with a leather carrying strap, though no protective carrying pouch, which is too bad.
The speaker has two drivers — a 3.5-inch mid cone woofer and a 3/4-inch tweeter. It manages to play very loud for its size, delivers a surprising amount of bass and is very strong in the midrange where vocals live. That said, like all these small speakers, it does have its limitations, and has a harder time resolving more complicated tracks (a lot of instruments playing at the same time) at higher volumes. That said, it will fill a small room with sound and would work well in a kitchen, bathroom, home office or dorm room.
Beoplay A1 (pictures)
See full gallery
1 – 5 of 8
Next
Prev
As its shape implies, it also doubles as a speakerphone and it’s a good one. The other plus is the strong battery life — it’s rated at 24 hours thanks to a 2,200mAh internal rechargeable battery and an efficient adaptive power management system. It’s worth noting that it charges with a USB-C cable, not a standard Micro-USB cable.
Here are the A1’s key specs:
Microsoft Lumia 650 review – CNET
The Good The Lumia 650 has a great design and a price that can’t be beat.
The Bad It’s missing some key new Windows phone features, like Continuum and Windows Hello.
The Bottom Line As budget phones go, the Lumia 650 ticks most of the right boxes, but with Microsoft’s phone future looking dim, you may want to pass.
If Microsoft isn’t killing off the Lumia brand, it’s certainly tamping it down — that fact isn’t official, but the job layoffs to its phone business are all too real. If that’s true, then the Lumia 650 might well be the last of its line, and while it’s a fine phone for its price, this likely swan song would end with more a whimper than a bang. It’s hard to recommend a phone from a company with a shaky phone future, but if your budget-phone needs must be met, then read on.
First things first, the 650 looks the business. From the anodized aluminium frame to the bright and crisp 5-inch OLED screen, the Lumia 650 has a more premium look than the flagship Lumia 950.
But pick it up and you begin to realise how Microsoft can put such a low price on it: $199 or AU$299, which converts to £135.70. It’s just 6.9mm thick but at 122g (4.3 ounces), the weight feels so light that CNET editors I showed the phone too kept asking: Is the battery inside? Coupled with the flimsy plastic back panel, the lightness makes it feel cheap.
The screen might look good, but the 720p resolution is a let down in a world of Quad HD displays, and the low-end Snapdragon 212 processor isn’t exactly a powerhouse. Perhaps more sadly, it lacks support for the biometric security system Windows Hello and the turn-your-phone-into-a-PC Windows Continuum. One bright spot: despite performing poorly in our battery test, the 2,000mAh battery actually did very well in real-world scenarios of moderate use.
If you’re set on a halfway decent phone with a truly budget price, the Lumia 650 does give you a solid Windows experience with better looks than most phones in the range. It just isn’t clear how many updates and how much support Microsoft will be able to offer down the line.
2016 Mercedes-Benz G65 AMG review – Roadshow
The Good The G65 combines a timeless look and appeal with genuine off-road robustness and a heady dollop of luxury.
The Bad Beyond being catastrophically expensive to buy and run, the G65’s V-12 engine isn’t as nice as the V-8 in the much-less-costly G63 AMG. Like all G-Wagens, the G65’s recirculating-ball power steering doesn’t just take some getting used to, it’s comically bad.
The Bottom Line If you get it, you get it. If you don’t, you don’t.
I recently showed the SUV seen here to Rob, a car-loving friend. After studying its appearance, climbing in and around it, fiddling with the power driver’s seat and listening to the engine fire up, he offered up his first impression: “This thing is absurd. It…it makes no…no sense. It’s just so…stupid,” he stammered.
That comment was still hanging in the air when he quickly followed it up with, “So, how much do you think it’d be for a used one? I’d totally drive this.”
It didn’t take my friend more than 15 minutes of pawing around to arrive at the same conclusion that took me a week’s worth of driving to figure out. This 2016 Mercedes-Benz G65 AMG — all $223,575-worth of 12-cylinder-powered Mesozoic-era Brinks truck — is at once ridiculous, terrible and amazingly wonderful. So amazing, in fact, that if I hit the PowerBall, my lizard brain would surely have me reflexively headed to my nearest Benz dealer.
