Popular Post

Amazon Gate

Samsung Galaxy S4 review

The Galaxy SIV is here - but does it pack enough of a punch?

By Gareth Beavis

The Samsung Galaxy S4 is the most hotly anticipated smartphone ever from the Korean brand, and with a glut of top end features, it's the most powerful and desirable device Samsung has created yet.
One of the most impressive things about the phone is the fact the size hasn't changed from its predecessor - the Galaxy S4 comes in at 136.6 x 69.8 x 7.9mm (5.38 x 2.75 x 0.31 inches), meaning there's no extra heft to try to work with in your palm.
However, despite this fact, the screen on the S4 has been increased once more, to a whopping 5-inch display with Full HD resolution. This means the same amount of pixels you'd have seen on a TV that cost well over £1,000 four years ago is now riding around in your pocket.
Samsung Galaxy S4 review
Let's not pretend that Samsung is a pioneer in this area though: like a great many features of the Galaxy S4, the phone borrows a lot from the other top smartphones of the moment. Both the Sony Xperia Z and the HTC Onehave screens that rock the same resolution, but neither of them have the jaw-dropping clout of the Super AMOLED HD screen on offer here.
On top of that, there's a much faster processor packed under the hood, ample storage space for media thanks to an expandable memory card slot, and the likes of 4G, Bluetooth 4.0, NFC and pretty much any other connection you care to mention on board.
Samsung Galaxy S4 review
Samsung has tried to supplement this with a tranche of software upgrades too, meaning a more powerful camera, a better way to communicate with your friends and consume media, and interestingly a big push into health through dedicated apps too.
The Samsung Galaxy S4 costs the same as the HTC One, give or take a pound or two, on contract. This will still put it around £35 per month, which isn't too bad for such a high design.
Galaxy S4 review
But before we dissect all the possibilities the phone has to offer, let's look at the design. As we mentioned, it's impressive in its form factor, thanks to the sub-8mm thickness, and at 130g it manages to still be light without shaving off so much heft that you feel like you've got a flimsy piece of plastic.
Samsung Galaxy S4 review
That's probably the biggest compliment we can pay the Samsung Galaxy S4 - where its predecessor felt a little bit cheap in the hand, the S4 manages to bring a much more solid build and better construction to boot.
So while the "faux metal" band makes a comeback on this model, it looks a lot more premium. And there's very little flex in the chassis when you hold it tightly, which was another problem with the Galaxy S3 at times.
Samsung Galaxy S4 review
That doesn't mean that the phone is completely remodelled from the S3 - it's very similar in appearance, so much so that a number of people asking to see it during our review thought we were palming them off with our old S3. The polycarbonate chassis remains, but that brings with it the faithful battery cover, which conceals a removable battery and microSD slot.
Samsung Galaxy S4 review
We're not so fussed about the battery being able to drop out of the phone - so few people carry around a spare battery, and nowadays portable charging blocks are becoming so cheap and light that they make much more sense too.
We'd almost prefer something like the Sony Xperia Z, which has a refined and packaged chassis but doesn't need a removable battery: it makes use of a slot instead for the memory card. This integrated nature would make for a slightly more premium feel to the phone.
Samsung Galaxy S4 review
However, it's a small gripe with the S4, as while the cover feels flimsy, it's better than it was on the S2 and the S3, and they both sold like hot cakes.
In the hand, the Samsung Galaxy S4 feels much better than any other Samsung phone we've held (apart from the gargantuan smartphones the brand used to make - the i8910 Omnia HD might have been built like a brick, but it felt wonderful to hold). The screen's spread towards the sides of the phone means a much narrower bezel, and the effect is certainly impressive.
Samsung Galaxy S4 review
It might look very similar to the S3, but when you take the Samsung Galaxy S4 up close, you really start to appreciate the nuances.
We'd say it feels a lot more like the LG Optimus G range now - when we first picked it up, we were struck with how similar it felt in terms of sturdiness and the polycarbonate construction to the LG Optimus G Pro.
That's no criticism, as the device was well built too, but it has a similar rounded feel. This is intriguing given the history of the two companies, and shows more of a leaning towards the plastic shell from the Asian brands in general.
Samsung Galaxy S4 review
Buttonry has barely changed from before - the power button has been shifted slightly on the right-hand side, and is now much easier to hit. Samsung has clearly taken some lessons from the Galaxy Note 2, which has a really well positioned power/lock button.
The volume key is less easy to hit, and could be lower down in our eyes, but the travel on both of these buttons is satisfying, and you'll always know when you've hit them.
The plastic used on the home key has been upgraded too, with a more solid feel under the thumb when you press down to get back to the main home screen. The two buttons flanking it give you access to menus or take you back from whence you came, and while both are easily hidden, they light up nicely with an even glow when called into action.
There are loads of sensors on the front of the phone above the screen, including cameras to track your eyes, a 2MP camera for HD video calling and a proximity sensor for knowing where the phone is in relation to your ear. On the white review unit we had, their presence looks rather ugly either side of the generous earpiece, but on the darker models this is less of an issue.
Samsung Galaxy S4 review
The other notable addition to the design of the Galaxy S4 is the infra red blaster on the top of the phone. This enables you to control your TV, satellite box, DVD player, amp and even air conditioner. Again, this isn't a new feature, but it works well in practice, and despite being small is powerful enough indeed.
Other than that, there's not a lot more to say about the design of the phone, as it's just a little underwhelming. We know it's unfair to lambast a brand for not overhauling the design every year, but in the One X and the One, HTC has proven that it is possible to offer up a new design each time around and still keep things attractive.
Looking so similar to the Galaxy S3, you can't help but feel Samsung has gone a little too Apple and created something more in keeping with the Samsung Galaxy S3S - a minor update to a great phone to keep those coming out of contract happy that they have a premium phone to upgrade to.
We do implore you to get the phone in your hand before making a judgement though - while it's not got the best design on the market when it comes to materials, it's a big step forward compared to the Galaxy S3 and allows for a grippy and easy-to-hold phone, with a whopping screen inside.
To just dismiss it for being plastic would be doing the S4 a disservice as it has so much more going for it than that, but it's worth remembering that to a lot of people, the way a phone looks is as important as how much RAM it's got on board and how fast the CPU is - if not more so.
The Samsung Galaxy S4 has an all-new screen, and we'll state it now: the Samsung Galaxy S4 has the best display you can find on a smartphone.
It's the same Super AMOLED technology used in other Galaxy smartphones, but this time it's been cranked up to Full HD resolution, which is 1920 x 1080 pixels, if you're asking.
This uses the same PenTile matrix that's drawn so much criticism for Samsung over the years, as some state that Samsung is using too many of one colour of pixel, or sub-pixel (the colours within each pixel) is too basic – all of this has meant that older Galaxy smartphones have had something of a blue or green tint, or been a little low-resolution when viewed (admittedly really) close up.
Samsung Galaxy S4 reviewThe Samsung Galaxy S
Well, and you'll forgive us for saying the same thing that we did last year with the Galaxy S3, close up now there's no way you can see any jagged edges or elements within the icons. It's simply superb, and makes everything from web pages to video look brilliant.
Samsung Galaxy S4 reviewThe Samsung Galaxy S2
And there's no worry about the tints of old, nor the criticisms levied at Samsung for making over-saturated screens, as often people have claimed that the colours look too strong on these devices thanks to the OLED technology used.
It is a feature of the technology, and not just because of the high contrast ratios on offer, but with the Galaxy S4 Samsung has added in a mode to make the colours look more natural, should the user so with to have it that way.
Samsung Galaxy S4 reviewThe Samsung Galaxy S3
This method does drop the brightness somewhat, and that's already lower than you might find on the HTC One but that extra brightness isn't needed thanks to the contrast ratio we mentioned earlier. One of the strengths of OLED technology is that when a pixel is displaying a black image, it's completely off, and therefore draws less power and looks darker. Compared to LCD screens, which have a backlight to light the colours in front, this means that the blacks will never be as black as found on an OLED.
So, as we said, there's nothing to want for with the Super AMOLED Full HD screen found on the Samsung Galaxy S4. It might not be as high resolution as the HTC One, simply because it's larger with the same amount of pixels, but viewed up close you'll struggle to find a flaw with it.
Samsung Galaxy S4 reviewThe Samsung Galaxy S4
You can change the brightness from the notification bar by sliding your finger up and down the screen - but if you want to make things easier you can just tag the Auto button and have the Galaxy S4 working away at deciding the optimum brightness for you.
What's new here is the ability to customise the auto level - so if you like things a little lighter or darker, then you can choose such a thing. It's a good way to manage your battery even easier.
Another feature, which is both good and bad, is the improved capacitive technology used in the screen. This is designed to ape a feature brought by Nokia on the Lumia 920, which enables you to wear gloves and still use the phone - which will be a key feature to those in colder climes, or like to wear gloves for sport or similar.
However, while this works well for gloves, it does over-power the screen somewhat, in that when you're holding your finger over the screen looking to scroll up and down when you're read a certain paragraph, it will sometimesregister a press when you've no intention of doing so. It's irritating to say the least, and something that we hope Samsung irons out with future software updates.
Aside from that, there's not a thing that we can criticise the Samsung Galaxy S4 screen for in any way, as it's as close to perfect as you can get on a smartphone - making it a great device for so many more functions as a result.
Via Tech Radar.com


