So, I’m doing the Mindflex game review, and I start thinking about the evolution of classic board games. Personally, I like the fact that many of them got a 21st century makeover. These 10 games may have purists thinking otherwise.

For the most part, do you consider these digital upgrades as good or bad ideas?

When Apple TV 3.0 came out, we were unimpressed. Readers asked what else they could use to play their many videos. Here are five nice ones to suit different needs—nearly all cost less, and do more, than ATV.

The goal here is simple: Play all the videos that I have ripped from DVD, downloaded from the web, shot with my own cameras or obtained in some other manner, no matter what the format. It sounds simple, but Apple TV can’t do it. Neither can the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3. Video codecs and containers are a nightmare to keep track of, and even more of a nightmare to convert.

This isn’t about photos and music. Apple TV is better at both of those than any of this stuff. It’s also not about renting movies or buying movies, or even streaming movies from Netflix. Roku has a nice cheap box for that, and Apple TV is suitable if you just want to live inside Steve Jobs’ media store. This is about playing non-DRM movies, pure and simple.

The names might be familiar to you: The Popcorn Hour C-200 by Syabas is quickly gaining cult status (and has its own hacker wiki), while the other four smaller boxes come from brands you probably have experience with, including WD, Seagate, Netgear and Patriot. None have built-in wireless, but they all have Ethernet ports.

My two main tests were simple—I loaded PC and Mac formatted external hard drives with a variety of files ranging from H.264 MP4s to WMVs of several vintages, from raw AVCHD files in MTS wrappers to the hot new DivX 7 MKV. Then I browsed through my local network to a NAS that had a cache of similar files. Could I see them? Could I play them? These shouldn’t be issues, but they’re big issues.

Here’s a rundown of each machine, and how they fared in testing:

As you can see, there were clear leaders given my criteria above, but what struck me was how each one differed. Truth is, depending on who you are, any one of these might be the best fit. Here’s what really separates them:

WD TV Live – $150

I would have given this thing the solo spot at the top if it weren’t for a few dings that might very well be fixed in a firmware update: It won’t show you DVD menus on ripped DVD images, and when you play files with the suffix .m4v, it won’t fast forward or rewind. Weird bug, and can be fixed if you just change .m4v to .mp4, but since that’s the default file naming for Handbrake’s “Apple TV” profile, it could be a problem for people, like me, who spent months ripping their entire DVD collection that way.

WD’s strengths include a friendly user interface with handy video previews, some promising early online services (including Pandora), and the most reasonable photo and music handling I’ve seen in this cluster of gadgets.

Seagate FreeAgent Theater+ – $150

I loved this when I tested it a few weeks ago, despite its fugly interface, and it holds up under testing. It does better with ripped .ISO files than WD, doing both DVD menus and chapters (and it doesn’t have that weird .m4v bug either). Video was better, especially when running 1080p content. And when it came to browsing my Linksys NAS in search of movies, it could reach more and read more than the WD.

The tradeoff is that the interface is bad, and there’s almost nothing in the way of online services. It gets points for making an attempt at sorting music, and displaying photos, but if that’s a priority, WD is the better call.

Popcorn Hour C-200 – $300

Hardcore AV nerds love this thing, and I understand why. There are more ways to get at video content than in any other set-top box I’ve ever seen, and if you really know how to hack, there’s really not much it can’t do.

It’s a big ole thing—they call it a “network tank,” and despite remind me of the far cooler ones in Tron, I get it. It has an internal BitTorrent client and you can plug in a Blu-ray drive, for God’s sake. I found very few video formats that it wouldn’t support (FLV was one) but I had to take major points off because for being so big, it has a lame interface, and it comes with an RF remote that only worked when I stood within 3 feet. They even mention that there might be problems with interference, and that if people experience that, they can buy the IR remote. Great, thanks.

My only question—and, commenters, it’s not rhetorical—is why spend $300 on this (plus extra for the optional internal HDD and the IR remote) when you can just buy a home-theater PC?

Patriot Box Office – $130

This was the dark horse of the group, being a late entry by a company known only for computer memory. I was surprised at how well it held up. It actually could decode more tested formats than any other device in this lineup—it did Flash video (FLV), which the three above can’t render. Only the WD and the Patriot show you video previews, too. As small as it is, there’s a space for a 2.5″ SATA drive in there, and even a BitTorrent client. You can copy files to and from different drives and the network, and it’s the cheapest of the lot, at $130.

