Best portable projectors of 2016!
Our smartphones and tablets are fantastic devices for media consumption, but with relatively small screens, sharing content isn’t easy. That is where a nice portable projector comes in. Be it to showcase a presentation at work or school, or enjoy a movie night with friends and family, here is a roundup of some of the best portable projectors currently available!
JmGO View
The JmGO View Portable Projector first showed up on Indiegogo, with the company comfortably surpassing their $100,000 goal by raising over $256,000. The JmGO View is one of the best thought out portable projectors we’ve seen, with a design that is unlike anything else that is currently available in the market.
While its cylindrical design may seem like a bad idea at first, with it looking like it would be susceptible to rolling around, the device is paired with a magnetic stand that holds it firmly in place. The real advantage of this design is in the fact that the body of the projector unit can be tilted to any angle, allowing to find the best position for the projected image with ease. This is definitely a far better implementation than other projectors that have a set of pre-fixed angles, with the options often not exactly what you’d want.
Like the other projectors on this list, the JmGO View comes with a keystoning feature, which prevents the image from warping even when the angles aren’t perfect. However, what really makes this projector special is the fact that it is running Android 4.4.4 Kitkat. The software is heavily customized to provide a clean and simple experience when navigating through the available apps like YouTube, Netflix, and more.
Everything can be controlled with a small remote that is included, and is always a welcome addition with projectors. Videos can be loaded using a USB flash drive that can be plugged into the USB port, or via HDMI. You can also stream videos from your phone, by either using Miracast, or streaming services like Netflix.
As far as the image quality of the projector is concerned, it has been really good. It may not be the best that we’ve seen, but it certainly gets very close. It gets brighter than most portable projectors in this price range at 250 lumens, features a resolution up to 720p, and offers good color reproduction, even if the contrast could be less extreme.
A good movie watching experience is nothing without good sound, and the JmGO View is miles ahead of its competitors in this department. A large pair of speakers is found on each side of this cylindrical projector, and sound fantastic. They do not sound tinny at all, and even have a good amount of bass to them. The JmGO View is the first projector with which I haven’t found the need to plug in a pair of external speakers to have an enjoyable time, and is definitely a huge positive.
There is one final trick the JmGO View has up its sleeves, and that is its 3D video capabilities. If you have access to a 3D movie or video, you can pair the JmGO 3D glasses with the projector to enjoy an even more immersive experience.
The great picture quality, functional design, loud speakers, and 3D capabilities will come at a price though, with the JmGO View coming with a price tag of $620. If the availability of features like high-quality speakers and 3D video aren’t particularly interesting for you, there are certainly cheaper options available that offer even better picture quality. However, if these additions pique your interest, the JmGO View portable projector is worth every penny.
Sony MP-CL1
At first glance, you may mistake the Sony MP-CL1 to be a smartphone, with Sony’s classic rectangular design to be seen here. The projector is as compact as a phone, allowing you to easily slip it into your pocket. It is also quite thin and light weight, making the MP-CL1 a truly portable option.
The Sony MP-CL1 projects using laser technology, which means that it will behave a little differently. The brightness is just 32 lumens, which sounds like you would barely be able to see it. However, the human eye perceives laser projections a little brighter than your standard LED projections at the same lumen count. That being said, the projected image with the MP-CL1 is still a lot darker than the JmGO View, but bright enough to enjoy at any distance less than 40 inches away.
This projector doesn’t need to be very far away to project a huge image though, and only being 40 inches away will create a 120 inch image with a 16:9 aspect ratio. Keystoning is also available, but rather strangely, no focusing capabilities, be it automatic or via manual controls. Thanks to this being a laser based projection system however, the image always remains pretty clear, regardless of how close or far you are.
The plastic stand it comes with seems a little flimsy, but gets the job done. It can clip onto the front or back, but at a fixed position, so you may need to use some extra books or other objects to prop it up perfectly. Like most projectors, you will be able to stream media via Miracast, plug in a USB flash drive, or connect a Mini HDMI or MHL cable. There are built-in speakers available, but they are pretty weak, so you’ll be better off using the auxiliary jack to use an external pair of speakers.
There aren’t a whole lot of extras with this projector, like a remote, but if portability is key, the Sony MP-CL1 is the device for you. The price doesn’t hurt either, with the MP-CL1 currently priced at around $350.
ASUS ZenBeam E1
If a little more bang for your buck is what you’re after, the ASUS ZenBeam E1 is the portable projector for you. It is an LED based system just like the JmGO View, and even though it isn’t as bright at 150 lumens, it’s definitely much brighter than the Sony MP-CL1. The ZenBeam is compact and lightweight as well, with dimensions of 83 x 29 x 110 mm, and weighing just 307 grams. It may not be thin enough to carry around in your pocket, but is still portable enough.
There no bells and whistles here either, and it just projects an image via Miracast, HDMI, or a USB flash drive. Picture Settings are easily accessible via the menu button, and there is also a volume rocker and input selection button. There is also a physical focus dial, which is the best way to be a hundred percent accurate with the focus.
Keystoning is available as well, which is a must have feature for portable projectors, but there is no stand, making books and other objects a necessity to prop up the device to the right angle. The quality of the speakers is about the same as what you’d get with an average smartphone, but an aux port is included to let you plug in an external set of speakers.