Canon 700D review

Canon's first touchscreen DSLR gets an upgrade

By Angela Nicholson
Canon 700D review

 

 
Introduction
Although the Canon EOS 650D was the first DSLR to have a touchscreen, Canon sensibly decided that the touch controls should be in addition to rather than instead of the button and dial controls.
This helped widen the camera's appeal, making it attractive to novices upgrading from a touchscreen smartphone or compact camera, as well as enthusiast photographers. As a result, according to Canon, the camera has sold very well.
Nevertheless after less than year the brand has decided to replace the Canon EOS 650D with the Canon EOS 700D, also known as the Canon EOS Rebel T5i. It sits alongside the Canon EOS 600D at the very top of Canon's "consumer" lineup, just below the Canon EOS 60D that starts its "enthusiast" range.
Canon EOS 700D review
However, the new camera only makes a few upgrades on the model it replaces.
The vast majority of the Canon 700D's specification is the same as the Canon 650D's. For example, the 18 million pixel APS-C sized sensor and the 14-point Digic 5 processor are the same. It also has the same hybrid autofocus system with nine-point, all-cross type phase detection points.
As before, the sensor has pixels that are used for the phase detection part of the hybrid autofocusing system that is available when using Live View mode or shooting HD videos.
Canon EOS 700D review
Best DSLR: top cameras by price and brand
When the Hybrid AF is in action, it uses the central pixels to inform the phase detection part and get the subject close to sharp - from then, the contrast detection steps in to get it into full focus. This means that you can use the camera handheld. Canon claims that the performance of this system when one of the new STM lenses is mounted has been improved.
Like the Canon EOS 650D, the Canon EOS 700D can shoot at 5fps, and the sensitivity can be set in the native range ISO 100-12800, which can be expanded to ISO 25,600 if necessary. This makes it a pretty versatile camera, capable of shooting in a wide range of situations.
One of the biggest changes brought with the new camera is that the impact of the Creative Filters (Grainy Black and White, Soft Focus, Fish-Eye, Art Bold, Water Painting, Toy Camera and Miniature Effect) can be previewed on the screen when shooting in Live View mode - just as you can with the Canon EOS 100D and the Canon EOS M.
However, these are still a JPEG-only option, so you can't have a 'clean' raw file recorded with the JPEG. If you want an unfiltered image as well as one with the effect on, you need to apply the filter post-capture using the Canon EOS 700D's post-processing options.
Alternatively, the Canon EOS 700D has the usual array of Picture Styles (Standard, Portrait, Landscape, Neutral, Faithful and Monochrome) as well as Auto, in which the camera selects what it calculates to be the appropriate option automatically, plus it can apply three user-defined styles.
All of the preset options can be adjusted to taste and can be used when shooting raw as well as JPEG files.
Canon EOS 700D review
 
Best Canon cameras
The Canon EOS 700D has also been designed to have a more expensive feel, with a textured coating and a 360-degree mode dial added. The latter means it can be twisted all the way around, rather than reaching a point where it stops and has to be twisted back again.
The Canon EOS 700D/Canon EOS Rebel T5i has a full asking price of £619.99 / AU$849 / US$749 body only or £749.99 / AU$999 / US$899.99 with the new 18-55 STM lens.
This means that it goes head to head with the 24 million pixel Nikon D5200, which was announced at the end of 2012.

Build and handling

Canon has clearly used the same mould for the EOS 700D as it did for theEOS 650D, since the two camera bodies look almost identical, with the only visible difference being a change to the mode dial.
The icons on the Canon EOS 700D's dial are raised rather than just painted and it's edged with a finer texture. This higher-quality dial can also be rotated through 360 degrees, so you don't have to turn it backwards and forwards to reach the options you want.
Canon EOS 700D review

Rubbing a finger over the two cameras also reveals that they have a slightly different texture, with the Canon EOS 700D feeling a little coarser - in a good way. The rubberised coatings over the finger and thumb-grips remain the same and give good purchase.
While it lacks the robustness of Canon's professional-level DSLRs, the Canon EOS 700D feels well made, with no movement detectable at any of the joints. The articulating joint that attaches the LCD screen and enables it to be rotated around for viewing from very high or low angles, or from in front of the camera, has a high quality feel.
Canon EOS 700D review
The Canon EOS 700D has the same control and menu layout as the Canon EOS 650D that it replaces. As before the menu is spread across 11 tabbed screens in stills mode, including a My menu option to which you can assign up to six features for quick access - we find it helpful to use this to reach the Mirror lock-up, Highlight tone priority, Auto Lighting Optimizer and Flash control options.
The menu can be navigated and options selected via the touchscreen or the button and dial controls.
Canon EOS 700D review
There's also a Quick menu that you can activate either by pressing the physical Q button or by touching the Q icon on the LCD screen. This gives a quick route to the mostly commonly needed camera settings.
If the Feature Guide is activated via Set-up Menu 3, touching an on-screen icon once brings up an explanation of the feature, while a second touch displays its available options. A single touch is all that is required if the Feature Guide is deactivated.
Canon EOS 700D review
What camera should I buy? Your options explained
As on the Canon EOS 650D, the power switch has a third option that's used to activate Movie mode. Once this has been done, the button on the back of the camera that starts Live View in stills mode becomes the movie record button.
Although the Canon EOS 700D has all the button and dial controls that we expect from a camera at this level, it is also possible to control the camera via the 3-inch 1,040,000-dot touchscreen. This is very responsive, and once you startusing the touch controls you find that you use them more and more because they are so intuitive.
Canon EOS 700D review
It's great to be able to swipe across the camera's screen to scroll through images and then pinch to zoom in to inspect details. It's just a shame that Canon has buried the rating control in the menu.
We found that the vari-angle screen provides a good, clear view with lots of detail visible even in quite bright light, making it very useful when composing images at ground level or above head-height.
Canon EOS 700D review
The touch-shutter facility, which enables the AF to be set and the shutter tripped with a touch of a finger on the screen, is particularly helpful in these situations.
However, the screen inevitably gets covered in fingerprints and these obscure the view, so it's a good idea to carry a decent lens cloth with you so you can give it a wipe now and then.
Canon EOS 700D review
Canon vs Nikon: which DSLR should you buy?
Because it's a DSLR rather than a compact system camera, the Canon EOS 700D has an optical viewfinder. While this only covers 95% of the frame and carries the risk of including a few extra elements along the edges of images, it is bright and pleasant to use.
As usual these days, when given the choice we would opt to compose images in the LCD when focusing manually, because the enlarged view makes it easier to be precise with the focus point.