So why did it come in a distant 3rd? Unlike the three above, it can’t read Mac formatted hard drives, and its video quality was noticeably the worst of the batch. That said, if you are a hacker sort and want something to play with that doesn’t cost as much as Popcorn, set your sights on this.

Netgear Digital Entertainer Live

As you can probably tell by now, Netgear had the most disappointing box of the lineup, despite its Apple TV ripoff of a look and feel. Lack of Mac media support and the inability to read key file formats, like DivX 7 and AVCHD, meant it couldn’t pass muster with real video fanatics. Its biggest point of woe was the fact that it didn’t support any file over 720p in resolution—whether that’s a software thing or a hardware thing, it’s sure not future-proof, and probably best to stay away.

I also didn’t like the fact that its interface is laid out entirely for retail, like an Apple TV without the panache, or a Roku box that costs more and doesn’t do Netflix. Local files were not a priority, and despite the friendly interface, it doesn’t even make an attempt to differentiate photos and music. I did give it a gold star for online services, but only because it had the most in this group—if online services are what you love, buy a Roku, or a TiVo, or an Xbox, or a friggin’ Apple TV.

Still not sure what you’re looking for, check the spec comparisons here:

Chuck Anderson, creator of Windows 7‘s laid-back, cerulean-cool default wallpaper and login screen, showed me the evolution of his work—including Easter eggs, avoiding Mac tropes and why flaming skulls didn’t make the final design.

Chuck is the embodiment of the dreams of thousands of DeviantArt users—he started out in screenprinting just after high school, worked for t-shirt maker Threadless by day and began creating a name for himself in the online art community by night. Under the pseudonym NoPattern (now the name of his design shop), he achieved incredible success at a startlingly young age: You’ve seen his work before on projects with Pepsi, Urban Outfitters, Reebok, and many more. My personal favorite has to be the cover art for Lupe Fiasco’s fantastic debut album, Food & Liquor:

Today, at only 24, he’s achieved a new level of stardom: His designs for Windows 7 will literally be seen by hundreds of millions of people over the lifespan of the OS. Microsoft hunted him down, and it was definitely a good call; Windows 7 is the best-looking Windows OS ever, and its style is reflected in the cool screens designed by Chuck. Check out some of his previous work in the below gallery (including a great graffiti-inspired piece for Zune) to get a sense of his style.

Since he’s such an independent guy, I was curious to hear how he managed to collaborate with Microsoft, the tech corporation most likely to have the word “monolithic” as an epithet. Chuck says the actual design team he worked with was quite small and surprisingly open to his ideas. The first thing they showed him back in December 2008 were those glorious Dr.-Seuss-as-read-by-Hunter-S.-Thompson wallpapers, so it was clear right off the bat that censorship wouldn’t really be a problem.

The two pieces took about four months, start to finish. Chuck started with a pencil and paper, and moved on to Photoshop for the Windows 7 sheen, but the two pieces retain that sketchy feel—in fact, all the individual threads on the login screen were hand-drawn with a Wacom tablet.

This first gallery shows the stages of the default login screen, the first image to be completed. Later came the default desktop wallpaper and Windows 7’s physical packaging, which both have the login screen as their aesthetic jumping-off point. This is where it begins—click on the first thumbnail to read Chuck’s own words about how his vision evolved.

The Login Screen

As it turns out, there are a few repetitions of the number seven in the login screen, but weirdly enough, that little Easter egg started out as an accident. Once Chuck and Microsoft noticed that there were seven white strands on the bottom left, they started repeating the number: There are also seven leaves, seven branches, and seven flower petals in the yellow quadrant of the Windows logo.

The default Windows 7 desktop is one of my favorites; usually the very first thing I do with a new computer is replace whatever wallpaper comes with it (Apple is a particular offender here—I hate that cheeseball space motif) and yet I happily left this one on my latest computer.

The Default Desktop

Microsoft sought out this young, independent, mixed media digital artist rather than going through traditional channels, and it resulted in a fresh new look that couldn’t have come from another source. It’s credit to them, as is the walkthrough itself. You’d never see Apple showing, say, the pieces that mysteriously got tossed aside in favor of that clip-art snow leopard on their latest OS X packaging, would you?