Mercedes’ G65 AMG has a primal, lizard-brain appeal like few other vehicles.
Chris Paukert/Roadshow
Don’t judge, and don’t be surprised at the deeply conflicted thought progression of anyone pulled into this matte-gray planet’s orbit. Mercedes’ square-jawed, square-everything SUV is barely bound by the laws of nature, let alone those of reasoning and common sense.
Like some sort of four-wheeled yeti, this vehicle is a mysterious, age-old beast that’s been spoken of in hushed tones for decades under multiple names: G-Class. Geländewagen (“cross-country vehicle” auf Deutsch). G-Wagen for short. Slice one in half and study its rings like a giant sequoia, and you’ll find that whatever you call it, the G-Class dates directly back to 1979, making it one of the very oldest vehicles you can still buy new. Yet despite its advanced age and stratospheric price tag, the last couple of years have seen this SUV achieve its best-ever global sales tallies. (April figures alone were up 19.1 percent year over year in the US.)
In other words, the G-Class is having a moment.
2016
Mercedes-Benz
G65
AMG
is
a
singular…
See full gallery
1 – 6 of 55
Next
Prev
You needn’t actually lay eyes on Big Benz to know it’s unlike anything else on the road — all you have to do is hear it. From the sharply metallic rifle-bolt clack of its door locks to the singular, prolonged whir of the starter motor that brings its leviathan 6.0-liter bi-turbo 12-cylinder to life, there will be no confusing this Three-Pointed Star for a Land Rover Range Rover Autobiography or a Bentley Bentayga — essentially its only rivals in the $200K SUV Club. It’s a feast for the senses.
Even the door and hood hinges stand proud in the slipstream, each its own tiny little “@#%^ you” to aerodynamic efficiency.
And it’s murder on the wind. The G65’s bodywork treats the air the way its V-12 treats global warming: like a nasty rumor it’s singlehandedly trying to debunk. From an upright grille to fender-top turn-signal protuberances and lighthouse-vertical windows, the G-Class is so openly disdainful of the passing atmosphere that it feels like some kind of strategy — the sheet metal equivalent of one of those resistance parachutes that sadistic athletes use to build stamina, perhaps. Even the door and hood hinges stand proud in the slipstream, each its own tiny little “@#%^ you” to aerodynamic efficiency.
Lay off the G65’s throttle at freeway speeds and you can actually feel the bruising wind and the parasitic drag of its four-wheel-drive system slowing things down. With 6,000 pounds of German history on its back, it should come as no surprise that the G65’s handbuilt 6.0-liter V-12 is rarely loafing when on the move. You’ll find yourself calling upon its 621 horsepower — and more importantly, its scarcely fathomable 738 pound-feet of torque — on the regular.
This 6.0-liter bi-turbo V-12 generates 621 horsepower and 733 pound-feet of torque.
Andrew Krok/Roadshow
For an extra $78,000, buyers receive four additional cylinders amounting to an extra half-liter of displacement, meaning the V-12 is priced like all of its parts came out of a Ritz-Carlton minibar. Yet according to Mercedes, you’ll only be quicker than the $139,900 G63 to 60 mph by 0.1 second, with 60 mph arriving in a rapid 5.2 ticks. (OK, top speed is bumped up to 143 mph, an increase of 13). Thing is, I’ve driven the V-8 G63, and it actually feels quicker than this rig because it doesn’t have as narrow of a powerband. Playing the G65’s dozen cylinders only delivers max oomph within a very specific range of engine speeds. And while it isn’t as old as the box that it comes in, this hand-built M279 V-12 has its roots in an engine family that dates back to the late 1990s, and it doesn’t like to be hurried when cold.
At an extra $78,000, the V-12 is priced like all of its parts came out of a Ritz-Carlton minibar.
Let’s call a spade a spade: The G65’s engine isn’t as good as the one in the far less-expensive G63. Its raison d’être is to be the winner in the owner’s personal cylinder-waving contest, and as the first V-12 available in an SUV in nearly a quarter-century, well, mission accomplished.
While its engine isn’t modern, the G65 at least has a more up-to-date transmission that helps make the most of it. The seven-speed AMG Speedshift Plus 7G-Tronic gearbox has — you guessed it — seven speeds, and whether left to swap cogs by its lonesome or when using the manual paddle shifters, it does a good job of keeping the engine on boil.