Performance

Given that they have the same sensor, it's not surprising to discover that the Canon EOS 700D can resolve the same amount of detail as the Canon EOS 650D, and that the two cameras' image quality is very similar.
Noise is well controlled throughout the sensitivity range, although as you'd expect, images taken using the upper ISO values have some coloured speckling visible. It's interesting that our lab tests reveal that the Canon 700D produces slightly noisier images than the Canon 650D at the lower to mid sensitivity settings. Canon has probably made this change to the image processing to bring out a bit more detail.
The Canon 700D can produce high-quality images direct from the camera with plenty of detail and pleasant, natural colours, but as usual the best results are produced from raw files that are carefully processed.
Canon EOS 700D review
Examining our images at 100% on the screen indicates that the camera's default sharpening is a little on the high side, and more natural images are created by turning the in-camera Sharpness value down.
As is Canon's way, the white balance tends to lean a little towards warm tones, but this isn't dramatic and it usually results in more attractive images.
However, Canon's evaluative metering system continues to give mixed performance. In some situations it is superb, but in high contrast conditions you need to be alert to the brightness of the subject under the active AF point, since this can skew the result.
Canon EOS 700D review

What camera should I buy? Your options explained
Bright subjects can trick the camera into under exposure, while dark ones can lead to over exposed images. This is an issue throughout the Canon DSLR range, but it seems especially strange in models that the company is aiming at novice photographers (as well as enthusiasts), such as theCanon EOS 100D and Canon EOS 700D.
While most users want the subject to be correctly exposed, few will be happy with a wildly over exposed landscape because the focus point is in shadow.
Canon EOS 700D review
With a dynamic range of almost 12EV at ISO 200 and ISO 400, it's clear that the Canon 700D is capable of recording a wide range of tones. However, these are compressed in the JPEG files to create a higher contrast image with more punch. Unlike the results for signal to noise ratio, our dynamic range measurements for the Canon 700D match those from the Canon 650D almost exactly.
Our tests confirm that Canon has improved the performance of the hybrid focusing system that's available in Live View and video mode.
We found that the Canon EOS 700D is appreciably quicker to achieve focus with one of the STM lenses mounted than the Canon EOS 650D. Nevertheless, the focusing still isn't really fast enough to be used with a moving subject.
Canon EOS 700D review
When you use the viewfinder to compose images, the Canon 700D reverts to the more standard phase detection autofocus system. This works well, with each cross-type point finding its target quickly and accurately even in quite low light and with low contrast subjects.
The only down side is that with 'just' nine AF points it's often necessary to focus the lens and then recompose the image, because there isn't a point directly over the subject.
Canon's STM lenses really come into their own when shooting video, and the new 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM kit lens's focusing is very quiet and smooth when Movie Servo AF is enabled.
Canon EOS 700D review
It's so smooth, in fact, that sometimes it's hard to tell that the focus is slowly being adjusted. The end result, however, is very high quality footage with no sound of the focusing system in action.
While post-processed raw files generally create better monochrome images, it's very helpful to have an idea of how the final images will look. It's also fun trying to get shots just right in-camera. The Canon 700D's Monochrome Picture Style produces some excellent results, with subtle toning being possible. In many cases the images are print-ready.



Image quality and resolution

As part of our image quality testing for the Canon EOS 700D, we've shot our resolution chart.
If you view our crops of the resolution chart's central section at 100% (or Actual Pixels) you will see that, for example, at ISO 100 the Canon EOS 700D is capable of resolving up to around 22 (line widths per picture height x100) in its highest quality JPEG files.
For a full explanation of what our resolution charts mean, and how to read them, check out our full explanation of our camera testing resolution charts.
Examining images of the chart taken at each sensitivity setting reveals the following resolution scores in line widths per picture height x100:
JPEG
Canon EOS 700D review

Apple iPhone 5 review



It's smaller, thinner and faster with a higher-resolution screen, but the new Maps app is a disappointment

There's a very simple way to describe the Apple iPhone 5: thinner, lighter and a bit taller than the iPhone 4S. While that gets across the general look of the phone, it rather underestimates what's gone into the design to achieve this.

SIZE AND WEIGHT

For starters, Apple has managed to shave 1.4mm of the thickness of its previous phone. When you compare them side-by-side, what Apple has done is immediately obvious. While the iPhone 4S' screen and back bulged out from the side, the iPhone 5 has a flush back, while the screen is barely raised at all.

Apple iPhone 5 volume buttons

There's no denying that the iPhone 5 is impressively thin

It's easy to tell the difference is size from photos, but weight's an altogether harder thing to describe. In pure stats, the iPhone 4S weighed 140g, while the iPhone 5 is 28g lighter at just 112g. Trust us, this is a big difference and it's immediately noticeable when you pick the iPhone 5 up: you get the feeling that it simply should weigh more, it's that light.

While the iPhone 4S and iPhone 5 are clearly related, there are some cosmetic changes to the new model, which give it a different look and help keep the weight down. Gone is the all-glass rear, replaced instead with an aluminum panel that covers most of back of the phone, bar two glass panels at the top and bottom. We've been told that during manufacturing the rear of the phone is photographed with the aluminum panel in place, so that the best-fitting glass panels can be found. Our review model was certainly well put together, with a flush fitting rear.

Apple iPhone 5 rear

A new aluminum back panel gives the iPhone 5 a different look and feel

SCREEN
One of the biggest reasons for the change in size of the iPhone 5 is because it has a larger 4in screen with a 16:9 aspect ratio, rather than the 3:2 aspect ratio used on the iPhone 4S. What this means in practice is that both screens are the same width, but the iPhone 5's is slightly taller, with a resolution of 1,136x640 (the iPhone 4S had a resolution of 960x640), maintaining the same high 326ppi. That's still a Retina display, which Apple defines as a screen where you can't see the individual pixels.
Apple iPhone 5
A 16:9 screen means the iPhone 5 is taller than its predecessor

Extra resolution is useful, as you can now fit five rows of icons on the homescreen, up from four on the iPhone 4S. It also makes sense when you use a lot of the applications: you can view more calendar appointments and emails in a list, for example.