Thanks to Chuck and to Microsoft for showing us their rejects. [NoPattern, Chuck’s Twitter]

Note: Speaking of rejects, you might notice that all the screens are capped at 700 pixels in width. It’s because Microsoft isn’t dumb: They don’t want shots they took a pass on becoming the wallpaper of netbooks and PCs all over. Sorry guys, we tried.

RIM’s successor to the original Bold — the BlackBerry Bold 9700 — has finally landed on our doorsteps. The 9000 is in many ways a hard act to follow. Hardware-wise, it lived up to its name, going where most phones never went with its retro, leathery, nearly clunky looks in an age of rounded edges and shiny curves. Don’t get us wrong — we loved the 9000’s aesthetics obsessively — which is why we couldn’t wait to get our hands on its newborn child. A few questions we had in mind: would the 9700 live up to its predecessor’s notoriously uncompromising fashion sense? Would the new Bold feel as good to hold and use in the hand as its loving parent? How would it stack up against other, new devices from RIM? If these are the kind of questions you think you might want answers to, read on for our impressions.

Continue reading BlackBerry Bold 9700 hands-on and impressions

Filed under: Cellphones

BlackBerry Bold 9700 hands-on and impressions originally appeared on Engadget on Thu, 05 Nov 2009 00:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

A year ago, Android was an unfinished OS for nerds, bursting with potential. With Android 2.0, it’s evolved into something sleeker, more refined and focused—but still something not quite human.

Over the last year, Android’s evolved more rapidly and appeared in more shapes than any other smartphone OS. Every major update has made Android more capable and advanced, while custom interfaces from companies like HTC and Motorola, mean it’s constantly and continually shifting shapes. When you look at the bucket of bolts everybody started with, some of the oh-so-shiny end results were kind of amazing. Android 2.0 blows all of that away, and lays down a platform for the next year that’s wildly more compelling, even as it retains a lot of the same fundamental weaknesses.

We reviewed on Android 2.0 on the Motorola Droid—our review of the actual phone is here.

New Skin, Same Awkward Body

Android 2.0 is glossy—not in an Apple “the whole world is shiny and reflective” kind of way, but more like molded plastic for a collectible action figure. The cartoon whimsy—the classic Google rainbow of bright colors—are gone. The iconography, redrawn for high-res displays packed with tons of pixels, is smoother and sleeker, more subtle, and forces you to ask yourself, “Google designed this?”

While icons and menubars have been polished to fine gloss, and some things are cleaner and better organized—settings, for instance—overall, the user experience is basically the same: three desktops, which you can pack with icons and widgets; the still brilliant drop-down notification shade, which pools everything Android wants to tell you; and a pop-up tab where all of your apps are at. This is all still fine, mostly, if a bit muddled.

The reason that cluttered interface confusion is mostly fine is that multitasking with Android is addictive, and it’s a better, easier-to-use implementation than any phone but the Pre. The window shade, a simple but powerful concept, is what makes it work. If I’m browsing the internet and get a message, I can pull the shade down, check the message, and go right back to browsing. Or flip over to messaging, reply, and get right back to browsing. At this, Android 2.0 excels, especially now that everything runs faster.

The long press and menu button conventions are still used nearly everywhere throughout the OS, but almost always inconsistently. If you’re trying to do something in-app and have no idea how, there’s a good chance the action you’re looking for is buried behind the menu button or a long press. But these controls do different things in almost every single app, and even sometimes in the same app, depending on the context.

Universal search, and in particular, voice commands which let you quickly access search, map or navigate with surprising accuracy (seriously, it deciphers my mumbling better than my mom), are probably the most significant improvements to usability. Universal search isn’t quite as universal as we’d like, though. It only pores over apps, contacts, YouTube, music and the web—you have to go into the messaging and email apps separately to search through them, which doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

And while Android 2.0 is capable of multitouch, other than making typing smoother, it’s nowhere to be found, at least not where I want it: the browser and maps. Also, the portrait keyboard’s still too tiny.