Even if you’ve only been skimming this article or taken a glance at its photographs, you know the G65’s fuel-economy picture isn’t pretty. Eleven miles per gallon city and 13 mpg highway are the official EPA estimates, and single-digit real-world returns are likely, even without enthusiastic use. OPEC ministers, rejoice.
HTC 10 vs HTC One M9
HTC has always been known for their beautiful designs and build quality, but when it comes to the flagship race, their high-end offerings have been found lacking in key areas, particularly the camera, that makes it fall short against it competition. Unfortunately, HTC has had a rough go over the last few years, but the company is hoping for a reversal of fortunes with their 2016 flagship smartphone.
- HTC 10 review
- HTC One M9 review
HTC may have dropped the “One” moniker with their latest device, but this may actually be the one for you. How much of an improvement is the current HTC flagship when compared to its predecessor? We find out, as we take an in-depth look at the HTC 10 vs HTC One M9!
Buy the HTC 10 now!
Buy the HTC One M9 now!
Design
HTC has made a few tweaks to the design language with the 10, but these small changes go a long way in differentiating the current flagship from its predecessors. Both smartphones do feature a full metal unibody construction, and are made from the same high-grade aluminium materials. However, the HTC 10 doesn’t comes with the brushed metal finish that is seen with the One M9, giving the former a much cleaner and sleeker look. The HTC 10 also comes with chamfered edges all around the back, which has been a bit of a polarizing design element, but the silhouette look that it allows for is actually pretty great.
The biggest changes are seen up front though. The top and bottom sections of the One M9 come with the same metallic finish as the back, which really emphasizes the black border that is found around the display. With the 10, the top and bottom sections are now black, and helps the display blend into all the sides. The bezels on both phones are about the same thickness, but feels a lot less prominent with the HTC 10 because of this.
Another big change is the removal of the dual front-facing speakers with the HTC 10, and while a front-facing speaker is still found above the display, the one below has been removed, in favor of a fingerprint scanner, which is embedded into a capacitive home button. That being said, the HTC 10 does have a second speaker at the bottom and this comes with a subwoofer built in. Finally, the black bar with the HTC logo that is found with the One M9 is no longer there with the 10, which is definitely a big plus.
Both smartphones comes with the buttons on right side, with the power button placed below the volume rocker. However, while the power button with the One M9 did come with a textured pattern, this is far more prominent with the 10, making it far easier to find with your finger. The buttons of the One M9 also sit a little more flush with the body of the phone, but that isn’t the case with the 10, allowing for better tactile feedback.
The HTC 10 is slightly taller and wider than the One M9, which is understandable, given that the former features a display that is larger by 0.2-inches. The 10 is also slightly thinner, but heavier than the One M9, but the overall feel in the hand with both smartphones is about the same. The metal build does make both smartphones a touch slippery, and is more pronounced with the 10 because of its smooth finish on the back, and can take some getting used to. Both the HTC 10 and the One M9 are beautifully-designed smartphones, but the cleaner look up front and on the back give the 10 the advantage when it comes to design.
Display
The HTC 10 comes with a 5.2-inch Super LCD 5 display with a Quad HD resolution, resulting in a pixel density of 565 ppi, while the One M9 features a 5-inch Super LCD 3 screen, with a lower Full HD resolution, and resulting pixel density of 441 ppi. HTC finally made the jump the Quad HD with the 10, but 1080p is more than enough when it comes to the 5-inch screen of the One M9, and in fact, you won’t notice a significant difference in sharpness when comparing the two displays side by side.
What is notable however is the vast improvement in quality. The display of the One M9 features much cooler color temperatures, and almost has a greenish hue, which looks very unappealing. The display of the HTC 10 is far warmer, and does get much closer to true whites. Colors are very vibrant with the 10, with a saturation that almost matches what is found with the good AMOLED displays out there. The HTC 10 offers a viewing experience that is far more enjoyable when compared to the rather dull screen of the One M9, and it certainly isn’t difficult to pick a winner here.
