http://ift.tt/2l98ExC
HQ Trivia Is Coming to Android | Crunch Report http://ift.tt/2C0ysXf Hi!You are about to activate our Facebook Messenger news bot. Once subscribed, the bot will send you a digest of trending stories once a day. You can also customize the types of stories it sends you. Click on the button below to subscribe and wait for a new Facebook message from the TC Messenger news bot. Thanks, Digital Trends via TechCrunch https://techcrunch.com December 27, 2017 at 10:01PM
0 Comments
http://ift.tt/2E0ttmG
Alex Honnold shares story about his historic free-solo climb of El Capitan http://ift.tt/2E5Wg9p Over the summer, Alex Honnold became the first to free-solo climb the 3,000-foot granite face of El Capitan in California’s Yosemite National Park. During an interview with The North Face, the California-based climber talks about everything from his love of El Capitan to the mice and worms that live inside it. Honnold is renowned for his free climbing and speed records, most notably within Yosemite Valley. After months of training, he began his climb at 5:32 a.m PT on June 3, reaching the top just under four hours. According to National Geographic, he ascended via “Free Rider,” a route rated 5.13a on the Yosemite Decimal Rating System. The route contains 33 pitches and was first climbed by Alex Huber in 1998. In the animated interview, Honnold speaks about what drives him to climb. “Climbing, in a lot of ways, is pretty contrived,” he said. “You could always just walk around back and get to the top of the wall. But I think the really inspiring objectives in climbing are the ones that feel the least contrived. In some ways the existence of a grand challenge, it’s almost like taunting you. Certain obstacles just cry out to be overcome.” Honnold goes on to say how El Capitan has always been the most inspiring wall to him. “Before I climbed it, I could just look at it and be like, ‘That’s an amazing wall,'” continues Honnold. For him, part of it was the symmetry and aesthetics of the wall. Its large prow tapers evenly on either end. There is also nowhere else in the world where people can climb a 3,000-foot vertical wall that only a five-minute walk from the road. The idea of free-soloing El Capitan first entered Honnold’s mind somewhere between 2008 and 2009 as an abstract dream. Every time he looked at the wall, it filled him with fear. “Honestly, one of my big fears on El Cap has always been that I’m going to step on one of these enormous, mealy looking worms and blow my foot off,” Honnold said. When it comes to actual risk, Honnold feels that dealing with personal mortality puts life into perspective. If that’s still not enough to get you out of the chair and into some climbing gear, Google Street View allows people to view the entire vertigo-inducing climb from the comfort of their screen.
Digital Trends via Digital Trends http://ift.tt/2p4eJdC December 27, 2017 at 09:30PM
http://ift.tt/2DZKA8a
Garmin Vivoactive 3 review http://ift.tt/2BMW2T9 Garmin’s fitness bands have almost always been large, even massive, smartwatches. In fact, we nicknamed them BBWs — or big, burly, watches. With the new Vivoactive 3, Garmin left the big behind and delivered a GPS multisport smartwatch that’s smaller, more refined, and a nice reminder that watches don’t have to be big and burly to deliver the goods. Features and designWe’re happy to see that after a short design detour with the square Vivoactive HR, Garmin returned to the realm of minimalist watch design with the round-faced Vivoactive 3. The watch is 1.75 inches in diameter, a little less than half an inch thick, and weighs only 43 grams. It’s water resistant to 5 ATMs and features just one button. The Vivoactive 3’s bright 1.2-inch color 240 x 240 pixel LCD touchscreen, Gorilla Glass 3 lens, and polymer case with stainless steel bezel leave it looking more like a Garmin Fenix 5 junior than a member of the company’s Vivo fitness band family. Which isn’t terribly far from the truth, especially when it comes to onboard tech.
Lee Crane/Digital Trends
Lee Crane/Digital Trends
Lee Crane/Digital Trends
Lee Crane/Digital Trends
The Vivoactive 3 packs in a full set of sensors including GPS (and GLOSNASS), a wrist based optical heart rate monitor, barometric altimeter, compass, accelerometer, and thermometer. It is capable of tracking daily fitness metrics like steps, stairs climbed, calories burned, distance travelled, intensity minutes, and sleep time and quality. A real-time “stress meter” measures heart rate variability and helps users eliminate that stress by delivering a paced relaxation breathing session right on the watch. When connected to a smartphone via Bluetooth, the Vivofit 3 delivers full smart notifications with a vibration alert. Like its predecessor the Vivoactive HR, the Vivoactive 3 comes loaded with 15 trackable activities including walking, running, swimming, cycling, snowboarding, skiing, stand-up paddling, and more. It also estimates VO2 max and fitness age. Using ANT+, the Vivoactive 3 can communicate with heart rate monitor chest straps, cycling speed and cadence sensors, and the Garmin foot pod for runners. It also tracks a round of golf, logging shots and scores, the distance to the front, back, and middle of the green, and keeps a running tally of strokes and putts per round, as well as greens and fairways hit. Not only equipped for outdoor activities, the Vivoactive 3 works well in the gym, too. With Garmin’s strength tracking feature, it counts reps and sets when using free weights or bodyweight exercises. But what really sets the Vivoactive 3 apart is Garmin Pay. The service (powered by Fit Pay) makes the Vivoactive 3 Garmin’s first watch to offer contactless payments. With the new Garmin Pay users can enter a passcode on the watch, select a connected credit card, and pay for purchases by simply holding the watch near the card reader at one of nearly 10 million checkouts worldwide — no phone or wallet required. (Unfortunately, Garmin Pay didn’t go live in time for this review. We hope to try it out soon.) Garmin Vivoactive 3 Compared ToThe Vivoactive 3 comes in three styles: Black with a stainless bezel, black with a slate bezel, and white with a stainless bezel. On the inside, however, the watch’s face, widgets, data fields, and apps can be endlessly personalized thanks to the Vivofit 3’s compatibility with Garmin’s Connect IQ store. Performance and useIn today’s connected culture we’re all pros at pairing Bluetooth devices with smartphones but this hasn’t stopped Garmin from continually improving its Connect Mobile smartphone app to make the process easier. After turning the Vivoactive 3 on (by pressing the side button) we were directed to choose a language and then download Connect mobile to create an account. The watch found the phone and delivered a 6-digit pairing number. Once paired, Garmin Connect Mobile made sure we understood