The image quality and color reproduction are pretty nice, although darker scenes will be best viewed in a room that is pitch dark. The only problem here is that the maximum resolution is just 480p, which really limits how big the projected image will be. That is why this projector is ideally suited for activities like presentations, and watching movies isn’t going to be as enjoyable, unless you get a little closer to the wall.
This may not be the best projector out there, but given its ultra portable nature and affordable price point of just $249, the ASUS ZenBeam E1 does have its advantages.
So, there you have it for this roundup of some great portable projectors that you can get your hands on! What’s your pick from our Best portable projectors of 2016 roundup and do you plan to buy any? Let us know in the comments below!
Polar M200 Release Date, Price and Specs – CNET
Tuukka Koski/Polar
Polar on Thursday announced the Polar M200, an entry-level GPS running watch and smart fitness tracker with a built-in optical heart-rate sensor. In addition to tracking pace and distance when running, the $150 (£150, about AU$200) watch doubles as an all-day fitness tracker and can measure steps, distance, calories burned and sleep at night.
It also supports notifications from an iPhone or Android smartphone. The M200 will vibrate to alert you to incoming calls, text messages, calendar events and social media notifications. It also includes inactivity alerts to keep you moving throughout the day.
The watch syncs with the Polar Flow app on Android and iOS. Here you can view detailed information on workouts and all day activities. The app also includes a running program that will build you a “personalized and adaptive training plan” for events ranging from a 5K all the way to a marathon.
The M200 is waterproof down to 30 meters (about 98 feet), and can be worn in the shower and while swimming. Polar has said the battery will last up to 6 hours with an active GPS signal and heart-rate tracking, which is a bit disappointing. The comparable Garmin Forerunner 35 is able to squeeze out an impressive 13 hours of battery life under the same circumstances. Polar also didn’t specify how long the watch would last as a normal fitness tracker.
The Polar M200 will be available later this year for $150, £150, and about AU$200.
Parrot Mambo MiniDrone Release Date, Price and Specs – CNET
The Parrot Mambo is a tiny drone that fits in the palm of your hand.
Aloysius Low/CNET
Parrot’s minidrones aren’t really designed for shooting awesome aerial videos. Smaller drones like the palm-sized Mambo are there to let you experience the joy of piloting a drone without forking out too much cash.
Retailing for $120 (which converts to about £95 or AU$160), the Mambo costs a lot less than the higher-end Bebop 2 ($549). It’s quite a fun toy to play with, but it does have its limitations. For one thing, you only get 8 minutes of flight time, which passes quicker than you think.
I found the drone pretty easy to control once I got the hang of it. It took me about one minute to figure it out, despite having never flown a drone before. You can fly it either with your phone or the Parrot Flypad controller. If you’ve flown other Parrot drones, you’ll recognize the control scheme as well and won’t need to learn how to fly all over again.
The Mambo has a flight time of 8 minutes if loaded with accessories such as the cannon accessory, and 9 minutes without.
Aloysius Low/CNET
You can outfit your Mambo with a peashooter cannon or a grabber that can lift up to 4g (0.14 oz). Getting hit by the peashooter won’t hurt, but it’s hard to find the tiny pellets after you’ve fired them. The grabber doesn’t lift much, but Parrot has a video showing the Mambo lifting a sugar cube to drop into tea, so if you practice hard enough, you might impress a visitor from the UK when they drop by your place.
The Parrot Mambo makes for a fun introduction to drone flying, but don’t expect to do much more with this. The short battery life also means you may want to invest in a spare battery to swap in when the Mambo’s juice runs out.
Key specs:
- Quadcopter-style drone
- 550mAh battery for around 8 minutes of flight
- Comes with a peashooter cannon and a grabber accessory
- Uses Bluetooth to stay connected with your phone
- Requires iOS 7 or Android 4.3 an above
Parrot Swing MiniDrone Release Date, Price and Specs – CNET
The Swing is able to hover like a quadcoter, or switch to plane mode where it flies horizontally.
Aloysius Low/CNET
If piloting a quad-copter drone isn’t your cup of tea, why not try one that flies more like a plane instead? That’s the idea behind Parrot’s Swing minidrone, which features a unique X-shaped design that feels like something from Star Wars.
Lacking the sleek fuselage of an X-Wing fighter, the Swing is all about the wings. There’s not much to look at, to be honest, but there’s more than meets the eye when the Swing takes to the air. It costs $140, which converts to around £110 or AU$185.
The Parrot Flypad controller lets you use the controller to switch between quad-copter and plane modes, and you can choose between three different speeds. I was easily able to get the Swing to take off and weave around for a good 8 minutes or so, but I felt I hadn’t really learnt how to control it in the short time I spent with the Swing.
Plane mode is a lot trickier to learn, given that the drone will constantly be moving. And be warned: Making a mistake will send it crashing into something. But if you’re worried about crashing, you can quickly hit the stop key. That switches the drone back into hover-quadcopter mode.
The Flypad controller allows you to control the Swing at a distance of up to 60m.
Aloysius Low/CNET
If you’re wondering whether you should get one, consider this: The Swing isn’t the easiest drone to learn but it offers plenty of fun, especially when you’re zooming around in plane mode. Unfortunately, that’s all you’ll be doing. The drone doesn’t offer a camera for video recording or any other features. It also uses Bluetooth, which means range is limited to around 20m, but you can increase this to 60m using the Flypad controller. Battery life, as mentioned, isn’t very good either, but you can swap in a fresh new battery as needed.