Performance
As is always the case when comparing a current generation device with its predecessor, performance gets a significant boost, with the HTC 10 featuring the latest and greatest currently available. Under the hood is a quad-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 processor, clocked at 2.15 GHz, and backed by the Adreno 530 GPU and 4 GB RAM, while the One M9 features an octa-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 processor, clocked at 2 GHz, and backed by the Adreno 430 GPU and 3 GB of RAM.
Not surprisingly, the performance with the HTC 10 is far better than what is seen with the One M9. Installing and opening apps takes much longer with the latter, and games take longer to load as well. With the One M9 coming with an older version of the Snapdragon 810, the device also tends to get uncomfortably warm when under heavy use, which further cripples the performance. The HTC 10 scores much higher in benchmark tests, but while that sometimes doesn’t translate to real world performance, the difference is easily seen here when comparing the two.
Hardware
In hardware, HTC actually removes a few features in order to accommodate the different design language of the HTC 10, but does also add some useful ones in their place. For starters, the IR blaster that is found with the One M9 up top is longer available with the 10. The IR blaster lets you control your television, cable boxes, sound systems, and other electronics, but with this not being as widely used, its removal makes sense when it comes to the latest flagship.
A more important feature that has been removed is the dual-front facing speakers that are seen with the One M9. This was one of the features that made the One M9 stand out from the crowd, and allowed for one of the best smartphone audio experiences around. The sound quality is simply fantastic, with crisp and clear audio, and the front-facing speakers created a very balanced sound.
On the other hand, the HTC 10 comes with a single front-facing speaker above the display, that is coupled with a woofer found at the bottom of the phone, that helps with the lows and mids. You do get nice sounding audio here, but it doesn’t match up to the quality of the One M9. However, where the 10 does take the lead in terms of audio is when using headphones, with the 10 featuring a Hi-Fi audio DAC, a headphone AMP, and Dolby enhancements, to allow for a great listening experience.
Of course, the reason for the removal of the dual front-facing speakers with the HTC 10 is to make way for the fingerprint scanner up front, that is embedded into the capacitive home button. The scanner is one of the best around, and is impressively fast and accurate. With a capacitive home button comes capacitive back and recent apps keys as well, allowing for more display real estate, when compared to the One M9 and its on-screen navigation keys.
While this isn’t a hardware feature, it is worth making a note of how loud the vibration motor of the HTC 10 is. It is one of the loudest we’ve seen, and if the phone is placed on a table, you will likely hear the vibration over the actual sound of the notification alert. The vibration motor of the One M9 is also very strong, but not nearly as loud.
The HTC 10 comes with a larger 3,000 mAh battery, compared to the 2,840 mAh unit of the One M9, but with the display of the former getting a bump in resolution, the battery life available with both is quite similar. Both smartphones comfortably allow for a full day of use, with around 4 hours of screen on-time, which is pretty good. Both smartphones also come with fast charging capabilities, but the HTC 10 charges faster, courtesy of a USB Type C (USB 3.0) port and Qualcomm Quick Charge 3.0 support.
Camera
The HTC One M9 comes with a 20 MP rear camera, with a f/2.2 aperture and no optical image stabilization, while the 10 features a 12 MP primary camera, with a f/1.8 aperture and OIS. One of the most disappointing aspects of the One M9 was its camera performance, and while the MP count has been reduced, the camera sensor comes with larger pixel sizes, allowing for much better low-light photography.
When it comes to image quality, the HTC 10 is far superior to the One M9. Looking at outdoor shots, photos taken with the 10 feature more color and higher contrast, and even appear sharper and with more detail, despite the reduction in megapixels. The One M9 camera is far more prone to overexposing a shot, and there always seems to be a haze over the photo. The HTC 10 does overexpose in some areas though, but when compared to the One M9, the former does a much better job with handling brighter areas. HDR also works better with the 10, even if the image sometimes appears to be a bit unnatural.
There is also a significant improvement when it comes to taking photos in low-light conditions. The One M9 utilizes a slower shutter speed in these situations, and coupled with the lack of OIS, you often get blurry shots, even with the steadiest of hands. There is a lot of loss in detail, a lot more grain, and the color reproduction suffers as well. HDR usually helps when taking photos in low-light, but it has the opposite effect with the One M9. It takes a lot longer to stitch the photos together, so you will end up with a blurry image every time, and the image will be way too bright.