how the Vivoactive 3’s basic functions work by walking us through a touchscreen swiping prep course illustrated with animated graphics. With only one button and a touchscreen, moving through the menus on the Vivoactive 3 requires a symphony of swipes, taps, and presses. Swiping up or down scrolls through the Vivoactive 3’s widgets. Tapping a widget screen leads deeper into the data and going back requires a swipe right. Those who prefer swiping left can switch that in the settings. It’s also possible to flip the watch’s orientation so the button is on the left side. With Garmin’s quick connect watch band, moving the buckle to the proper orientation only takes roughly 10 seconds. A Menu of MenusWhile getting around on the watch, we were surprised to find that settings could be accessed from different menus. A long tap on the screen brings up the settings menus (with a battery level graphic at the top), while a long press of the button delivers the fully customizable Controls Menu with the battery level graphic in the middle of the screen. Additionally, backlight brightness could be accessed from either the controls menu or the settings menu. Overall control of the watch’s alarms, display backlight, personal info, goals, heart rate zones, and controls menu are easily edited on the Garmin Connect website, however, editing data fields — or customizing new watch faces or apps — must be done on the watch. We wanted to rearrange the order of our apps (so bike would be first, for instance) and it turned out we could adjust it on the watch, on the website, or on the Connect Mobile app. Figuring out where to best adjust each of the watch’s features does take a bit time. Action trackingThe Vivoactive 3 tracks a load of activities and while we’d love to think that we’re out there doing each one all the time, for us, it really came down to biking, walking, swimming, and an occasional workout. First thing we tried was the bike ride function. We pressed the button once, chose the bike app, and waited roughly 20 seconds for the watch to line up the GPS satellites before we took off. The interface looked so similar to the Fenix 5X that we wrongly assumed all the options would be similar, as well. However, they weren’t. One of our favorite cycling metrics is percent grade — who doesn’t love keeping track of how gnarly their climbing is? While we could set a data field for total ascent, there wasn’t an option for percent grade. The Vivoactive would pair with our ANT+ heart rate monitor chest strap and our cadence sensor no problem, however, it won’t connect to a power meter (even though it has the technology). We realized the Vivoactive 3 has a much narrower set of options than the Forerunner 935 or Fenix 5 simply because of where it lives in Garmin’s GPS watch ecosystem. Now that many of its watches have the same tech inside, Garmin is differentiating its products by features and price. While we’d like to see every feature on every watch, the reality is that those who want more have to pay for it. Some downsidesBeing able to check 24-hour heart rates with the swipe of a finger is great and seeing a visual representation of current stress levels is entertaining, however, our time with the Vivoactive 3 was not entirely trouble free. One was no biggie but the other was very much a deal breaker. The first was when we got the Vivoactive 3 wet as Garmin’s new touchscreens are very touchy when in the water. Taking a shower or swimming often sent the Vivoactive 3 off on an auto-pilot tour of apps and settings. Yes, the watch has a touchscreen lock that is a long press of the button and a tap on the screen away but it isn’t something we want to do each time we jump in the shower. We worried something similar would happen when we used the Vivoactive 3 to track lap swimming but Garmin’s engineers were ahead of us. In swim activity mode the touch screen automatically locks. During a swim the only way to interact with the watch is through the button. Smart right? Then comes the deal breaker. We rely on silent smart notifications and alarms to guide us through our daily life. We depend on the vibrations to tickle us awake each morning, remind us when to pick up the kids, and let us know our phone is ringing without screaming it out to everyone else in the room. Unfortunately, the Vivoactive 3’s vibration alert is one of the weakest we’ve ever encountered. Even set to “high,” the vibration alert repeatedly failed to wake us up, alert us to a text, or get our attention when a call was coming in. In our time with the Vivoactive 3, we missed nearly every vibration alert the watch delivered. It got to the point where we switched back to wearing Garmin’s Vivosport at night, simply because we knew we could trust it to vibrate enough to wake us up in the morning. It’s a bummer that a watch with so many positives could fall so short when it comes to notification alerts. Our TakeThe vivoactive 3 is a powerful, small, midrange GPS multisport watch that also acts as a digital wallet. The color LCD touch screen is bright, crisp, and easy to read. The preset activity tracking and indoor workout recording worked exactly as we expected and checking our stress levels during the day was always entertaining. Sadly, the weak vibration alert keeps it off our wrist. Is there a better alternative? In our opinion, Garmin leads the wrist based fitness tracking game. The Vivoactive 3 fits right into the gap between fitness bands like the Vivosport and big, burly GPS multisport watches like the Fenix 5X. Those who don’t need the features of Garmin’s $700 flagship multisport Fenix 5X but want a little more than what a Vivo fitness band offers will find great value in the $330 Vivoactive 3. How long will it last? The Vivoactive 3 is a full-featured GPS multisport watch with the sensors to match. There is no reason to be worried about it becoming obsolete any time soon. Garmin continually updates its system software adding fixes and new features along the way. We would be surprised if we didn’t see features trickling down from the Fenix 5 to the Vivoactive 3 in the coming year. Should you buy it? As a Fenix 5 junior, the Vivoactive 3 is a great value. It’s also the only Garmin watch to offer Garmin Pay. If you’d like a digital wallet on your wrist and can live with an almost imperceptible vibration alert, then the Vivoactive 3 nearly offers a Fenix 5 experience at close to half the price. If vibration alerts are more important than connected sensors and Garmin Pay, then we’d suggest saving $130 and buying the Garmin Vivosport instead. Digital Trends via Digital Trends http://ift.tt/2p4eJdC December 27, 2017 at 08:19PM
http://ift.tt/2E3WbDk