Key specs:
- Can switch between quadcopter or plane mode
- Can go up to 30 kph, or around 18.6 mph
- Compatible with iOS 7 or Android 4.4
- Up to 8.5 minutes of flight time
Google Pixel XL vs Samsung Galaxy Note 7 first look
Google has taken the wraps off the Pixel XL, their new flagship handset, so it is only natural to compare it to one of our all-time favorite series. In this post we are putting the new Google Pixel XL right up against the Samsung Galaxy Note 7. Shall we get started?
Right off the bat you can tell these are two very different smartphones. The Google Pixel XL brings forth a style we have grown very used to in the industry. It has a metal design and a sleek body that has become a standard in the high-end market. Meanwhile, the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 sports the same metal edge and glass front and back currently recognizable in all the latest Samsung handsets.
But that is all looks, right? Which one looks and feels best is a matter of preference. What we can tell you more about is resistance. The Google Pixel XL rocks an IP53 rating, which makes it dust and splash resistant. Meanwhile, Samsung goes all out with an IP68 rating – it is dust tight and can be immersed in water up to 1.5 meters for 30 minutes.
The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 also has that now-iconic curve along the edges of the front. This doesn’t do too much in terms of functionality, but it does make the phone feel thinner and more comfortable in the hand. The Google Pixel XL is also a beauty to hold, though. It’s just a matter of whether you like metal or glass better. What we can say is that the Google Pixel XL feels very solid. It is manufactured by HTC, after all. Samsung phones do tend to feel a little more fragile.
In terms of color choices both handsets have a few, but the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 will grant more options. Sammy’s handset comes in Silver, Gold Platinum, Blue Coral, Black Onyx. Meanwhile, Google’s new phone has three variants: Very Silver, Quite Black and Really Blue (yes, that’s what they are calling these colors).
USB Type-C continues to become the standard and now we can see both handset featuring the new port. It can still be hard to adapt to it, due to lack of adoption, but it is the future and does provide certain improvements. A reversible connector, faster transfer speeds and better compatibility are only a few examples.
The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 comes with a slightly larger screen, but the quality turns out to be nearly as good in both cases. Google’s Pixel XL features a 5.5-inch AMOLED display with a 2560×1440 resolution, while Samsung’s phablet touts a 5.7-inch Super AMOLED panel with the same definition.
High-end specs can only get so good nowadays, and both phones are nearing the current threshold.
In terms of performance we should see nearly identical results. High-end specs can only get so good nowadays, and both phones are nearing the current threshold. The Pixel features a powerful Snapdragon 821 processor with 4 GB of RAM, and the Note 7 is not far behind with its Exynos 8890. But when it comes to internal storage the Google Pixel XL has the upper hand, as it comes in variations of 32 and 128 GB. The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 is limited to a single 64 GB version.
Things change once we start considering external memory, though. Google has built no expandable storage support into the new Pixel phones, and Samsung’s device can take microSD cards.
Battery life should also be pretty similar, as both phones feature nearly identical specs. The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 does have a bigger 3,500 mAh battery, but it only beats the Pixel XL by 50 mAh. The Galaxy Note 7 does win this round too, though, as it has better options for charging. Both come with fast-charging capabilities, but this time around Google is doing away with wireless charging, something many of us consider disappointing.
Shall we talk security? These handsets have great fingerprint readers with super fast recognition, but Samsung is bringing something interesting to the table – an iris scanner, which uses a dedicated camera near the selfie cam to search for a registered set of eyes to unlock the phone.
At first sight it may seem like these cameras are very similar, but there are a few key differences to be noted. The 12.3 MP Pixel XL camera has no OIS, but does promise large pixels (better light intake), super fast laser auto-focus, an f/2.0 aperture, slow motion and 4K video capture.
See also: Shootout: How good is the new Pixel XL camera?54
The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 doesn’t fall behind, though, and some may say it is better. Its 12 MP sensor does have a better f/1.7 aperture, optical image stabilization and a dual pixel set-up for improved light intake. You can be sure we will be testing sample photos further. For now we really can’t pass judgement on which is better.
Overall, the user experience of these phones will predicate on Android and multitasking preferences. The Note 7 has a myriad of features to boast, including all of the different methods of multitasking that include the Multi Window and the Pop-Up View – and, of course, the S Pen brings its own very long list of features to the fold. Sharing is easier than ever in the Note, with tools like Screen Write, the Notes application that consolidates pretty much all ways of working with digital notes, and the Smart Select that now has a tool for recording 15 second GIFs of (almost) anything that is going on in the given frame. And for the users who need a constant reminder of any piece of information, the Screen Off Memo can pin notes to the Always on Display so that it is constantly within view.
Also read:
- Samsung Galaxy Note 7 review
- Google Pixel and Pixel XL hands-on
- Google Pixel and Pixel XL vs the competition
The Google Pixel XL is limited by what the vanilla Android experience has to offer. It is a better option for those who prefer a cleaner experience with no bells and whistles, but we also can’t deny Samsung’s improvements have proven to be very convenient to many of you. One thing is for sure, the UI on Google’s software will be easier on the eyes and much more simplified.
The huge benefit Pixel users get is the promise of quick Android updates. Remember this is the replacement to the Nexus brand, which promises to keep you on the bleeding edge of Android software. And I must say, Android Nougat is so far quite delightful, bringing a lot of refinements to what we are used to in Marshmallow, including better ways of handling tasks and notifications as well as a bit more eye candy to please the design-minded.