HTC One M9 camera samples
HTC 10 camera samples
Interestingly enough, the front-facing 4 MP “Ultrapixel” camera of the One M9 is a lot better than the 5 MP unit of the HTC 10. You get a lot more detail with the One M9, and it exposes the shot better. The advantage the selfie camera of the HTC 10 has is with regards to video, with the front-facing camera also coming with OIS, allowing for very steady videos, which is perfect for vlogging. With video, the rear camera of the 10 also does a much better job, thanks to the availability of OIS, and the videos shot with the One M9 also seem to be too dark.
Software
Both smartphones are running Android 6.0.1 Marshmallow with the HTC Sense UI on top. However, the difference between the two version of the Sense are significant, with the latest version available with the 10 far more streamlined. The aesthetics largely remain the same, but HTC now retains a lot of Google’s Material Design elements, such as in the notification drop down, the Settings menu, as well as in the Recent Apps screen.
HTC has streamlined the software experience even further by removing duplicate apps. So now, you get Google Photos, Google Calendar, and Google Messenger, instead of HTC Gallery, and the HTC versions of the other two apps. It used to be redundant and a little confusing for users before, and it’s great to see HTC make this change. There were also a lot of other pre-installed games and apps that cluttered the One M9, but have been removed with the HTC 10.
HTC 10 screenshots
In terms of features, things remain mostly the same. You get lock screen shortcuts, a robust Themes store that lets you completely change the look and feel of the interface, and BlinkFeed, which a news and social media aggregrator. Of all the left screen experiences out there, BlinkFeed remains one of the best, and is a nice way to have all the information you may need in one page. There is also a great HTC widget that houses all your most used apps, with the list changing depending on your location.
HTC One M9 screenshots
HTC Sense has been one of the better skins of Android since the One M7, and while the jump from the One M9 to the 10 isn’t a major overhaul, the key changes and improvements that have been made make a huge difference.
Specs comparison
| Display | 5.2-inch Super LCD5 display Quad HD resolution, 565 ppi |
5-inch Super LCD3 display Full HD resolution, 441 ppi |
| Processor | 2.15 GHz quad-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 Adreno 530 GPU |
2 GHz octa-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 Adreno 430 GPU |
| RAM | 4 GB | 3 GB |
| Storage | 32/64 GB expandable via microSD up to 200 GB |
32 GB expandable via microSD up to 200 GB |
| Camera | 12 MP rear camera, f/1.8 aperture, 1.55µm pixel size, OIS, laser autofocus 5 MP front-facing camera, f/1.8 aperture, OIS |
20 MP rear camera, f/2.2 aperture 4 MP “Ultrapixel” front-facing camera |
| Connectivity | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac Bluetooth 4.2 GPS + GLONASS NFC USB 3.1, Type-C 1.0 connector |
Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac Bluetooth 4.1 GPS + GLONASS NFC IR Blaster microUSB 2.0 |
| Battery | 3,000 mAh non removable |
2,840 mAh |
| Software | Android 6.0.1 Marshmallow HTC Sense UI |
Android 6.0.1 Marshmallow HTC Sense UI |
| Dimensions | 145.9 x 71.9 x 9 mm 161 grams |
144.6 x 69.7 x 9.6 mm 157 grams |
Gallery
Final thoughts
So there you have it for this closer look at the HTC 10 vs One M9! When it comes to these two HTC flagships, the 10 features notable improvements over its predecessor. While the One M9 does offer the better audio experience when using external speakers, the HTC 10 has it beat it pretty much every other aspect.
- HTC 10 review
- HTC One M9 review
The display is more vibrant, with brighter colors, and of course, a higher resolution. The design is much sleeker, and the software experience has been streamlined even further. The fingerprint scanner is a nice addition and works remarkably well, and HTC finally got things right on the camera side of things. Unless dual-front facing speakers are an absolute must have, the HTC 10 is definitely the better the choice between the two, and even then, the new speaker arrangement on the HTC 10 provides excellent audio.
Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post’s poll.
Which is your pick out of these two and is the HTC 10 enough of an upgrade? Vote in the poll and let us know your views in the comments below!
Buy the HTC 10 now!
Buy the HTC One M9 now!