What is a DSLR camera and what sets it apart from mirrorless and point-and-shoots? http://ift.tt/2liclAg What is a DSLR camera? If you’ve been asking yourself this, you’ve come to the right place. We’re going to break down everything you need to know to understand what a DSLR camera is, how it works, and what sets it apart from the likes of mirrorless and point-and-shoot cameras. Defining a DSLR cameraIn the most literal sense, a DSLR camera is a digital single-lens reflex camera. What this means is inside the camera’s body is a mirror that reflects the light coming from the lens and sends it through a prism (in higher-end DSLRs) or a series of mirrors (usually in lower-end models) and finally to the optical viewfinder. This is how you can see what you’re shooting, right through the lens. When the shutter is pressed, the mirror inside the camera flips up — which is where the term reflex comes into play — and sends the light coming through the lens directly to the sensor instead of the viewfinder. The advantage of this setup, compared to that of a mirrorless or point-and-shoot camera, is that you can see, in real-time, the exact scene you’re going to capture. There’s no lag, as there tends to be with point-and-shoots and mirrorless cameras where the sensor has to transfer what it’s seeing to a separate digital display elsewhere on the camera. On the downside, you can’t preview your exposure settings through the viewfinder the way you can on a mirrorless camera. (If you haven’t gathered by now, mirrorless cameras are so named because they don’t have a DSLR’s reflexing mirror.) Another, less talked about advantage is that DSLRs have exceptional battery life because the optical viewfinder draws very little power. Beginner models, like Canon’s EOS Rebel T7i, are usually good for at least 600 shots, while professional models, like Nikon’s 45-megapixel D850, have batteries that can last well over 1,000 exposures. Crop vs full-frameOne of the more confusing elements of DSLRs is the sensor. While DSLR camera sensors are measured in megapixels, like all digital cameras, not all sensors are the same physical dimensions. There are two main sensor types offered by DSLR manufacturers: full-frame and APS-C (often called “crop-frame”). Explained in the most simple terms, the sensor inside a full-frame camera is the size of a standard 35mm film negative, and this is where the term full-frame comes from. APS-C sensors are about half the size of your standard 35mm negative and, as a result, create what’s called a crop factor. We have a full explainer on crop factors, but the long and short of it is, if your camera’s sensor has a 1.5x crop factor, a 50mm lens will have the roughly the same field of view as a 75mm lens would have attached to a full-frame camera. This added “zoom” is nice for when you want a little extra reach with your telephoto lens, but means you can’t get as wide of a shot with a wide-angle lens as you would on a full-frame camera. Most manufacturers make lenses specific to both full-frame and APS-C models, and while all brands allow you to use full-frame lenses on crop-frame bodies, it’s not generally recommended to go the other way around. Some brands, like Canon, don’t even allow it, but on brands that do, like Nikon, using a crop lens on a full-frame body won’t use the entire sensor area and will thus require the image to be cropped significantly. Bigger is betterCompared to point-and-shoot cameras, even the smallest of DSLR cameras are much larger in comparison. The increase in size makes them a little less compact for carrying around, but means an increase in image quality and speed. Since DSLR cameras use larger sensors, they tend to offer much better image quality, especially in low-light situations. This is because each individual pixel on the sensor can be larger in size compared to a point-and-shoot camera with the same amount of megapixels. When a pixel is larger, it can capture more light with less digital noise, leading to a clearer image, even in relatively dim lighting conditions. Autofocus is also an area where DSLRs beat out even the best point-and-shoots. Autofocus technology inside DSLRs is not only faster, but generally provides much better continuous performance and subtract tracking, which is important for shooting any type of moving subject. The quality of a lens also affects how fast and accurate the autofocus is, but generally speaking, there’s no comparison. Interchangeable lensesOne of the biggest advantages of a DSLR camera over a point-and-shoot camera is the ability to attach different lenses to it. As you may have experienced with your phone or point-and-shoot, sometimes the built-in lens just isn’t enough, whether you want to fit more in the frame or want a little more reach for far-away subjects. With a DSLR camera, it’s as simple as swapping out lenses. Switching lenses is usually as simple as pressing a small button on the frame of the camera, and giving the lens a little twist and pull. A huge variety of lenses exists, from wide-angle models for landscapes to super-telephotos for sports and wildlife to large aperture portrait lenses that create that creamy smooth background blur. Each camera manufacturer has its own proprietary mounting system and accompanying lenses. Third party lens manufacturers, such as Sigma, Tamron, and many others, tend to offer their lenses in multiple mount types to accompany all photographers. If you happen to have lenses from old film cameras sitting around the house, odds are you can even mount those to a DSLR with the help of adapters, such as those made by Fotodiox. So don’t feel like you have to drop a lot of money on lenses to make the most of a DSLR camera. Mirrorless cameras also have the ability to change lenses, and are generally more compact than DSLRs. That said, DSLR cameras have been around for a much longer period of time, so there tends to be more lens options with DSLR cameras than mirrorless cameras, particularly from third parties. Accessories galoreAnother strength of DSLR cameras is the ability to use a great deal of accessories and attachments with them. Most any DSLR includes what’s called a hotshoe. This mount on top of the camera can be used as a mounting point for external flashes and even trigger wireless flashes when used with transmitters, such as Pocket Wizards. DSLR cameras also have a slew of ports for attaching various adapters, trigger systems, external monitors, microphones, wired flashes, and even GPS modules. This versatility makes it easy to customize the camera to fit your exact needs, whether you’re in a studio or on-location in the Himalayas. New accessories are popping up every day and with each new generation of DSLR cameras comes a new line of accessories to make the most of the device’s technology. Wrapping it upIs a DSLR camera right for you? That’s up for you to decide, but hopefully this explainer can help you better answer that question. If you need more help, we have a guide on how to choose a that best fit your needs, as well as a collection of the best digital cameras of 2017 and the best DSLR cameras you can buy.