The Pixel XL also packs a couple of features that are going to stay exclusive to it: the most important is Google Assistant, the greatly improved replacement to Google Now. But you also get unlimited original format photo and video storage, an integrated support app, and a customized launcher you won’t see on other devices.
Now, let’s talk money. The Google Pixel XL starts from $769, which is expensive, but then the Note 7 is even more pricey, costing as much as $900 at US carriers.
See also: Here’s where you can buy a Google Pixel in the US18
The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 does show some advantages, mainly in software optimization, an iris scanner, S-Pen features and certain camera specs, but the Google Pixel XL offers performance, a clean software, Google Assistant, a metal construction and timely updates for what could be a slightly lower price point. Android purists will definitely choose Google’s phone any day.
But tell us what you think! Which phone will you go for?
Asus ZenBook 3 review – CNET
The Good Powerful Core i7 processor in a slim, portable package with an excellent touchpad. A helpful USB-C mini-dock is included.
The Bad The 12.5-inch display is locked at 1,920×1,080 resolution, and it isn’t a touchscreen. Lots of extra bloatware. Battery life isn’t as good as the MacBook. Other similarly configured systems cost less.
The Bottom Line The Asus ZenBook 3 mimics many of the best features of Apple’s 12-inch MacBook, but in a Windows version with a more powerful processor.
Visit manufacturer site for details.
When is a MacBook not a MacBook? There’s a long history of PC makers selling computers that have a striking resemblance to one of Apple’s laptops. Sometimes this is in the form of a subtle homage, other times, it’s a literal attack of the clones. We’d even previously taken to calling one of Dell’s older designs the “DellBook Air.”
After Apple released the very minimalist 12-inch MacBook laptop in 2015, we saw a handful of similar designs, with Core M processors and ultra-shallow keyboards, and the Samsung Ativ Book 9 came closest to mirroring it.
Sarah Tew/CNET
Now there’s a new contender for most MacBook-like, called the Asus ZenBook 3. It’s a close-to-total clone, at least on the outside. But under the aluminum chassis, this ambitious, slim laptop trades midtier Intel Core M processors for a low-voltage Core i7 CPU.
But, the ZenBook 3 also shares the MacBook’s weaknesses, specifically a very shallow keyboard that’s not conducive to long-form typing, and an extremely limited set of connection options, which consists of a single USB-C port and a headphone jack (no one is taking the headphone jacks out of laptops, yet).
This might seem like too small a laptop, with too many compromises, to be an effective tool for either work or leisure, but the design grows on you. In the case of the 12-inch MacBook, I decided after a year of on-and-off use that it was actually one of my favorite laptops to use, because of its extreme portability and overall ease of use.
The ZenBook 3 next to the Apple MacBook.
Sarah Tew/CNET
The same could be said of the ZenBook 3, but with a few important caveats. This Windows version of essentially the same design is missing a few advantages that the Apple version has. The touchpad, while good by ultraportable Windows laptop standards, can’t come close to the responsiveness and multitouch gesture integration of any MacBook. That’s the home-field advantage Apple has in closely designing both the computer hardware and computer operating system, including the just-released MacOS Sierra.
The second advantage Apple has is a singular focus on battery life, and the current version of the 12-inch MacBook (that system’s second iteration) runs about 3.5 hours longer per charge than the ZenBook 3. That’s an important consideration when toting around a superslim laptop that might very well travel with you all day long for start-and-stop sessions at meetings, in coffee shops or on airplanes.
This configuration of the ZenBook 3 has a low-voltage Intel Core i7-7500 processor, along with 16GB of RAM and a sizable 512GB of PCIe SSD storage. That configuration, when it’s available later this fall, should cost $1,600 in the US. International Asus configurations often differ slightly, but that works out to £1,229 or AU$2,085. A better bang for your buck may be the $1,100 configuration (£845, AU$1,433), with a Core i5 CPU, 8GB of RAM and a 256GB SSD.
ZenBook 3
| $1,600 |
| 12.5-inch 1,920 x 1,080 screen |
| 2.7GHz Intel Core i7-7500U |
| 16GB DDR3 SDRAM 1866MHz |
| 128MB Intel HD Graphics 620 |
| 512GB SSD |
| 802.11ac wireless, Bluetooth 4.0 |
| Windows 10 Pro (64-bit) |
The one spec that you can’t change, and one of the ZenBook 3’s main letdowns, is the standard 1,920×1,080 screen resolution, which is the only option available on this 12.5-inch non-touch display. Premium laptops, even with smaller sub-13-inch screens often hit 2,560×1,440 or higher.
There’s a good case to be made for the very similarly configured Razer Blade Stealth, another slim laptop with a 12.5-inch screen. The newly refreshed Blade Stealth (full review coming soon) has the same Core i7-7500 CPU, and can be configured with similar RAM and hard drive specs. But, its display is a 2,560×1,440 touch screen, and our test configuration (Core i7/16GB RAM/256GB SSD) is $1,250 in the US. My biggest knock against that system is the dated-looking extrawide bezel surrounding the screen.
The very similar Razer Blade Stealth, which has a higher screen resolution, but a wide bezel around the display.