Apple iPhone 5 email comparison
More resolution means that each app can display more information

Typing with the phone in portrait mode is also easier, as there's more space above the keyboard for text, making it easier to see what you're writing and correct any mistakes is necessary.

Apple iPhone 5 keyboard

The higher resolution means you can see more when you type

It's not just a bigger screen, though, as the iPhone 5's display embeds the touch components with the actual pixels, removing a layer from the old screen. As well as being thinner, the new screen is brighter with higher colour saturation. Compared side-by-side with an iPhone 4S, we really noticed the difference with the iPhone 5 looking a lot more vibrant, with more pleasing colours. The screen is evenly lit and viewing angles are excellent, with the display easy to see from any angle. A 16:9 display also makes more sense if you're watching a lot of TV programmes or films on your phone, as the screen better suits the aspect ratios typically used, leading to a reduction or complete removal of black bars.
While Apple used to be a way ahead of the competition in resolution, we're seeing more Android phones with full 720p displays. The trade-off is that these Android devices typically have a larger screen with a slightly lower PPI. As we see it, a larger screen will give you more resolution, but you'll lose some of the pocketability of the iPhone 5, so it's a matter of choosing what is most important to you. 







Nokia Lumia 520 review Windows Phone 8

goes low end but not low rent

The Nokia Lumia 520 is Nokia's fifth Windows Phone 8 handset. It's a phone which slots into the very bottom end of the range, just below theNokia Lumia 620.
And we do mean just below - the specs of the 520 and 620 are remarkably similar, meaning that Nokia's main competition at the bottom end of the market is itself. Otherwise, its biggest rival is likely to be the recently launched Huawei Ascend W1 - a low-end handset that we're rather fond of.
Of course if you look beyond Windows Phone 8 then there's also a whole host of Android competitors such as the Huawei Ascend G330 and theOrange San Diego.
Overview 2
The Nokia Lumia 520 has a fairly generous 4-inch, 480 x 800 display and is powered by a 1 GHz dual-core Snapdragon S4 processor and 512MB of RAM. That may not sound like much but the power matches the Lumia 620, and we had few qualms about the performance of that phone given its price. The screen is actually slightly bigger than that of the Nokia Lumia 620, which only has a 3.8-inch display.
The Nokia Lumia 520 starts at around £150 SIM free or from around £100 if you buy it locked (and the price has already plummeted to £70 in some stores), while the Lumia 620 retails from around £175 SIM free or £150 locked.
That means a decent saving for those who don't mind committing to a network. It's a little cheaper than the Huawei Ascend W1 too.
Overview 3
Like all recent Nokia handsets there's a lot of colour in the Nokia Lumia 520. It shares the look of other Lumia devices, with a single piece of smooth plastic covering the back and sides of the phone. That shell is available in black or white, but the bright shades of yellow, blue and red on offer will appeal if you like it loud.
overview 4
If nothing else, it makes Nokia handsets stand out from the crowd. Regardless of the colour, it's quite a nice looking phone in other ways, with an angular rectangular design more in line with the higher end Nokia Lumia 920 than the curved edges of its closest relation - the Nokia Lumia 620.
It's certainly a more distinctive (and we'd argue classier) look than that of the Lumia 620 - which is odd for when the Lumia 520 is supposed to be the more basic option.
Overview 5
It's also slimmer and lighter than the Lumia 620, at a fairly sleek 9.9mm and 124g. At 119.9 x 64mm it is longer and wider than the Lumia 620, but that's understandable given that it's also got a slightly bigger screen.
We like the feel of it too. The plastic casing seems almost warm, making it nice to hold, and it's not as slippery as it might look - so getting a firm grip on the handset is no problem. The almost jagged corners can dig into your hand a little when held in certain positions, but it's at worst slightly uncomfortable and easily avoided by adjusting your grip.
Overview 6
The front of the Nokia Lumia 520 is mostly screen as you'd expect and at 4-inches it's a decent size for a low-price handset. The pixel density of 233 pixels per inch also isn't bad at all for the money you're paying - sure it's dwarfed by the likes of the 469 ppi HTC One, but it's also many times cheaper.
A huge plus is the ability to use gloves with the screen too - being able to type in the cold weather is becoming a really common ability on phones, but we're impressed Nokia managed it on such a cheap handset.
Unlike some handsets, the screen here isn't edge-to-edge: there's a black border running the entire way around it. At the sides this border is fairly narrow, but it becomes quite wide at the top to make room for the earpiece and a Nokia logo. It's even wider at the bottom, because that's where you'll find the start, back and search softkeys.
Overview 7
The back of the handset is almost featureless, with just a small Nokia logo in the centre, the 5-megapixel camera lens near the top and a tiny loudspeaker near the bottom.
Overview 8
The right edge of the handset houses all of the phones physical buttons, with a volume rocker at the top, a power button near the middle and a camera button near the bottom. The layout works well, with the buttons spaced far enough to prevent confusion.
Overview 9
The left edge is devoid of any features, ports or buttons at all.
Overview 10
The top is home only to a 3.5mm headphone port on the left hand side.
Overview 11
The bottom edge has a micro USB port in the centre, which is used for charging or connecting the Nokia Lumia 520 to a computer.
Overview 12
The back cover is easy to remove - you simply use your nails to peel it away at each corner. The cover itself feels reasonably sturdy, so we don't see it snapping even if you take it on and off a lot.
Once that has been removed, you'll have access to the 1430 mAh battery (which interestingly is bigger than the 1300 mAh battery found in the Nokia Lumia 620).
Overview 13
















Underneath the battery there are two slots - one for a micro SIM card and one for a microSD card. The Nokia Lumia 520 supports up to 64GB cards, which comes in very handy for bulking up the storage from the fairly limiting 8GB of onboard memory.

 

Panasonic S60 plasma TV review: Basic, budget plasma gives great picture


Panasonic S60 plasma TV







The good: The Panasonic TC-PS60 has a budget price, excellent picture quality with exceedingly deep black levels, great shadow detail, accurate colors, and superb off-angle and uniformity characteristics; basic, easy-to-use streaming services include Netflix, Amazon and YouTube without extraneous Smart TV features. The bad: Picture quality in bright rooms not as good as many other TVs; only two HDMI inputs; limited streaming content; consumes more power than LCD TVs. The bottom line: The Panasonic TC-PS60 plasma TV's low price, high-end picture quality, and bare-bones Smarts make it one of the best values we've ever seen.

Set price alert It's difficult to overstate how good of a deal the Panasonic S60 series represents. In a dark room its inky-deep black levels, accurate color, and perfect uniformity can make it look almost as good as flagship models that cost twice or three times as much. On the other hand its picture fades noticeably when subjected to bright lights, so if you can afford it, I definitely recommend stepping up to an ST60. Panasonic doesn't make the decision a no-brainer, however. The S60 comes in a 42-inch size, offers a refreshingly simple take on Smart TV, and most importantly, costs hundreds less than the ST60 -- and, I'm guessing, every other TV that comes close to this level of picture quality. For buyers on a tight budget who still crave a superb picture, can control room lighting, and don't need extra features or inputs, the Panasonic S60 is my early favorite pick of 2013. Series information: I performed a hands-on evaluation of the 50-inch Panasonic TC-P50S60, but this review also applies to the other screen sizes in the series. All sizes have identical specs and according to the manufacturer should provide very similar picture quality.