Synek Counter Top Beer Dispenser review – CNET
The Good Once you have everything hooked up, it’s easier to pour a tall, foamy glass of beer from the temp-controlled and carbonated Synek Counter Top Beer Dispenser than from a growler.
The Bad Depending on where you live, finding beers you can actually use with Synek ranges from tough to impossible. Setting up Synek is a pain, and the valves can be finicky when your beer starts running low. Synek’s cartridges don’t actually keep your beer fresher for significantly longer than an ordinary growler.
The Bottom Line With Synek, you’re supposed to be able to bring home a greater variety of beer than you can find in bottles and you’re supposed to be able to drink it at your own pace. Right now, you can’t do either. The Synek Counter Top Beer Dispenser isn’t ready for the mass market.
Visit manufacturer site for details.
Get ready to fight a beer revolution. The Synek Counter Top Beer Dispenser wants to make distribution headaches a thing of the past for brewers, and help consumers drink a greater variety of beers at home. Synek’s idea is to replace growlers with airtight, doggie-bag-like cartridges. Fill one up at your local bar or brewery, then take it home and plug it into the carbonated, temperature controlled dispenser, and you’ll be able to enjoy your fresh brew for weeks longer than you would from a growler — not to mention the fact that each cartridge holds twice as much beer as a growler does.
You can order the Synek Dispenser on the company’s website right now for $330 (Synek is lining up distributors, and hopes to start selling the dispenser overseas soon — for now, that price converts to roughly £220 and AU$460). For your money, you get an empty carbon dioxide canister, one Synek cap, and three cartridges so you can open the box, grab a bag, and head to your favorite bar. Just be ready to fight the good fight alongside Synek.
There were moments during my tests when I saw how great this product could be, but it’s not there yet. For starters, you’ll have to battle the machine to get it working correctly, and once you do, the cartridges won’t actually maintain your beer’s taste for very long. On top of all that, the selection of beers you can get in a cartridge is currently quite limited in some parts of the US.
So, if you don’t want to be a soldier in Synek’s revolution, and instead, just want to be a customer and enjoy the convenience and ease of use that title implies, then I can’t recommend the Synek Counter Top Beer Dispenser right now.
Sipping suds with the Synek Counter Top Beer…
See full gallery
1 – 5 of 14
Next
Prev
The quest for beer
A few of my issues with Synek might not apply to you. For instance, I had trouble finding a place to fill my carbon dioxide tank. If you’re a home brewer, you might already have a source, but keep in mind, you can’t just buy a tank of CO2 — you have to fill the empty tank Synek sends you. Here in Louisville, Kentucky, I couldn’t find a place that’d fill my tank with food-grade CO2. So, I went with the company’s suggestion, and filled it with industrial CO2 at a sporting goods store.
My next issue — a much bigger one given Synek’s promise of selection — finding beer. Again, this might not be an issue for you. Take a look at the map on Synek.beer. At first glance, the number of pins impressed me, but the gray ones that fill out the map are mostly breweries that aren’t participating. Enter your ZIP code, and make sure you have a few gold pins near you if you’re considering purchasing Synek.
Synek’s map looks great at a glance, but the gray pins don’t necessarily indicate a participating location.
Screenshot by Andrew Gebhart/CNET
Bars need a special fill kit in order to pour beer into your Synek cartridge without it touching air along the way. Gold pins on the Synek map mark places that have one of these kits. Any bar might be willing to fill one up for you the same way they’d fill up a growler, but you only get the longer shelf life if you have it filled with a kit.
In Louisville, the only participating location is Akasha brewing — a relatively new facility on the outskirts of downtown. I’d never been to Akasha before testing Synek, but I’m always looking for an excuse to try a new brewery, so this made for a perfect one.
Finding a place to fill my Synek cartridge was harder than I’d like. Hopefully the upcoming addition that lets you use the dispenser with an ordinary growler will alleviate the problem.
Chris Monroe/CNET
As you might imagine, tasting the various Akasha beers was fun. Waiting while they figured out what the heck Synek was and how to work it? Less so. Again, this was a location with a gold pin on Synek’s site. They had never filled up a cartridge before, and the bartender and manager had no clue what I was talking about when I asked. The owner did, and was keen to help me figure it out for love of experimentation.