Sarah Tew/CNET
Of course, you could also just get a 12-inch MacBook, starting at $1,300 (£1,050 and AU$1,800). It’s a fun, fast-feeling little computer, with a higher-res screen and new MacOS features such as Siri and a universal clipboard that shares content between the laptop and an iPhone. But, its Core m-series CPU isn’t as powerful, and it tops out at 8GB of RAM, rather than the 16GB found here.
LG BP350 review – CNET
The Good The LG BP350 is a budget Blu-ray player with image quality that’s basically the same as more costly models. It offers the most popular streaming services including Netflix, Hulu and Amazon Video.
The Bad The player is very slow at loading discs and streaming services. Lacks a number of connection options offered by competitors including Ethernet and coaxial digital audio.
The Bottom Line The inexpensive LG BP350 is capable of fine image quality, but its sluggish load times keep it from earning our recommendation.
Blu-ray players are so inexpensive now, and their image quality so similar, that you might be tempted to just buy the cheapest one and call it a day. But there are still advantages to shopping around and maybe paying a couple of bucks extra.
The LG BP350 is a 2015 model that is still available in the US for $79, the UK for £66 and Australia for AU$159. It’s one of the cheapest Blu-ray disc-spinners around, and it comes with hefty compromises. It’s one of the slowest players we’ve tested at loading both discs and streaming videos, and it’s missing all but the most basic connections. If you only want to play Blu-rays and very occasionally watch Netflix, this will do the job. But we think it’s worth paying a bit more for something like the $80 Sony BDP-S3700 or the $100 Samsung BD-J9500.
Design and features
Ty Pendlebury/CNET
With its cross-hatched finish the BP350 looks more like a lemon zester than a Blu-ray player. A power button, a tiny eject button and a USB port adorn the front panel, while ’round the back there’s just a power input and an HDMI port. That’s a sparse rear even compared to other players at the price — usually you can expect at least an Ethernet port and a coaxial digital port as well. At least it has Wi-Fi.
There’s a small selection of the most-popular streaming services onboard, namely Netflix, Amazon Instant Video, Hulu, Spotify and Pandora. While that selection is dwarfed by the dozens on offer from Sony players, at least they’re all preloaded on the LG, so you don’t need to trawl through lists to find new services.
Google Pixel XL vs Nexus 6P first look
Google has now taken the wraps off the Pixel XL, leaving behind the Nexus family in favor of a new direction that sees Google more directly compete against Samsung and Apple in the smartphone hardware game. The new Pixel XL brings a lot to the table, but how does it compare to its predecessor?
Let’s take a look as we put the the Pixel XL up against the Huawei-built Nexus 6P in this quick comparison.
Aesthetically speaking, the Pixel XL and Nexus 6P have little in common in common, other than perhaps the use of metallic unibody designs and the circular fingerprint scanner found on the rear.
The Google Pixel XL offers up a unibody metal design that features a unique area of glass of the rear that starts around the fingerprint reader and stretches to the top. A subtle “G” can be found at the bottom, with no oversized logos or markings in sight. The front of the phone is completely devoid of buttons, with just a single speaker at the top middle, a sensor below, and the front-facing camera found to the left. Below the display is a pretty sizable chin, where honestly we would have liked to have seen a secondary speaker.
See also: Google Pixel and Pixel XL hands on34
Turning to the Nexus 6P, the Nexus is a bit larger and heavier than the Pixel XL, but it is a bit slimmer for what it is worth. Just like the Pixel, the phone is a unibody metallic device, but instead of the partially glass back, the 6P instead offers a unique camera “wedge.” Otherwise, the back is pretty plain with simple Nexus branding and a circular fingerprint scanner in the middle. One area that the Nexus 6P stands triumphantly over the Pixel is the front-side, thanks to its dual speaker configuration.
At the end of the day, both phones take an otherwise ordinary metallic design and add a little extra flair. With the 6P, it’s the camera bump. With the Pixel, it’s a half-glass backing. We suspect the Pixel’s design will be met with split reception, similar to the 6P before it, but really it comes down to personal preference as to which design is more appealing.
Both the Pixel XL and Nexus 6P offer QHD AMOLED displays, though this time around Google has shrunk the size down to 5.5-inches from the 5.7-inch size of the 6P. The smaller size means the Pixel XL will have slightly higher PPI, but overall you’re looking at pretty similar viewing experiences with all the characteristics you’d expect from an AMOLED panel.
Performance favors the newer phone, which is expected. The Pixel XL features the brand new Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 processor, paired with 4GB RAM. Of course, the Nexus 6P is no slouch with its Snapdragon 810 and 3GB RAM, either. Though the processing package isn’t the latest or greatest anymore, it is more than capable of providing a great Android experience.
If you’re looking for plenty of storage options, the Pixel XL will probably disappoint a little, as your choices are between either 32GB or 128GB. In contrast, the 6P offered 32, 64, and 128GB configurations. Neither phone offers expandable memory, but that’s pretty much expected from Google. It is worth noting that the Pixel XL does include free unlimited storage of videos and pictures at full resolution.
Battery life will likely be fairly similar between these two phones, with both offering 3450mAh battery configurations. Both phones also feature quick charging and USB type-C. Whether the Snapdragon 821 offers any noticeable battery optimizations over the Snapdragon 810 remains unseen, but we’ll be sure to put the phone through its paces once we get our review unit.