Digital Trends via Digital Trends http://ift.tt/2p4eJdC December 27, 2017 at 07:51PM
http://ift.tt/2liUzgo
What is a blockchain? Here’s everything you need to know http://ift.tt/2zFgGCJ The world of cryptocurrencies is a complicated one. Although it’s become simpler to put money into it over the years, the underlying technology behind it all has only become more and more complicated. As hard as that makes it to get your head around though, as you’ll come to understand, that is actually a good thing. Whether you’re simply looking to invest in bitcoin, trade some Ethereum, or are intrigued about what comes next for the blockchain, we’re going to help explain it to you. In this guide, we’ll help answer the core question at the heart of the cryptocurrency world: what is a blockchain? Back to the genesis blockThe first work on the technology began back in the early ’90s in a paper entitled “How to Time-Stamp a Digital Document.” It was the very rudimentary idea of what the blockchain would eventually become, but it was the beginning of something that would spawn industries worth hundreds of billions of dollars and could very well reinvent many aspects of how our digital society operates. Although you may associate blockchain technology specifically with cryptocurrencies like bitcoin, it’s just as related to cryptography as it is to digital currencies. Blockchains utilize the mathematical securing technique to legitimize a record, confirming its authenticity. The blockchain is a growing chain of these records, or “blocks,” that allows for a confirmed trail back to the original block that’s heavily resistant to modification and tampering. That chain begins at the “genesis block,” the very first record in that chain and continues unbroken through successive blocks. Each of them is proven through the use of cryptographic hash pointers, which link it with the previous block in the chain and prove its validity. They also contain a timestamp and transaction data, thereby offering the same function as a traditional middle-man institution but with public rather than private oversight. A more colloquial description of it is that it’s effectively a ledger that notes down the details of a transaction. What makes a blockchain different from more traditional ledgers is that it’s entirely peer-to-peer and therefore unbiased and requires the time investment of the community involved in its usage, rather than a dedicated middleman. That’s what makes the blockchain such an effective backbone for cryptocurrencies, which is where it made its first practical appearance in the creation of bitcoin in 2009. Developed by the still effectively anonymous “Satoshi Nakamoto,” the cryptocurrency allowed for a method of conducting transactions, effectively acting like an entirely digital currency, but protected from interference by the use of the blockchain. Bitcoin and the alt-coinsAlthough bitcoin and the alternative currencies all utilize blockchain technology, they do so in differing manners. Since bitcoin was first invented it has undergone a few changes at the behest of its core developers and the wider community, and other alt-coins have been created to improve upon bitcoin, operating in slightly different ways. In the case of bitcoin, a new block in its blockchain is created roughly every ten minutes. That block verifies and records, or “certifies” new transactions that have taken place. In order for that to happen, “miners” utilize powerful computing hardware to provide a proof-of-work — a calculation that effectively creates a number which verifies the block and the transactions it contains. Several of those confirmations must be received before a bitcoin transaction can be considered effectively complete, even if technically the actual bitcoin is transferred near-instantaneously. This is where bitcoin has run into problems in recent months. As the number of bitcoin transactions increases, the relatively-hard 10-minute block creation time means that it can take longer to confirm all of the transactions and backlogs can occur. With certain alt-coins, that’s a little different. With Litecoin it’s more like two and a half minutes, while with Ethereum the block time is just 10-20 seconds, so confirmations tend to happen far faster. There are obvious benefits of such a change, though by having blocks generate at a faster rate there is a greater chance of errors occurring. If 51 percent of computers working on the blockchain record an error, it becomes near-permanent, and generating faster blocks means fewer systems working on them. Beyond cryptocurrenciesAs much as blockchain technology has facilitated the creation of cryptocurrencies which have themselves had a considerable impact on a large number of institutions and industries, the blockchain itself has much greater potential. Its ability to secure trust in a digital commodity, to effectively make something that is infinitely reproducible, unique, has wide-reaching implications. It confirms a transaction in a manner that is both verified and publicly verifiable. Until now that’s not been possible at the speed and ease that the blockchain allows. In comparison, traditional financial institutions operate at a snail’s pace and are far less compatible with public oversight. There is much less interoperability within financial systems and that’s why global financial transactions can be so time-consuming and prone to error. Blockchain technology could theoretically make traditional accounting practices redundant, allowing for all financial transactions to be publicly viewable, thereby immune to cooking the books. Its decentralized nature could mean borrowing money from pools of peers rather than financial institutions or make it possible to confirm credit card transactions to altogether eliminate fraud. Technologies currently being tested with cryptocurrencies, like smart-contracts, could mean the need to do away with costly lawyer fees or complicated contracts to guarantee a service or item is received in return for payment. Buying and selling houses could do away with estate agents and the aforementioned legal experts entirely if we knew the blockchain would confirm all aspects of our transactions. At its core, blockchain technology spreads the responsibility for making sure something happens as intended to all of those involved in the system. It eliminates middle-men by creating a lot more of them. It has its detractors, but the blockchain has a very exciting future, whether you’re investing in cryptocurrencies or not.