Gadgets for beer lovers
- Fizzics
- Brewie
- PicoBrew Pico
The second-closest Synek-approved, gold-pin brewery was over 100 miles away, in Indianapolis. After making the 2-hour trek, I had a similar experience. This time, one of the two bartenders had actually heard of Synek, but getting the cartridge filled was an experiment he had only tried once before. Friends of mine across the country inquired about Synek at other gold pin bars to more blank stares.
So, if you’re looking to join the fight and help recruit and teach your local bars about Synek, I’m sure Synek would appreciate your efforts. If you’re a customer hoping for a seamless experience of taking some beer to go, expect to do a lot of extra leg work.
Tasting disappointment
Amazon Fire TV Stick review – CNET
The Good The Amazon Fire TV Stick can access thousands of the most popular streaming apps. It’s dirt cheap and unlike Chromecast, it actually includes a physical remote. Amazon content launches quickly. The voice remote option allows more convenient search and easy access to the Alexa digital assistant.
The Bad Slower than most other streaming devices. Popular apps like Netflix, Hulu, YouTube and others take a back seat to Amazon’s own TV shows and movies. There’s no way to customize the interface.
The Bottom Line The inexpensive Fire TV Stick remains a great value for heavy users of Amazon TV shows and movies, but most other new devices work better for Netflix and the rest.
Along with Roku, Apple and Google, Amazon is a major player in streaming TV devices, and the Fire TV Stick is the most popular Amazon streamer. It’s small, cheap and capable, and people seem to like it. In fact it’s the most-reviewed product in Amazon history, with more than 100,000 user reviews, averaging four out of five stars.
Count this as one review that’s less enthusiastic. After a year and a half on the market, the Fire TV stick is showing its age. It’s not the the Fire Stick is a bad device; it’s not. It’s that its similarly price rivals are so good. All of the Fire TV Stick’s competitors have shipped newer streamers since it debuted, and the two closest in price — Roku Streaming Stick and Google Chromecast — are both better right now.
Roku’s new-for-2016 stick costs a bit more, but it’s worth it for the extra apps, speedier response times and more open, customer-friendly interface. The slightly cheaper Chromecast is more appealing for phone-centric users who don’t mind the lack of a remote (though, notably, it lacks the Amazon Prime video app).
Amazon’s Stick is good enough, but struggles to stand out against the tough competition. The Alexa voice assistant is easily accessible if you buy the more expensive version ($50 versus $40) with the voice remote, but since you have to have your TV on, it’s hardly a viable Echo or Dot substitute. Amazon has done a good job adding must-have apps, but they get buried by menus designed — more than any other device I’ve ever used — to make you browse, search for and buy video from just one source: Amazon itself.
Amazon Fire TV Stick product photos
See full gallery
1 – 5 of 17
Next
Prev
And if you’re a hardcore “Amazon person,” the Fire TV box might be worth the extra money compared to the Stick. It has better connectivity, 4K capability, and is smoother and faster to use every day. The Stick is still a superior value at less than half the price, however.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Amazon replaces the current Stick with a faster version later this year. Until then there are better devices to choose as your main streamer, and better values.
Editors’ note: This review was completely updated May 27, 2016, to account for changes since the last update in 2015, including the introduction of new devices. The ratings were reduced to account for the changes in the competitive landscape mentioned above.
Sticking to the Amazon basics
If you’re not familiar with streamers in general and sticks in particular, here’s a quick primer. Numerous devices available today let you stream TV shows, movies and other video content, as well as music, via the Internet.
View full gallery
Sarah Tew/CNET
Sticks like Amazon’s are the smallest and cheapest. They plug into your TV’s HDMI port and use your home Wi-Fi network. They get power either from an included wall adapter or a USB port on your TV, although I recommend using the adapter to avoid the stick needing to boot up every time you turn your TV on.
Almost all streamers can access major apps like Netflix, Hulu, YouTube, HBO Now and Watch ESPN. The major exception is Amazon video. Apple TV, Chromecast and Google Android TV devices like the Nvidia Shield can’t access any Amazon content directly. They lack an Amazon video app, so you have to use an inconvenient workaround like AirPlay or screen mirroring from a phone, tablet or computer.
AIVAnet 