The Nexus 6P completely raised the bar on what to expect from the Nexus family in terms of camera performance. Offering less megapixels in favor of larger ones, the 6P offered a 12MP shooter with f/2.0 aperture that prioritized low light performance. The end result was a pretty solid camera overall.
See also: Shootout: How good is the new Pixel XL camera?50
A similar story plays out with the Pixel XL, which features a 12.MP shooter with f/2.0 aperture and 1.55 μm sized pixels. On paper, this is a very similar configuration to the 6P. While we won’t be able to definitively say how the cameras compare until we’ve done a full review, it is worth noting that DxOmark has rated the Pixel XL with an 89 — beating out the Nexus 6P, Galaxy S7, and the iPhone 7 and receiving the highest mark from the company to date.
Like the Nexus 6P, at the heart of the Pixel XL is a stock Android experience. That said, Google has been less shy about adding on special features this time around. Out of the box the Pixel XL features Android 7.1 Nougat with the new Pixel launcher preloaded. Swiping up from the dock brings up the app drawer and circles are more the motif for this launcher. Another Google G is in plain view at the top, opening up a familiar Google Now search bar.
But the real star of the show is Google Assistant, now baked right into the OS. Previously found within the Allo application, the latest iteration offers a greatly improved experience over what you’d find with Google Now. Asking it contextual questions yields clear, accurate answers. For example, I asked Assistant to play me wrestler TJ Perkins’ entrance from WWE. Once I said the request, Youtube appeared and played the video in question.
The fast, fluid stock experience is alive and well on the Nexus 6P as well, with Android 7.0 Nougat currently being the latest version on offer. While the experience is largely identical, Pixel Launcher and the baked in Google Assistant are not part of the formula here. While it’s possible these new features will come to the Nexus family in some form down the road, for now these special extras remain something you’ll only be able to experience with a Pixel.
In many ways, the Pixel XL and Nexus 6P share a lot of the same DNA, despite offering different looks and different overall approaches. After all, they both run mostly stock Android software and have been built with Google’s influence. Still, the Pixel represents a big leap forward with Google not just influencing the software and hardware, but instead fully controlling it.
Pricing is another area where the two phones greatly differ. While the Nexus 6P could be had for just $399, the Google Pixel XL’s premium specs and features start at $769. It remains a matter of debate whether the Pixel XL offers enough improvements to justify that price hike, but it’s clear that Google wants to send a very different message with the Pixel family than it did with the Nexus line before it.
See also: Google Pixel & Pixel XL vs the competition101
The Pixel XL is an evolution of the Nexus formula, a device where Google doesn’t just control the software experience, but has equal power over the hardware. For Google fans looking for a phone built from the ground up with Google’s intentions and full blessing, it doesn’t get any better than that.
ASUS ZenBook 3 review: A powerful MacBook competitor with issues
Apple’s tiny MacBook was a revelation when it debuted last year. It was thinner and lighter than most ultraportables on the market, and its refined design brought over some cues from Apple’s mobile hardware. So it was only a matter of time before a PC maker took a swing at a similar design. Enter the ASUS ZenBook 3, a minuscule machine that promises to be just as portable as the MacBook while packing in much faster hardware. But while ASUS has proved it can sell powerful machines for far less than the competition, it’s less experienced when it comes to delivering truly premium hardware. The ZenBook 3, while attractive on the surface, is a reminder that ASUS still has a lot to learn.
Hardware
At first glance, the Zenbook 3 screams luxury. Its aluminum alloy case is smooth and sleek, and it measures an impressive 11.9mm at its thickest point. I particularly liked the deep shade of blue and the gold accents, which are classy in a subtle way. ASUS’s ZenBook line is unquestionably “Apple-inspired,” with an emphasis on thin profiles and all-metal cases. But the ZenBook 3’s design in particular looks like a mixture of the MacBook and the 11-inch MacBook Air, right down to the small notch below the trackpad and the look of the speakers above the keyboard. That’s one way to evoke a premium feel, I guess. But it would have been nice to see some actual innovation, as with HP’s sexy new Spectre.
With a 12.5-inch display, ASUS managed to outdo the MacBook by half an inch. But Apple’s laptop boasts a higher-resolution 2,304 x 1,440 display, as compared with 1080p on the ZenBook. At least it’s a good-looking display, though; it’s bright enough for outdoor use, while colors appear vibrant and mostly accurate. Though it’s not a touchscreen display (that’s to be expected with such a thin laptop), ASUS covered it in Gorilla Glass 4 for extra protection. After testing out plenty of touchscreen Windows laptops over the past few years, though, I’m surprised by how much I missed that feature here.
While the two-pound ZenBook 3 feels light and sturdy at first, it wasn’t long before I started noticing flaws. Applying a bit of pressure around the laptop’s keyboard leads to some seriously disturbing creaking noises, as if the seams around the bottom of the case are rubbing against each other. It’s not something you might ever do to your laptop, but this also doesn’t bode well for long-term durability. If a bit of force from my hands can disturb the case’s integrity, how can I ever trust it in a book bag with other heavy items?
Then there’s the keyboard and trackpad, which present a different set of issues. The ZenBook 3’s buttons have more travel than those on the relatively flat MacBook, but the feedback you get when pressing them is mushy and insubstantial. Perhaps it’s just because I’m a heavy typer, but I was never able to get into a decent typing flow. While I eventually got used to the wonky feedback, I still get more typos with this machine compared with every other laptop keyboard I’ve tested recently. Honestly, even though the MacBook’s keyboard isn’t ideal either, I still prefer it to the ZenBook 3’s.