Digital Trends via Digital Trends http://ift.tt/2p4eJdC December 27, 2017 at 07:37PM
http://ift.tt/2Cg59iu
Study: Hackers Could Disrupt or Crash HDDs Using Only Sound Waves http://ift.tt/2C1uCgA Want to destroy video evidence of a break-in, prevent ATMs from logging malware attacks, or simply shut down a critical computer system? One possible way to do that might be disrupting hard disk drives with sound waves, either with a specialized device or just by hijacking a nearby speaker. The reason the tactic allegedly works is simple, per Bleeping Computer: Sound waves cause vibrations, and when a “sound is played at a specific frequency, it creates a resonance effect that amplifies the vibration effect.” Modern hard drives automatically shut off when vibrating to prevent the mechanical arms which perform read-write operations from scratching the data-storage platters and destroying data. That, obviously, can seriously disrupt functions on the associated devices or force them to crash. Advertisement As BleepingComputer noted, Princeton and Perdue university scientists recently demonstrated that such an attack is practical with a specialized audio rig that blasted an HDD drive with acoustic waves at specific angles and at various frequencies. Depending on the duration and frequency of the attack, the researchers wrote, they could induce either a temporary fault from which systems recovered or permanent ones requiring a full system reboot. In their study, the researchers noted that since HDDs are the “most commonly-used type of non-volatile storage due to their enhanced energy efficiency, significantly-improved areal density, and low cost,” there’s a wide number of systems potentially vulnerable to attack. Those included both CCTV systems and desktop computers, both of which the researchers showed could be messed with by the sound-wave system—though disrupting either required a specially designed sound played from a close distance. Those difficult conditions make this more of an interesting proof of concept of a previously unproven vulnerability, but as the researchers wrote, “Using more powerful sound sources can increase the attack range accordingly.” In the CCTV system case, researchers were able to prevent it from recording further camera data, while they were able to drive the desktop computer into a BSOD state. Advertisement One theoretical application of the attack technique suggested by BleepingComputer would be preventing an afflicted ATM from “collecting forensic evidence while fileless malware executes in the ATM’s RAM and dispenses cash to attackers,” but there’s probably lots of ways one could use this maliciously. As a result, the researchers recommended that sensitive computer systems come equipped with acoustic shielding for their HDD components—though maybe it wouldn’t hurt to invest in a solid state drive either. Digital Trends via Gizmodo http://gizmodo.com December 27, 2017 at 06:06PM
http://ift.tt/2CfqPLI
We rounded up every hot smartphone for an ultimate camera showdown http://ift.tt/2BZZz4G The camera has quickly and easily become one of the most important features of a smartphone. We’re capturing more and more photos every day, and it’s all largely thanks to the simplicity of tapping a shutter icon to snap a shot, as well as the abundance of the camera phone. In 2017, we saw an astounding number of excellent cameras on flagship smartphones ranging from $500 to $1,000. We took eight of our favorite smartphones of the year on a trip to San Francisco, to see which we can crown as the best. We’re testing the cameras on the iPhone X, LG V30, Google Pixel 2 XL, Samsung Galaxy S8, HTC U11, Huawei Mate 10 Pro, and the OnePlus 5T. But before we dive in, we should clarify our process behind this test. Our goal is to test the experience of using the cameras on these phones as the average person. We didn’t dive into the settings to make some tweaks, and we made no edits to photos other than adjusting their size. We treated all phones the same — taking them out of a bag, pointing them at a subject, tapping on the subject, and pressing the shutter icon. We tried to mimic what the average person would do, which is simply opening the camera and taking a photo, without dealing with any specific camera settings. Identifying the “best” photo is also a very subjective task. Sometimes there are clear winners, but there are disagreements as well. When we say we like a particular photo the most, that doesn’t mean it’s undisputedly the best. You may like something else, and that’s fine. The test spans a few popular photo categories, but we’ll start first with the camera apps on these smartphones first. Camera launch speed and interfaceA phone that lets you access the camera quickly is a winner, and we’re happy to say all eight of these phones let you snap in seconds. Most Android phones, including the Pixel 2 XL, Note 8, S8, OnePlus 5T, and the HTC U11, let you double tap the power button to jump into the camera. The Huawei Mate 10 Pro and LG V30 mix it up by requiring you to double tap the volume down key (this is not the default function on the Mate 10 Pro). Alternatively, you can swipe up from the camera icon on the lock screen for both. The iPhone X is simply a swipe to the left from the lock screen. We found the most convenient and fastest way to launch the camera is with phones that opted for the default Android approach. Which phones launch the camera app the quickest? It’s impossible to say — all the cameras launch instantly with next to no delay. It’s easier to spot shutter lag, which is the delay from when you tap the shutter icon to when the camera captures a shot. We found the iPhone X, Pixel 2 XL, and the Note 8 outperform the rest, but it’s a small win; the other devices are still incredibly quick. The LG V30 does seem to have the longest shutter lag, but not by much, and it’s far from a deal-breaker. We believe the iPhone X, Pixel 2 XL, OnePlus 5T, LG V30, Galaxy S8, and the U11 all have the simplest camera interfaces. The Note 8 comes close, but it makes no mention of what you can access by swiping left or right (unlike