Models in series

Panasonic TC-P42S60

42 inches Panasonic TC-P50S60
50 inches Panasonic TC-P55S60
55 inches Panasonic TC-P60S60
60 inches Panasonic TC-P65S60
65 inches

Design
The understated S60 won't wow guests with GQ panache, but it will blend in better than most big TVs. Its only accents are strips of silver along the top and bottom edges. The black frame around the screen is skinnier than the U50's from last year and, like that of its ST60 brother, thin enough to almost pass for an LED-based LCD TV.

The S60 is thicker than any LED model when seen from the side, however, and at 2.5 inches deep, half an inch thicker than the ST60. The low-profile, glossy black stand lacks the capacity to swivel.



The non illuminated remote is the same as the ST60s but for a few different key labels/functions. I like its logical layout, clear button differentiation and dedicated keys for Netflix and eHelp, a comprehensive onscreen manual. On the other hand, "Internet" is a confusing name for the key that launches the app suite, and it's too big compared with the tiny "Menu" key. A few times I accidentally hit Internet instead of the Up cursor.




Hitting that tiny Menu key brings up Panasonic's main settings menus, which are a big improvement over last year's version, with easier navigation and sleeker design.

Key TV features Display technology
Plasma
LED backlight
N/A Screen finish
Glossy
Remote
Standard Smart TV
Yes
Internet connection
Built-in Wi-Fi 3D technology
N/A
3D glasses included
No Refresh rate(s)
60Hz, 48Hz
Dejudder (smooth) processing
No DLNA-compliant
Photo/Music/Video
USB
Photo/Music/Video Other: Optional touch pen (model TY-TP10U, $79)
Features
Although not quite as admirably features-bereft as the U50 from last year, the S60 comes close. It lacks the 3D and fancy Smart TV doodads of the ST60 series, although it does offer a refreshingly basic assortment of streaming video services as well as built-in Wi-Fi. Picture-related improvements over the entry-level X60 series include 1080p resolution and a better contrast ratio specification -- and if last year's X5 is any indication, the S60 will be a much better performer than the X50. Compared to the more-expensive ST60, the S60 has a different panel, worse antireflective screen, fewer steps of gradation, a worse contrast ratio, and no 96Hz mode. See the full comparison below for how those difference shake out in testing.




The S60 is also the least expensive 2013 Panasonic plasma to support the optional touch-pen accessory ($79), which, as you might guess, allows users to draw on the screen. It works, but I don't see how it's at all useful outside of a presentation environment. Smart TV: Panasonic calls the S60's Internet-connected content suite "Online Movies" instead of Smart TV, but in many ways it's better than the overwrought, advertising-infused Smart TV systems offered by the ST60 and step-up 2013 Panasonic sets, not to mention those of competitors like Samsung and LG. The S60 offers just six apps: Netflix, Amazon Instant Video, Vudu, YouTube, Hulu Plus and CinemaNow. Each one (except for maybe the last) is a useful streaming video source, and I'm guessing most users won't want any more. The ST60, on the other hand, has quite a few more, including numerous potentially useful ones like Pandora and Skype that the S60 omits. Of course it also has tons of useless apps as well, so there's something to be said for the S60's simpler approach.


Those six apps pop up along the bottom, making selection dead simple, but they do take longer to load. Netflix, for example, took more than 20 seconds on the S60 compared to a bit over 10 for the ST60. I did appreciate that the app interfaces, including YouTube and Netflix, were of recent vintage.



Picture settings: The selection here is better than in 2012's equivalent "U" models. Highlights include a two-point grayscale and a color management for the primary colors--although the multipoint grayscale and gamma controls go missing. The company has also added another picture mode, "Home Theater," atop its standard four, and a cool "copy adjustments" option that allows you to migrate your picture settings from one input and/or mode to others. Other controls include an unusual seven different aspect ratio settings and the standard array of items to help prevent and treat image retention, including a pixel orbiter and scrolling white bar. Fans of the soap opera effect will be disappointed to learn that it's reserved for the step-up models.


Connectivity: The back panel of the S60 is disappointing. It only has two HDMI inputs, meaning that if you connect a cable/satellite box and a game console, there's no room for a Roku/Apple TV, a DVD/Blu-ray player, or any number of other HDMI devices. If you want to connect more gear to this TV, a cheap switcher, or a switching HDMI-equipped AV receiver, is probably the best solution. The downside, of course, is the extra complexity of switching, a problem in turn best solved by a universal remote. The S60 is also missing the SD card slot found on the ST60. It does have a pair of USB ports, however, as well as the standard single component/composite video input. Picture quality: While it's not the best-performing plasma I've tested this year, the S60 delivers a remarkable picture nonetheless. Its black levels are exceedingly deep, its color performance likewise superb, and of course its uniformity and off-angle fidelity are basically perfect. In these areas it trounces all but the most expensive LED and LCD TVs, but it also has one big weakness. Like Nosferatu, it doesn't do well under the lights. Add that to its mediocre video processing and you have a pair of significant minuses compared to the best TVs on the market. But they can't stop the S60 from earning an "excellent" score from us. Click the image at the right to see the picture settings used in the review and to read more about how this TV's picture controls worked during calibration.

Comparison models (details) Panasonic TC-P50U50
50-inch plasma Samsung PN51E550
51-inch plasma Panasonic TC-P55ST60
55-inch plasma Panasonic TC-P55ST50
55-inch plasma Vizio M3D550KD
55-inch LED Sharp LC-L60E650
60-inch LED

Black level:
 The most important picture quality characteristic is the depth of black a TV can produce, and in the lineup above, in dark room, the S60 was second only to the ST60 in both measurements and to my eye. During Peter Parker's nighttime wandering in "The Amazing Spider-Man" (Chapter 7), for example, its letterbox bars and darkest shadows appeared a shade inkier than those of the U50 and ST50, and just slightly brighter than the ST60. Outside of a side-by-side comparison in a dark room, however, I'd have a tough time telling any them apart. None of the other three sets, including the Samsung E550 plasma or the local dimming Vizio, came close to the S60's depth of black. Details in the shadows were also superb. Peter's clothing, the graffitied wall and the fire escape during the nighttime chase appeared with every detail intact. Low-level shadows did appear just a bit brighter than they should have, for example in the helicopter shot over the nighttime city (48:44) and the fence behind the thug (48:51). That's because gamma was a bit too bright compared with the ST60 in dark areas, but the two were so close that any difference would be impossible to discern outside a side-by-side lineup.

Color accuracy: Although again not quite up to the standards of the ST60, the S60 was excellent in this area. Most of its measurements came in with minimal error thanks in part to the array of new controls. The color management system on the S60 wasn't quite as effective as that of the ST60, however, whose measurements were a hair better in Blue, Cyan and Magenta. Bright scenes were rich and beautifully saturated, thanks in part to the S60's excellent black levels. Skin tones, like those of Gwen's face when she was talking to Peter in school (36:33), looked natural and lifelike, although they did at times appear a bit more flushed than on most of the other sets (again, a very subtle difference). Meanwhile, primary and secondary colors, like the bold reds and oranges in the lab sequence (39:44) looked correct mostly correct, with the exception of slightly too-deep blues on the virtual rat. In dark areas black and near-black were mostly true, especially compared with the LED sets with their bluish tinge. Deep shadows did show a slight greenish tint, however, which made them appear a bit less realistic than those seen on the ST models and the Samsung -- albeit about the same as the U50.