The trackpad, while large and relatively smooth, is a chore to use. It requires a lot of pressure to register clicks, which isn’t great when you’re trying to balance an ultralight notebook on your lap. It would often get confused with left and right clicks, and on several occasions I had to press down multiple times for it to register anything. Tapping the trackpad to select things isn’t great either, as it often moves the pointer off your target. And for some reason, ASUS thought it was a good idea to put its fingerprint sensor right on the trackpad. That effectively renders the top-right portion of the trackpad a dead zone most of the time.
At least the fingerprint sensor works well; it usually gets me to the desktop in less than a second. On several occasions, I received warnings about Windows Hello being disabled because of too many fingerprint login attempts, even after I was just waking it up from sleep mode. I’m not sure why those errors occurred, but it makes me think that Windows Hello is somehow trying to identify fingerprints even when the ZenBook’s lid is shut. (And that could be tied to the flexing issue as well.)
You might have noticed one other nod to the MacBook: The ZenBook 3’s only ports are a single USB-C socket and a 3.5mm headphone jack. At least ASUS was kind enough to bundle in a USB-C mini-dock, which includes an HDMI port, a traditional USB connection and another USB-C socket. Unfortunately, you can use the dock’s USB-C port only for charging, which will make life difficult if you want to connect a USB-C device and an external monitor at the same time.
Performance and battery life
| 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 |
What’s truly impressive about the ZenBook 3 is that ASUS has managed to fit in seventh-generation Intel Core processors and gobs of memory in such a tiny case. Our review unit came with a Core i7-7500U, which offers speeds between 2.7GHz and 2.9GHz, and 16GB of LPDDR3 RAM clocked at 2,133MHz. ASUS says it worked with Intel to achieve that memory speed, which is faster than any other ultraportable on the market. It even exceeds the maximum 1,866MHz RAM speeds Intel officially supports for its latest chips.
The MacBook, on the other hand, is still stuck with slow Core m3 and m5 CPUs and a maximum of 8GB of RAM. Apple might refresh it soon, now that the seventh-gen Intel CPUs are available, but for the time being, ASUS wins the spec battle.
The ZenBook 3 felt just as zippy as other high-end ultraportables. It didn’t skip a beat during my typical workflow, which involves having several browsers open with dozens of tabs each, plus Slack, Spotify and Photoshop. And thanks to the video-decoding capabilities in Intel’s new processors, the CPU usage managed to stay below 20 percent when I streamed 4K video from YouTube. Basically, you’re not sacrificing any performance here.
Battery life
ASUS ZenBook 3
9:45
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
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
5:48
Dell XPS 15 (2016)
5:25 (7:40 with the mobile charger)
When it comes to real-world battery life, the ZenBook 3 also outshines some recent ultraportables I’ve seen, like the Huawei MateBook and the Lenovo X1 Yoga with OLED. It typically lasted an entire workday, and sometimes it even had juice left over by the time I got home. In our typical battery test, which involves looping an HD video until the power dies, it lasted around nine hours and 45 minutes. Given that Intel is stressing video decoding with its new chips, though, that figure might not be directly comparable to other ultraportables. I’ll be testing the ZenBook 3 with other battery benchmarks soon and will report back with the results.
Configuration options and the competition
You have two choices with the ZenBook: the $1,099 model with a Core i5-7200U processor, 8GB of RAM and 25GB of storage; or the more powerful $1,599 version with a Core i5-7500U chip, 16GB of RAM and a 512GB SSD. The latter model was the one I tested, so keep that in mind if you’re hoping to achieve the kind of performance reflected in our benchmarks.
Apple’s MacBook, which is really the only direct competitor, starts at $1,299, with a significantly slower Core M3 CPU, 8GB of RAM and a 256GB SSD. Bumping up to $1,599 gets you a Core M5 and more storage, but you’ll still be stuck with 8GB of RAM.
If you can live with something slightly heavier, then you’ve got a wealth of ultraportable options to choose from, including HP’s revamped Spectre 13 (2.45 pounds), the fantastic Dell XPS 13 (2.6 pounds), and even Microsoft’s Surface Pro 4. All of those machines will likely get upgraded soon with Intel’s seventh-gen CPUs, so it might be worth waiting a bit (or snap up one of last year’s models if they’re on sale).
Wrap-up
Ultimately, with the ZenBook 3, ASUS did what it does best: pack in plenty of powerful hardware for a cheaper price than the competition. But the company’s inexperience at crafting truly high-end machines shows, with some truly worrying durability and usability issues. I give ASUS credit for building such a thin and powerful device, but what does that matter if the keyboard and trackpad are a pain to use?
Pebble 2 review – CNET
The Good Affordably priced. Five-day battery life. Swim and shower-proof to 30 meters. Always-on display. Improved software makes glancing at quick notifications easier. Built-in microphone for quick text message responses. Works with Android or iOS.
The Bad Baked-in fitness tracking is uneven, especially heart rate and workout tracking. Plastic design. Small black and white screen is sometimes hard to read. Pebble’s apps and watch face options are often ugly.
The Bottom Line The Pebble 2 doesn’t win on fitness tracking, but it’s still a solid pick for simple notifications and messages on a long-battery budget smartwatch.