A Killer Machine, Sorta

Software is inextricably tied to hardware in many respects, and nowhere is that more true than performance. Droid, the first Android 2.0 phone—and the only one we’ve used—is ridiculously capable, with an ARM Cortex A8 TI OMAP3430 processor that’s basically the same as the chips inside of the Palm Pre and iPhone 3GS. Point being, it’s got heavy duty processor firepower.

So it’s absolutely inexplicable that while it’s overall the fastest version of Android yet—most apps fly open instantly, run zippily and practically zoom from one to another, even with a couple running in the background—very basic user interface elements, like the main pop-up menu on the home screen and sliding over from one desktop to another, often stutter or lag (with no apps running up front, and just a couple of widgets on the desktop). At this point, it’s clear that these performance hiccups are an Android problem, not a hardware deficiency. It’s maddening to hold a badass phone like the Droid and watch it handle menus like a pussy.

Accounts, Contacts, Exchange and Other Serious-Sounding Words

Besides Google Maps Navigation Beta, Android 2.0’s most significant upgrade for regular people is all about contacts and networking. Like the Palm Pre and HTC’s Sense UI, it integrates contacts from multiple sources—namely, Facebook and Exchange (no Twitter yet). The scheme works exceptionally well, with finesse that’s almost out of character for Google. The way it pulls in your Facebook contacts actually makes sense: When you add the account, you can choose to add all 900 of your Facebook contacts, or just the ones who you have actual Google contacts for. Oh, sweet reason! It even managed to match our address book contacts with correlating Facebook accounts pretty accurately and seamlessly, with a few exceptions.

1. Everybody whose name is capitalized in the screenshot is matched up with Facebook—I loathe capital letters, but got over the inconsistency.
2. And the rarely mismatched contacts prove difficult, if not impossible, to completely straighten out.

Quick Contact is what keeps this orgy of personal information from getting too messy when it’s time to get down to business—clicking on a contact’s icon blooms a row of icons, letting you instantly ping them via SMS, phone, email, Facebook or whatever you want.

Android finally approaches a real smartphone when it comes to accounts. Multiple Google accounts and Exchange support come stock. What’s that mean? Well, if you have a hosted Google apps account for work, and a personal one (like all of us at Giz do), you can use the awesome native Gmail application for both, instead of being forced to relegate one of the accounts to the separate, okay-but-not-as-good email app, which is what handles all of your Exchange, IMAP and POP mail. The only bummer is that you still have to toggle between each Google account mailbox in the Gmail app. (Yes, there are two different email applications. A Gmail app, and one for everything else. And they’re completely different.)

There’s one serious limitation to the multiple Google account support: The only Google calendars that sync to the phone are the ones from your main Google account, not your secondary one. Exchange calendars, on the other hand, use the separate-but-equal-as-far-as-I-can-tell “Corporate Calendars” app. We tested Exchange support using mail2web’s free service, and everything seemed to show up correctly, FWIW.

Maps

The biggest change to Google Maps is Navigation, which Wilson Rothman, a Magellan for our time, reviewed extensively here. My assessment is mostly the same after a weekend in a car—it’s pretty good, but occasionally befuddling and hard to get around. A potential point of confusion is that Navigation is both integrated into Maps and also its own distinct app, unlike Latitude.

Also new, sorta, is layers. Basically, every bit of information you wanna see in Maps is now a “layer.” Like if I’ve got Latitude up on the map, and want to see nearby coffee places with satellite view, that’s three layers—Latitude, a search for coffee, and satellite view. It can get a little confusing, especially if you’re going from search to search or Maps to Navigation and then back to Maps—none of it’s conceptually clean or simple, and the interface isn’t always aren’t entirely self-apparent. Also. Pinch. To. Zoom. I want it.

Browse Awesomer, But No (Multi)Touchy

The browser’s faster, smarter and more powerful, and is probably the second best browser now, next to mobile Safari. It mostly cuts through lardass sites like Gizmodo with pep previous versions didn’t, with more responsive scrolling and panning (slowdown does happen though). The browser actually starts you out on each site with a view of the entire page now, which is nicer in theory, but then it makes you want to pinch to zoom in—which, like Maps, is not enabled. You’re stuck with unwieldly buttons and double-taps that never quite line the page up the way they should. If Palm, who’s an insect by comparison, can pinch and zoom with impunity, why can’t Google? Don’t say it’s out of friendship, because Apple doesn’t even like you guys anymore.