the S8). The Huawei Mate 10 Pro’s interface has improved from earlier versions, but it’s still the weakest on the list; Pro mode is difficult to find at first, and there are a few features that aren’t fully explained. The Note 8, iPhone X, Mate 10 Pro, V30, S8, and U11 all take the cake for offering the most varied features, and the OnePlus 5T is easily the most bare bones camera app of the lot. Photo categories:Broad daylightThe clock tower at the San Francisco Ferry Building stood out as a ripe target for a camera comparison, and right off the bat we’ll say we like most of the photos here. It’s putting them next to each other where you see the subtle (and not-so-subtle) differences. The Pixel 2 XL and the HTC U11 shot our favorite images, because they capture a lot of detail and have good color accuracy. Of the two, we’d pick the U11’s photo as the Pixel 2’s photo looks a tad muted in comparison. Take a look at the lines of the clock tower — they’re almost invisible on the rest of the phones. The California Republic flag right below the clock tower is another good point of focus: The flagpole is almost invisible on the iPhone X and the OnePlus 5T. Barring the Pixel 2 XL, the U11, and the OnePlus 5T, most of the skies have a slight purple-ish tint; it’s very faint on the iPhone X, but it’s obvious on the Mate 10 Pro. The Pixel 2 XL’s photo looks the most realistic here, but we would share the U11’s photo because the sky and the clock tower are a tad brighter and more vibrant. The losers here came from the Huawei Mate 10 Pro and the Samsung Galaxy S8. The photos are bland, there isn’t as much detail, and there are too many purple hues. We take a lot of photos indoors, and the Christmas tree at Neiman Marcus in San Francisco made an ideal example. It’s easy to pick a winner here: The Pixel 2 XL. The Pixel’s photo just feels like Christmas: It’s warm, has brilliant detail, and there’s good dynamic range — you can see the blue sky through the oval dome at the top. The HTC U11 is a very close second, and we wouldn’t be surprised if people thought it was better than the Pixel 2 XL. It has cooler tones, and ever-so-slightly better dynamic range at the dome. To clarify, poor dynamic range appears when one part of the photo that’s overexposed or too white, while another part of the photo is underexposed, or too dark. Good dynamic range can balance out the two, allowing you to see details in both bright and dim areas. The U11 and the Pixel 2 XL do a great job in this environment. We like the added warmth in the Pixel’s photo — the colors just pop — which is why it’s our favorite. The HDR setting on many camera apps allows you achieve good dynamic range by taking multiple shots and combining them with software. We allowed the phones to use it if they turned it on automatically, but did not go out of our way to engage it, because average people simply don’t shoot that way. Some of the phones also offer extra options, under a “Pro” mode, that let you tweak all the settings to capture the perfect shot. It’s great that it’s available, but again, it’s not how a vast majority of people use their smartphone cameras. Most people take their phone out, launch the camera, and tap the shutter icon. That’s how we did it, and that’s how we’re judging these photos. The iPhone X comes third, and it’s certainly a great photo. It’s has even more blue tones than the U11, and great dynamic range, but it does start to lose some detail in the Christmas tree — likely because the tree is a lot darker. The rest of the phones don’t do as well, but there are some merits: The Note 8 gets points for maintaining a little more detail, and the OnePlus 5T offers decent dynamic range. The poorest photos come from the Mate 10 Pro, because the colors look muted and almost grayscale, as well as the LG V30 and Galaxy S8, because the domes are way too overexposed. Low-lightTaking photos in low light is even more challenging for a phone than in daylight. High-end smartphones have continued to get better in this category, but there’s still plenty of room for improvement. In this photo of the Castro Theatre in San Francisco, the iPhone X, Galaxy Note 8, and the Galaxy S8 offer the sharpest photos, with solid detail. Take a look at the neon curls at the top of the “Castro” sign — they are sharpest on the photos taken by the aforementioned phones. The Google Pixel 2 XL is a close second, but there are elements of the photo that look slightly fuzzier and soft. Our outright favorites come from the iPhone X, the Google Pixel 2 XL, and the OnePlus 5T. The rest of the photos are somewhat overexposed, and some are too yellow. We love the cool, dark nightclub vibes the Pixel photo gives off, but our top pick here is the iPhone X. Take a look at the yellow buildings to the left of the theater — the iPhone illuminates them more than the Pixel 2. We should note, the Pixel does have slightly better dynamic range; you can see more things inside the stores below the yellow buildings, as well as see the faint outline of the horizon in the distance. The Mate 10 Pro does a solid job here as well, alongside the OnePlus 5T. Our least favorite photo goes to the HTC U11, which is too warm and slightly overexposed. The LG V30 isn’t great either — the static neon sign and several parts of the photo are blurry. FoodGood lighting: We’ve all taken our phones out before a delicious meal to snap a photo and share it on social media. You want your phone to accurately capture your beautifully plated meals. It’s difficult to choose a winner in our first test — a delicious meal at Darren’s Cafe in Fisherman’s Wharf — they’re all great photos. Zoom into the details, and it becomes slightly easier to choose winners. Our overall favorite pick is the Pixel 2 XL and the OnePlus 5T, but they win at a very, very small margin. There’s good contrast in both photos, a spectacular dash of color, and excellent detail. The HTC U11 also offers great detail, with the Mate 10 Pro and the Galaxy S8 coming in behind. The Note 8 is a tad blurry if you zoom in on the fried chicken, and so is the iPhone X. The worst offender is the