Video processing: The S60 showed a couple of flaws in this category. Most importantly, unlike the ST60 it is incapable of correctly reproducing the correct film cadence of 1080p/24 sources when set to its standard (60Hz) mode. Instead, the pan over the Intrepid from "I Am Legend" (my standard cadence test) appeared relatively halting and choppy, compared with the smoother -- yet not too smooth -- look of the ST60 and other sets that handled film correctly. I tried the 48Hz mode but as usual it flickered too much for me to tolerate. Since those are the only two modes available, you have to choose between choppy motion and flicker. I'd choose the former every time. As I mentioned before the S60 also lacks dejudder, so if you like the smooth look of the Soap Opera Effect (I don't), you may want to choose another TV. Sticklers for motion resolution will also note that the S60 performed a bit worse than the ST60 (700 lines vs. 800) when the latter's dejudder was turned off. Turning it on, which isn't an option on the S60, widened the gap between the two further. On the other hand I found it quite difficult (as usual) to discern any blurriness in program material, and the S60's result is still better than that of a typical 120Hz LED TVs. Finally the S60 only passed our 1080i film deinterlacing test when we manually chose the On setting in its 3:2 pull-down menu; it failed in the default Auto position.

Bright lighting: This is the S60's Achilles' heel. When I turned up the lights the image on the S60 washed out significantly, looking a good deal worse than that of any other TV in the lineup--with the exception of the U50 and Samsung E550, which were about the same. The difference was most visible in darker scenes, where "black" and shadowy areas became grayish and most of the punch and impact I described above. In addition reflections in the screen, like my face and striped shirt as I sat on the couch in front of the TV, showed up more strongly than on any of the others, including both ST models (again the U50 and Samsung were exceptions). Compared to many LCDs, the maximum light output of the S60 is limited. In their brightest picture settings with a window pattern, the S60 measured 58fL (footlamberts), while the Vizio and Sharp LCDs hit 95 and 92, respectively. With a full-screen pattern, the number drops to 11 for the S60 while the LCDs stay just as bright as ever. This combination of washed-out blacks, bright reflections and relatively limited light output makes the S60 a below-average performer under bright lighting. It should still look great in many moderately lit rooms, but if you have an extremely bright room or just prefer watching an extremely bright picture (like Vivid or Dynamic on your current TV), you may want to get a different TV.



Power consumption: [Note that this test and all of the chart numbers below apply only to the 50-inch TC-P50ST60; not to any of the other sizes.] As expected the S60 uses significantly more juice than any similarly-sized LCD-based TV, and almost exactly the same as most other 50-inch plasmas we've tested, including the 2012 U50 model, after calibration. The default Standard mode draws a quite bit more power than last year, but it's also brighter and more watchable. That's a good thing because past Standard modes were way too dim. The current Energy Star specification is still version 5.3, which still imposes a hard cap of 108 watts for any size of TV. According to Energy Star's April 2013 list of qualified TVs, no 2013 Panasonic plasma earns the blue sticker.

high-resolution screen on the new MacBook Pro with Retina Display makes images -- even simple text -- look beautifully clear. Despite a redesigned, lightweight body, the powerful components, including an Nvidia GPU, compare well to recent high-end desktop replacements. Overdue new ports, including USB 3.0 and HDMI, are welcome. The bad: With a $2,199 entry-level price tag, the MacBook Pro with Retina Display costs more than the typical American mortgage. The lack of onboard Ethernet jack, FireWire, or an optical drive can be inconvenient at times. Despite being thinner and lighter, it's not as travel-friendly as a true ultrabook or MacBook Air. The bottom line: The newly redesigned MacBook Pro with Retina Display combines an amazing screen with just enough of the MacBook Air design to feel like a new animal, and to take its place as the best of the current MacBook breed.   The release of a brand-new Apple laptop design is rare, and always accompanied by much fanfare. The new MacBook Pro with Retina Display is no exception, especially as it introduces a new screen technology to laptops, while pulling in influences from the MacBook Air, existing Pro, and even the third-generation iPad. At a starting price of $2,199, the Retina MacBook Pro is in a different tier of product than other recently spec-bumped Airs and Pros, but it also offers a mix of design and features that can't be duplicated in other Mac laptops: a quad-core processor in a body that's svelte (but not quite ultrabook-thin), discrete graphics, a super high-res display, and -- new to any MacBook -- HDMI. This is the biggest change to the Pro's aesthetics since it adopted the now-familiar aluminum unibody construction in 2008. Updated periodically with new processors and new features, the MacBook Pro line remains a familiar sight in offices (especially in creative fields) and coffee shops. And, while that pre-existing 15-inch model is still considered thin for a midsize computer, recent challenges from Window-powered ultrabooks and even Apple's own MacBook Air have clearly influenced this split in the MacBook Pro family tree, leading to a thinner, more forward-looking offshoot (which will live alongside the thicker, non-Retina 15 and 13-inch Pro laptops).
 
Note that the 2012 MacBook Air and Pro lineups have been updated to Intel's third-generation Core i-series processors, also known as Ivy Bridge, and this new MacBook Pro with Retina Display starts out there. As Apple laptops have at times taken a while to trade up to Intel's latest hardware, it's nice to see Ivy Bridge arrive in a timely manner. Of course, the real highlight is that new Retina Display. Its resolution is 2,880x1,800 pixels, providing a level of detail never seen on a laptop before. The highest standard Windows laptop screen resolution is 1,920x1,080 pixels, the same as an HDTV. That previous high-water mark has been fine in my experience, but even that can make text and images look small on a 15-inch laptop. Apple solves this via a different dot pitch for the screen, much as it did on the third-gen iPad. In person, the Retina Display looks great, although you're more likely to notice it when comparing to a non-Retina laptop. It'll likely be more useful for heavy readers or Photoshop/Final Cut users at first, and we'll have to see how long it takes for other popular programs to update themselves to take advantage of the new screen. In the end, the MacBook Pro with Retina Display, while expensive, is the best all-around MacBook Apple now makes -- unless you absolutely, positively need a built-in optical drive or Ethernet jack (both are available via external dongles or peripherals). It provides desktop-replacement-level performance, but is nearly as slim as an imagined 15-inch MacBook Air would be, even if it's a little heavier than it looks. Because it eclipses the previous MacBook Pro in many ways, it earns a CNET Editors' Choice nod. Still, it feels like a rest stop on the road to somewhere else, a not-too-distant future when all laptops are paper-thin and feather light, with powerful hardware, wide connectivity, and generous solid-state storage that rivals bulky old platter hard drives. Don't be shocked to see Retina screens filter down to less expensive models at some point in the not-too-distant future. We're not there yet, but this is a big step in that direction. Price as reviewed
$2,199 Processor
2.3GHz Intel Core i7-3610QM Memory
8GB, 1600MHz DDR3 Hard drive
256GB SSD Chipset
Intel HM77 Graphics
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M / Intel HD 4000 Operating system
OS X Lion 10.7.4 Dimensions (WD)
14.1 x 9.7 inches Height
0.7 inch Screen size (diagonal)
15.4 inches System weight / Weight with AC adapter
4.6/5.4 pounds Category
Midsize In hands-on use, the new, thinner 15-inch MacBook Pro is both familiar and very different from what we've seen before. This is not an ultrabook (or an ultrathin laptop, as one would call these systems before Intel invented the ultrabook term), nor is it a full midsize laptop. Instead, it's an entirely new take that skirts the two, taking features from both sides of the aisle. In the hand, at 0.7 inch, it's nearly as thin as a MacBook Air, at least the thicker end of that tapered system. But it's heavier than it looks, closer to a Pro, at 4.6 pounds. In other words, this is not the ultimate mobile laptop for people who have to jog around from place to place all day long, five or more days per week.