Visit manufacturer site for details.
I like the Pebble 2 as a watch, but I don’t like it as a fitness tracker.
Smartwatches are about compromise. Fitting everything on a tiny little wrist-gadget isn’t easy. And one thing most smartwatches cut short is battery life. That’s why Pebble’s watches have always earned a soft spot in my geek heart: they compromise on other things, but deliver on longer battery.
Pebble watches have features that no other smartwatches have really been able to crack: longer battery life, truly always-on screens, and all Pebbles (except the Round) have been water resistant, even for swimming.
Now, the Pebble 2 is going after full-on fitness tracking. Fitness trackers dominate sales on the list of top watches and wearables. The Apple Watch shifted into a fitness-forward mode. And so it’s no surprise that Pebble has jumped into fitness feet-first now, too.
View full gallery
Optical heart rate onboard.
Sarah Tew/CNET
New to this year’s Pebbles is an optical heart rate tracker: both the Pebble 2 and upcoming Pebble Time 2 (a color-screened sequel to last year’s Pebble Time Steel, coming later this year) have them.
The Pebble 2 is, otherwise, like a true sequel to the original, utilitarian black-and-white Pebble model from 2013, keeping that plastic design and tiny Game Boy-like screen. The Pebble 2 adds some improvements, like a Gorilla Glass-covered display and a built-in microphone to create voice notes or voice-respond to texts and Gmail (even on iPhones). It’s more compact, too. But it’s that fitness tracking, specifically heart rate, that’s new.
The Pebble 2’s going for fitness, not style. Can heart rate, combined with automatic step and sleep tracking, turn this smartwatch into a full fitness tracker…for $130 or £100 (equivalent to AU$170)?
Well, that’s where I ran into problems. I wish I could say everything worked as well as promised. I’ve been wearing the Pebble 2 for a week, and it’s far from what I’d call a great fitness tracker. But it’s trying really hard.
View full gallery
Step tracking has been available since earlier this year on Pebble Time watches.
Sarah Tew/CNET
Pebble as fitness tracker: Leaving a lot to be desired
Thanks to updates, last year’s Pebble Time and Time Steel have already been able to track steps and sleep automatically, with decent success. The Pebble 2 + HR model reviewed here (there’s another heart-rate-free Pebble 2 that costs only $100; this heart-rate-enabled version costs a bit more) takes things another step forward, with an optical heart rate tracker that sits on the back of the watch and spits out flashing green LED lights.
There are compelling reasons for the idea of Pebble-as-fitness-tracker: its battery lasts longer than any Android Wear, Samsung or Apple Watch (five days, even with heart rate enabled). And yes, the tracking for heart rate, steps and sleep is all automatic. It’s swim-friendly. And the only thing you need to manually do is start and stop workouts via a new included Fitbit Workout app.
View full gallery
Automatic sleep tracking works, basically.
Sarah Tew/CNET
But…Pebble’s fitness tracking feels like a bonus feature more than the main event, and that’s where many people will get turned off from the start. Pebble doesn’t have any of its own fitness watch faces, meaning you’ll have to find a third-party one that works for you if you want at-a-glance data without clicking down into Pebble’s app menus.
There are tons of watch faces on Pebble’s app store, many of them fitness-related, and some tap into the Pebble’s onboard heart-rate data, but they mostly look terrible, and aren’t easy to look at or use. A few are keepers. They tend to have a home-made, throwback, slightly ugly aesthetic. Pebble’s watchfaces aren’t easy to swap out, either, and can’t be easily be customized with complications — bits of at-a-glance data. Some watch faces support customizations, but you’ll have to hunt for a solution. I’d kill for a handful of good baked-in Pebble fitness watch faces.
View full gallery
What a workout readout looks like. Not a great use of screen space.
Sarah Tew/CNET
To see steps, sleep and heart rate data, you press up on the Pebble 2’s side buttons. Steps and activity are tracked automatically, which is handy. The Pebble phone app also syncs this data and presents graphs of daily steps and sleep, and all-day heart rate charts.
But workouts are a problem. A new Workout app has been added to the watch, which tracks walks, runs or generic “workouts.” Starting a workout means heart rate data, distance, pace and steps are shown at a glance. I found, however, that tracking walks or runs sometimes ended up with the app folding in data from before my stated workout time…as if the app sensed I had been walking already, and wanted to count those steps. But what if I don’t?
View full gallery Sarah Tew/CNET
Looking at the workout app, and even starting and stopping exercises, isn’t easy either: the Pebble 2’s side buttons are super small, and hard to recognize by feel (there are three buttons on the right, one on the left).
Even worse, the Pebble 2 doesn’t currently sync workout data to the phone app at all. An update to allow this is expected by November, but right now it means there’s no meaningful accumulation of workout info. So, right now, the Pebble 2 doesn’t keep track of workouts.
Pebble stores fitness data on the Pebble phone app, but doesn’t cloud-store the data like Fitbit. That means if you install the Pebble app on another device, you’ll lose the data. Pebble can sync its data (minus heart rate) via Apple’s HealthKit or Google Fit, but I’d be worried about suddenly losing a lot of accumulated charts down the road. The Pebble 2 works with a handful of other fitness apps, including Runkeeper, but support for these apps is a mixed bag, and not everything works with the Pebble 2’s heart rate monitor.
AIVAnet 