V30 — you don’t need to zoom in to see the blur. Color-wise, it’s an even tougher choice. The photos where the egg yolks pop are our favorites, including the Pixel 2 XL, U11, iPhone X, Galaxy S8, and the OnePlus 5T. The Note 8, V30, and the Mate 10 Pro were a tad bright, but it’s really hard to tell the difference at a first glance. Our winners remain the Pixel 2 XL and the OnePlus 5T, but we’re incredibly impressed by the output of all these phones here. Poor lighting: It’s easier to draw out winners in a more challenging test — low-light food photography. Most restaurants have dim lighting, which can be problematic for food photographers. We had delectable ramen from Waraku in Japantown, but there’s very little lighting in the restaurant. We have a standout winner, though, and it’s the Pixel 2 XL. It manages to capture a great deal of color, very little noise, and good details, offering a photo we’ll be happy sharing on Instagram. The runner up is the iPhone X. There’s an overall red tint, but it still manages to capture some color, with a good amount of detail — it’s just not as sharp as the Pixel 2 XL. Close behind the iPhone are Samsung’s Note 8 and the Galaxy S8. The color balance is OK, and there’s a decent amount of detail. Next up is a tie between the V30 and the Mate 10 Pro, both of which also have a red tint, but colors are more muted. There’s not an egregious amount of grain, as the details are similar to the Note 8 and the S8. Our poorest of the lot are the HTC U11 and the OnePlus 5T. The photos are blurry and too grainy, with muted colors; we likely would not share these if we had a choice. Portrait ModeIt’s almost a requirement now to have some form of a Portrait Mode on flagship smartphones. Portrait Mode is when the subject stays in focus, and a blur effect (bokeh) is added to the background. Most flagship phones have some type of Portrait Mode in place, but there are still those that don’t. You won’t find a photo from the HTC U11 or the LG V30 here. The Galaxy S8 and Pixel 2 XL don’t use dual cameras to identify depth and add a blur — it’s purely software. That being said, our top picks are the iPhone X, the Pixel 2 XL, and the Galaxy Note 8. The iPhone’s Portrait Mode photo is perhaps a tad too bright for us, but the colors feel natural and the blur is strong and DSLR-esque. The top of the subject’s head is a tad out of focus, but it works because the blur radiates as a circle from the main focal point. The Pixel 2 XL’s Portrait Mode doesn’t radiate, but it accurately identifies the subject and does a great job of applying the blur around them — only a few strands of hair are blurred. The blur isn’t as strong as the Note 8 or the iPhone X, but it’s solid. The background is a little too muted, whereas the iPhone’s is vibrant and colorful. The Pixel’s photo does look the most natural. The Note 8 doesn’t handle the subject’s skin tone very well — it’s a little pasty, but the blur is very strong and fairly accurate. There is an overall reddish hue we’re not too fond of in the photo. The Mate 10 Pro comes next, though is perhaps too saturated, and the blur can be a little jarring (look at the top of the subject’s head). The OnePlus 5T does a solid job with placing the blur around the subject, but the effect is very weak. The background looks oversaturated, and the skin tone is worse than the Note 8. The worst, unexpectedly, is the Galaxy S8. Samsung never emphasized this mode in the phone, and for good reason. The result looks photoshopped, and the blurring is visibly wrong in some places. In lesser lighting, Portrait Mode may not work as well. Our photo here is in front of the Golden Gate Bridge, as the sun started to make its way down. We were largely in the shade, though, so the lighting isn’t as strong as the previous photo. We left in photos taken with the HTC U11 and the LG V30, so you can compare the difference between a standard portrait photo and one taken with Portrait Mode. Our top choice is the iPhone X, which offers excellent dynamic range (the background is perfectly exposed). The background is also vibrant and colorful with a strong blur, and you can see a lot of detail on the subject: great details, great blur. The Pixel 2 XL is the runner up. There’s a bit of grain on the subject, but it’s well-detailed, and offers excellent dynamic range like the iPhone. The background isn’t as vibrant or colorful, though. The rest of the photos are largely just OK. The OnePlus follows behind the Pixel due to its good dynamic range and solid details, but the blurring isn’t as accurate around the subject. The overall photo is a tad too dim. The Mate 10 Pro is next, with a detailed photo and good blur, but the background is overexposed. The subject’s skin tone is a little too pasty. The poorest Portrait Mode photos came from the S8, which has poor blur accuracy, jarring bokeh, and the photo is just too dim. The Note 8 is not good at all either — the background is completely overexposed, and that ruins the rest of the photo. We’re not going to compare the photos from the LG V30 and the U11, because they did not have a Portrait Mode. The photos are good, but it highlights what Portrait Mode can do to make them great. SelfieBut what about selfies? Selfies may be one of the most popular uses of camera phones, but unfortunately most smartphones don’t put a lot of focus on the front camera as much as the rear one. Our pick is easy here: The Pixel 2 XL. It offers a great amount of detail and looks sharp, and best of all there’s still a good dynamic range in the background. The iPhone X, HTC U11, Note 8, and V30 follow suit with solid detail, but the U11 stands out for its brilliantly blue sky, and great dynamic range. The overall photo is a little too dim, though. The rest of the phones in the aforementioned list have overexposed backgrounds. We like the Mate 10 Pro’s details on the subject — it even surpasses some of the phones we just mentioned, but it’s ruined by its pathetic attempt at dynamic range. The background is far too white. The Galaxy S8’s photo is too soft, and it suffers from a very white background as well.