New MacBook Pro Unboxed at Always On

Still, it feels like a nice shift from the current Pro, which is what I'd call a "carry it around twice per week, tops" laptop. More often than that, especially with the traditional 15-inch MacBook Pro, and it really drags you down. I could see carrying this new, thinner Pro around with you several days per week, or maybe to and from work on a daily subway commute at a stretch. From a distance, this could be mistaken for an Air, but up close, it's a different story. The design of the speakers, on either side of the keyboard, is lifted from the MacBook Pro. Along with the slablike, non-tapered body, I'd say the new Pro leans 70/30 or more toward the Pro rather than the Air in terms of design DNA. The keyboard and trackpad are essentially the same as seen on the last several generations of MacBook, which is a good thing. Other laptops have matched, but not surpassed, the backlit Apple keyboard. And the trackpad, with its multifinger gestures, remains the industry leader. There are some patents, secret sauce, and OS-level sleight of hand behind this, but the practical result is touchpad experience far more satisfying than on any other laptop. The Retina (left) and non-Retina MacBook Pro displays compared. The Retina Display is the real hardware breakthrough of the system. Now that this very high-resolution screen technology has come to the iPhone, iPad, and MacBook Pro, it's something of an Apple staple, and future products will have to at least consider including it. Of course, it's just a branded name for a very high-resolution screen -- 2,880x1,800 pixels, a level previously unseen in laptops (I've seen some larger desktop monitors come close). By adjusting the dot pitch and promoting the use of customized software (some of Apple's own apps and, not surprisingly, Photoshop, have already been updated), text and images avoid the typical high-resolution pitfall of appearing too small. Even in everyday use, the screen looks amazing. Colors pop and images have great depth, but the biggest difference to me, same as with the latest iPad, is in text. Compare blocks of text side by side (using the "reader" button in Safari is a great way to do that), on a Retina and a standard MacBook Pro screen, and the difference is unmistakable, as seen above. The non-Retina 15-inch Pro used for comparison has a 1,440x900-pixel native resolution. Interestingly, like the other 13 and 15-inch MacBooks, the new Retina Pro sticks with a 16:10 aspect ratio, using the much more common 16:9 only in the 11-inch MacBook Air. It's hard to imagine a situation where it would make a tremendous amount of difference, but some people have strong preferences, and there's something to be said for matching the aspect ratio of HD television content, or at least having a universal standard to design around. Apple MacBook Pro with Retina Display
Average for category [mainstream] Video
HDMI, DisplayPort (via Thunderbolt)
VGA plus HDMI or DisplayPort Audio
Stereo speakers, headphone/microphone jacks
Stereo speakers, headphone/microphone jacks Data
2 USB 3.0, 2 Thunderbolt, SD card reader
4 USB 2.0, SD card reader, eSATA Networking
Ethernet, 802.11n Wi-Fi, Bluetooth
Ethernet, 802.11n Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, optional mobile broadband Optical drive
None
DVD burner Apple can both give and take away when it comes to ports and connections. Ethernet, the optical drive, and FireWire are on the chopping block, but -- in what I can only describe as a very pleasant surprise -- HDMI has been added. The twin Thunderbolt ports literally double down on that still-underused connection, and the pair of USB 2.0 ports have become USB 3.0. Both are potentially useful for adding external storage to augment the flash memory, but you might also need those extra connections to hook up dongles for Ethernet and FireWire. The default 256GB of solid-state storage is close enough to mainstream size for me, but digital packrats will want the 512GB option, part of an upgraded base model that starts at $2,799. There's also a 768GB upgrade from that, but that's an additional $500. Still, this is one of the first "professional" laptops that can get away with having no spinning platter drives. Yes, that is indeed an HDMI connection. But it's the HDMI that's really a mind-blower. We've asked for that for years, just because it was the easiest way to get content onto big TVs, projectors, external monitors, and so on. Apple doesn't always add features just because they're "practical" (see: SD card slot, 11-inch MacBook Air), so let's just assume the repeated inclusion of HDMI on MacBook "wish list" articles over the years finally had some impact (as unlikely as that seems).  The high-end 2.3GHz quad-core Core i7 CPU and Nvidia GeForce 650M GPU remind me of the recent spate of Ivy Bridge gaming laptops we've reviewed. They also had quad-core Core i7 Ivy Bridge CPUs with new Nvidia GPUs. However, those were giant 17-inch desktop-replacement rigs, with huge cases and terrible battery life. I did see a 15-inch version of that recently, from Maingear, and the Retina Pro feels like that kind of serious power shrunk down to a much slimmer size. In our CNET Labs benchmark tests, the system ran even faster than that first wave of quad-core Intel Core i7 Ivy Bridge systems. The caveat is that our benchmarks, including Photoshop and a multimedia multitasking test which included QuickTime, tend to be weighted toward OS X performance. In hands-on use, it felt evenly matched with a system such as the Origin Eon 17-S. That's more than enough power for just about any task, and even more impressive when you consider that those other systems are mostly full-size desktop replacements. The switch from AMD graphics to Nvidia's GeForce 650M is also a big step. Macs have never been serious gaming machines, but occasional standouts such as Diablo III are available cross-platform, and make for an excellent anecdotal test. That game will add additional support for the native 2,880x1,800 resolution via a future update, but for now you can still crank up the in-game resolution that high in the options menu. It made for a somewhat sluggish experience, running at around 23 frames per second, according to the onscreen frame rate counter. Pulled back to 1,440x900-pixel resolution, the game flew, at around 65 frames per second. To compare the performance with older MacBooks, we ran our dated Call of Duty: Modern Warfare test. It crashed when we tried to get the in-game resolution up to 2,880x1,800 pixels, but ran at 75.4 frames per second at 1,440x900 pixels and 70.8 frames per second at 1,680x1,050 pixels. The past two 15-inch MacBook Pros we've tested, running on different AMD GPUs, ran the same test at between 41 and 51 frames per second at 14x9.  Multimedia multitasking test (in seconds)
(Shorter bars indicate better performance) Battery life has always been a MacBook strong suit, especially when combined with Intel's very efficient processors and the lower power requirements of solid-state storage. Even though this system has a discrete GPU, it can turn that component off and on as needed, so it's not draining your battery unnecessarily. A couple of years ago, MacBooks required you to log out and then back in to swap graphics processors, but for the last couple of generations, that's happened automatically and seamlessly. In our video playback battery drain test, the new MacBook Pro ran for 6 hours and 59 minutes. That's great for a 15-inch laptop, and it may even run longer depending on your workload. The previous 15-inch MacBook Pro ran for about the same time, 6 hours and 54 minutes. Yes, this is, like all current MacBooks, a sealed battery. Some people positively hate that, it's never bothered me. Apple includes a one-year parts-and-labor warranty, but only 90 days of telephone support, which has always struck us as odd. Upgrading to a full three-year plan under AppleCare will cost an extra $349 and is pretty much a must-buy, considering the proprietary nature of Apple products and their sealed bodies. Support is also accessible through a well-stocked online knowledge base, video tutorials, and e-mail with customer service, or through in-person visits to Apple's retail store Genius Bars, which, in my experience, have always been fairly frustration-free encounters. I've previously called the 15-inch MacBook Pro one of the most universally useful all-around laptops you can buy. This new version adds to that with HDMI, faster ports, and more portability. But it also subtracts from that with its exclusion of an optical drive and Ethernet port, plus its very high starting price. The Pro and Retina Pro are clearly two laptops designed for two different users, and with the exception of all-day commuters who need something closer to a MacBook Air or ultrabook, one of the two branches of the MacBook Pro family tree is still probably the most universally useful laptop you can buy.
Thanks to Cnet.com

            
Sony  Xperia Z-Review

Does Sony’s newest flagship make a splash against its rivals? Find out in our review.

Design


The Sony Xperia Z is a ginormous bit of kit – there’s no getting away from that fact. However, it’s also amazingly slim, measuring just 7.9 millimeters thick and weighing in at a very respectable 146 grams, making it quite comfortable to carry. Sony Xperia Z front and back official (black) Height-wise, however, it’s still quite a handful and may feel slightly unwieldy if you have small hands, as your thumb won’t easily reach some of the menu options located at the top. While looks are subjective, we think the Xperia Z is a very polished and handsome looking device that will surely catch a few admiring glances for its slick, monolith form. Sony Xperia Z volume rocker side official What really separates the Xperia Z from the competition, however, is that it’s certified water and dust resistant. With Ingress Protection ratings IP55 and IP57, the Xperia Z can withstand being submerged in one metre of water for up to thirty minutes and won't easily get clogged up inside too. The handset also features a Dragontrail glass front and back to keep scratches and scuffmarks to a minimum. We dropped the review unit numerous times for “test purposes” and the front panel received only the smallest of scrapes. Suffice to say, these are all very impressive credentials for what is essentially a very high-end smartphone. Naturally, this makes the Xperia Z an ideal choice if you’re prone to - or even worried about - dropping your handset a lot – be it on the ground or in a tub of water. 7/10

Hardware



Display and processor The Xperia Z has a five-inch full HD Reality Display with an eye-popping 441 pixels per inch density that’s over a 100 higher than even the iPhone’s Retina Display. Sony Xperia Z display specs official Better yet, it uses Sony’s latest Mobile Bravia Engine 2 video processor, offering a silky smooth framerate that really brings movies to life. The touchscreen itself is incredibly responsive, providing an enjoyable experience in every situation we’ve come across. Sony Xperia Z display movie official The only thing letting it down is a less-than-stellar viewing angle and a contrast ratio that we wish were higher to take advantage of those extra pixels. Under the hood, Xperia Z straps a brawny 1.5GHz quad core Snapdragon S4 Pro processor that keeps things ticking over smoothly and handles both multimedia and multitasking with aplomb. 8/10 Camera As with most Sony smartphones, the Xperia Z has a very impressive camera too. At the back it has a 13-megapixel autofocus shooter, equipped with LED flash and the new Exmor RS sensor that takes great snaps in low-light conditions. Basically, it’s perfect if you live in Britain. Sony Xperia Z camera official We’re particularly impressed by how fast the autofocus is and how the lens is able to keep with up with fast movements without breaking a sweat. Of course, like most high-end kits, the Xperia Z records videos in full HD and ups the ante with High Dynamic Range (HDR) video recording as well, which should please any keen videographer. At the front of the handset is a 2.2-megpaixel webcam, which also offers 1080p HD recording and is great for making video calls too. 9/10 Connectivity and extras In terms of connectivity, the Xperia Z is packed with options. Chief among these is Near Field Communication – aka NFC – which lets you use the handset to pay for low-ticket items – say coffee or travel – by simply swiping the handset over an NFC reader. Sony Xperia Z screen close-up Although it’s still early days for NFC, with most major handset makers adopting the technology, it’s bound to become standard eventually. There’s also Bluetooth 4.0, Wi-Fi a/b/g/n and Wi-Fi Direct for fast wireless data transfer. And there’s DLNA support and Wireless TV out too to let you wirelessly stream video on the handset to a compatible HD television. In terms of storage, you have 16 gigabytes onboard to play with, plus a microSD slot to expand that further. Last but certainly not least, the Xperia Z is 4G ready, which means it will work with the high-speed network standard out of the box. 9/10

Interface and software


The Xperia Z runs on the latest Jelly Bean version of Google’s Android operating system, which means it has all the newest features and improvements the platform has to offer. Sony Xperia Z home screen close-up official It also comes with Sony’s bespoke user interface slathered on top, but a good thing is that this is not as heavily customised as proprietary skins on some other Android handsets and is much closer to what you expect from the vanilla edition of Android. To unlock the screen you swipe upwards, which has a rather neat blinds-like animation. You also have two shortcuts, which you can tap and swipe sideways to jump straight into an application. Inside, there are seven home screens, which you can personalise with a host of widgets, apps and themes to really make the handset your own. Apps can be organized using folders, while many of the widgets can be resized as you see fit. You can also change the appearance of the homescreen using themes and wallpapers. For the most part, the software on the Xperia Z is pretty much what you expect if you’ve used an Android smartphone before. However, it also packs some great Sony apps such as Music Unlimited, Walkman and PlayMemories – plus all the best Google apps and services like Gmail, YouTube and Maps installed out of the box. Sony Xperia Z waterproof front and side official Of course, the real action is at the Google Play store where you’ll find hundreds of thousands of great applications, as well movies and music to download - all of which should run with a real sense of snap on the Xperia Z thanks to its powerful processor and ample memory. 7/10

Verdict


The Sony Xperia Z is a brilliant handset. It’s crammed with cutting-edge technologies - not least of which is a gorgeous screen, a brawny processor and a fantastic camera. xperia z purple back Of course, the fact that it’s water and dust resistant too also deserves serious consideration when you’re thinking of spending a substantial amount of money on a new handset. If you’re in the market for a truly high-end smartphone, you can’t go wrong with the Xperia Z.

<div id="vc-recommend-iframe-wrapper" style="height:300px"></div>
<div id="vc-comments-iframe-wrapper"></div>
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://api.vicomi.com/embed/widgets.js?access_token=6373b01f21246877416a73331b037405"></script>  

11 Responses so far.

  1. Anonymous says:

    How Can we select a best cam? What's Your opinion?

  2. We are here to help you out with the whole procedure to Download MS Office Setup online. . Visit - www.msofficesetupkey.com


  3. Thank you for bringing more information to this topic for me. I’m truly grateful and really impressed.

  4. Asus says:

    What do u think about Asus? https://www.bestadvisor.com/asus-chromebooks
    I already have the second Asus, I rlly like it. But it's rather expensive
    And now I'm thinking about buying new Asus
    Or are there other alternatives?

  5. Anonymous says:

    Great Post.
    You bring up some interesting points to consider.
    Thanks for providing such a great information.

  6. Unknown says:

    great post.
    You bring up some interesting points to consider.
    Thanks for providing such a great information.

  7. Good post and lots of information about technology. The VarianceTV adware works as an adware program that displays intrusive advertisements once it’s placed on the computer.

- Copyright © TechKings4U - Techkings4u - Powered by Blogger - Designed by TLJ -