Julian Chokkattu/Digital Trends
Julian Chokkattu/Digital Trends
Two phones stand out even further for offering a Portrait Mode with the selfie camera — the iPhone X and the Pixel 2 XL. The Pixel blows the iPhone out of the competition here. The photo is rich in detail, it’s sharp, has great dynamic range, and a solid blur. The iPhone’s blur feels out of place, and the overexposed background is disappointing. Special featuresSome of these smartphones have special features, like the Huawei Mate 10 Pro’s black and white mode; the LG V30’s wide-angle lens; the iPhone X’s studio lighting features for a more personalized portrait; and the Note 8, Mate 10 Pro, and iPhone X’s 2x optical zoom. We explore these features in our full-length reviews of these phones, and we recommend you check them out there. So which is the best?If you haven’t noticed, there’s one phone that’s been in our top picks for almost every category, and that’s Google’s Pixel 2 XL. It’s truly the best camera phone of the year, with its spectacular dynamic range, great color accuracy, brilliant details, and overall reliable performance in all types of lighting conditions. The iPhone X is our runner up, stealing the show with the rear camera Portrait Mode. HTC has cemented third place, and we honestly think it’s one of the most underrated smartphones of the year. The rest of the phones in our comparison are by no means bad camera phones at all. They take excellent photos, and have genuinely good features that make them fun to use. But they’re not the cream of the crop. These smartphones may have great cameras, but there’s a lot more to a phone. Check out our smartphone reviews to learn more about what each phone has to offer. Digital Trends via Digital Trends http://ift.tt/2p4eJdC December 27, 2017 at 05:49PM
http://ift.tt/2l8p890
After Net Neutrality Vote, Fake Comments Are Still Flooding Federal Websites http://ift.tt/2E0Zz1A Fake comments submitted to a federal agency after a notice of proposed rulemaking is something that, even just a few years ago, no one would’ve really given two shits about. Even typing “notice of proposed rulemaking” right now is making me incredibly sleepy. But after 24 million comments were filed in response to the FCC’s Restoring Internet Freedom Order (that’s the one that killed net neutrality), Americans from all walks of life suddenly began paying attention to erstwhile-borrring bureaucratic procedures that, were it not for the net neutrality fight’s energizing effect, would’ve been like listening to Ben Bernanke discuss the Great Depression’s effect on credit intermediation after swallowing a bottle of Ambien. Advertisement So here we are: Instead of playing on their phones, high school students were watching an FCC open meeting in class, of their own volition, and groaning loudly (the way they do) every time someone used a dummy phrase like “heavy-handed” or “light-touch regulation,” which is sadly every five to 10 seconds. But it’s not just rowdy internet freedom fighters getting drowned out by swarms of fake comments aimed at convincing federal regulators the public feels one way when, in reality, the complete opposite is true. As The Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday, fake comments criticized a proposed Labor Department rule that would “require investment advisors handling retirement accounts to act in the best interest of clients.” Among a group of 50 people who allegedly filed comments on the rule and were contacted by the Journal, 40 percent said they didn’t actual write the comment that was filed using their name, address and phone number. One of the comments, supposedly filed by a Pennsylvania man who later agreed to go on the record and say he never wrote it, read: “I do not need, do not want and object to any federal interference in my retirement planning.” Advertisement It’s mostly known by now that while federal agencies have to accept public comments, they don’t actually have to consider any of what they say. Nevertheless, making a “materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent” statement to a federal agency (like, say, using someone else’s name without their consent) is a felony. This apparently happened millions of times during the FCC’s rulemaking process. But the agency’s Trump-appointed chairman, Ajit Pai, has declined to aid any law enforcement investigation into the matter—partly, we assume, because the lead investigator, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, is turning out to be one of the administration’s worst nightmares. Whereas the FCC established a rule that its IT team wouldn’t do anything to block fake comments—mostly out of concern that it would be accused of censoring comments that didn’t align with its political agenda—the Labor Department told the Journal that its happy to delete any comments reported to be fraudulent. In addition to the Labor Department and the FCC, the Journal also reported that it has identified fake comments plaguing dockets at three other federal agencies. Advertisement While it’s easy to comprehend why someone would seek to tamper with the FCC’s comment system at the height of the net neutrality debate—its high number of comments serving as an indicator of exigent and widespread public concern—one has to wonder what kind of sick bastard would try to game a rulemaking process that affects how senior citizens receive retirement advice. Is there no decency left? Digital Trends via Gizmodo http://gizmodo.com December 27, 2017 at 05:42PM
http://ift.tt/2li3KxG
Forget lithium-ion — this graphene-based power pack recharges insanely fast http://ift.tt/2pI6mdt Regardless of whether you are simply whiling away the hours on a long journey with your Nintendo Switch or are left unable to work because your iPhone X or MacBook is out of juice, running out of battery charge on the go is pretty darn annoying. That’s where a new new graphene-based fast charging USB-C battery pack, currently sweeping Kickstarter, wants to help. Describing itself as the world’s first portable USB-C power bank which works using graphene-based composite packs, it is smaller than many power packs available on the market, and promises to be able to recharge in just 20 minutes. It supports charging up to 60W, which means that a battery with a capacity of 6,000mAh can be charged in as little as 20 minutes. You can also quickly charge gadgets with 40W, allowing the iPhone X and iPhone 8 promising to reach a full charge in just 90 minutes, as opposed to the usual three hours. The USB-C connection means that it’s compatible with the power adapters for Nintendo Switch, the MacBook, or Lenovo, Dell, and HP laptops. You can alternatively use a special adapter to get it to work with old laptop chargers or MagSafe adapters. Oh, and the smaller internal resistance and superior conductivity of the battery means that the temperature rise is lower than it would be with regular traditional batteries — thereby making it safer. This is underlined by the fact that cell swelling and burning will supposedly never happen with a graphene-based battery. “The key part of this project is the battery cell,” Wade Lam, the product manager at manufacturer Elecjet, told Digital Trends. “Our partner CellsX has spent 13 years in graphene composite battery R&D.” If you would like to get your hands on an Apollo USB-C power pack, you can currently place a pre-order on Kickstarter. So far, the project has far exceeded its original $10,000 funding target, with plenty of time left on the clock. Prices start at $59 for a power pack, USB-C to C cable, and instructions. Additional options — with extra adapters — are also available. Shipping is set to take place in March 2018. So, to recap: Smaller, safer, faster, more convenient. Provided this works as promised, consider us sold! Digital Trends via Digital Trends http://ift.tt/2p4eJdC December 27, 2017 at 04:46PM
http://ift.tt/2l803LI
The top 10 coolest corporate headquarters in the world, ranked http://ift.tt/2lasuIH It’s no secret that many of the world’s mega-corporations have a penchant for large, lavish, and downright legendary headquarters. Whether it’s enormous buildings, provocative architecture, or outrageous amenities, Fortune 500’s love to show the world how awesome they are through their buildings. To give you a sense of what we mean, we’ve rounded up some of the biggest, baddest, and most ridiculous corporate headquarters on the planet, and ranked them according to their completely subjective level of “coolness.” Enjoy! 10. Bank of China Tower
|
Categories
All
Archives
October 2020
|