Well, It Would Be a Better Camera

More controls! Yay! White balance, focusing mode, color and more. It’s just too bad that on the Droid, the camera’s completely unresponsive garbage. I don’t know if it’s software or hardware, so I’m mentioning in it both here and in our Droid review. Fix please.

Multimedia, or the Lack Thereof

The only way to get your music and videos on the phone is to manually drag and drop the files. There is no syncing, no easy way to get your music library onto your phone. How are normal people supposed to figure this out? Verizon reps actually joked about how putting music on the Droid is sure to make for a lovely Saturday afternoon. What. The. Shit.

And, there’s not even a built-in video player! I have a phone with drop-dead gorgeous screen that I can’t use to play movies without digging up my own video app, even if I could figure out how to get videos onto it. Correction: The video player’s tucked inside of the slow and rather buggy Gallery application, where you also browse photos. And it wouldn’t play videos that worked perfectly on a Zune HD or iPhone. Also, it and the music player are hideous.

Until I can magically and perfectly sync 12 gigs of music and videos over the air, you can’t get away with not having a media sync desktop application. And DoubleTwist, a third-party app that can sync to Android, doesn’t really count, since it’s not bundled with it. (Update: FWIW, if you know where to look, Motorola offers a PC-only Media Link application for its Android phones. But it still doesn’t solve the larger Android problem—Google needs to specify an easy-to-use syncing solution for people who need that.) Make no mistake, for a phone platform that’s supposed to be ready for consumers now, this is a disaster, like a spaceship that’s about to shoot into the atmosphere with a gaping hole in the side.

Goin’ to the Android Market, Buyin’ Some Apps

The Android Market has over 10,000 apps, and its state of the union is still a mixed bag. On the one hand, it’s finally got official apps from Facebook, Amazon, Pandora and other critical names people expect on their phone. On the other, and almost universally, these apps aren’t nearly as polished or full-featured as their iPhone counterparts (look no further than the Facebook app, which lacks even messaging in Android). And games? It’s a pretty desolate wasteland, if you’re looking for something beyond NES emulators. The library is getting better, and will undoubtedly keep getting better, but it’s hard not to lament Android’s comparative app ghetto, even as the platform’s poised to explode. (Update: Another point I forgot to mention, and part of the reason Android games are limited in scope, is the storage limit for apps since they can’t be installed on the SD card—for instance, it’s 256MB on the Droid.)

A problem that’s currently plaguing the ecosystem, and is hopefully not a foreboding omen of the fragmentation to come, is that many apps weren’t designed for the higher resolution screens that Android 2.0 supports, so their icons and graphics render crap-ugly on Droid, even in the main menu. (Granted, the phenomenon is partly Google’s fault for restricting access to the 2.0 SDK to all but a select group of privileged developers until basically the day Droid was announced.)

The Market itself, while it got a desperately needed facelift with 1.6, still has a ways to go. There’s no way to update all of your applications simultaneously—you have to click through the update process for each one. And finding apps remains a problem. Browsing for apps exclusively on your phone is a tedious experience, especially when there’s so many apps to wade through. Besides more refined browsing and suggestions, there needs to a way to look through the Market on your desktop. Also, Google’s got this whole cloud thing going, why aren’t my apps tied to my Google account, so if I move to another phone, they’ll all magically repopulate it, like my contacts?

Wherefore Art Thou, Android?

I probably sound like I’m more down on Android 2.0 than I actually am. I like it a lot, truthfully. It’s an amazing conduit for Google’s services. If your online life is lock, stock and barrel Google, there really isn’t a better or more powerful smartphone for getting stuff done in that universe. The Gmail app is a perfect distillation of Gmail for a small screen. The Google Talk app, if you have a bunch of friends using Gtalk, is fantastic. Google, really, is Android’s greatest strength. Excellent multitasking is a close second.

In time, Android very well could be the internet phone, hands down, in terms of raw capabilities. And while it’s not as easy to use or polished or seamless as the iPhone—or to some extent, Palm’s WebOS—it’s way more usable than most other smartphones, and keeps evolving, way faster than anyone else, continually closing that gap. Android 2.0’s potential finally feels as enormous as the iPhone’s, and I get kinda tingly thinking about it. I can’t say Android 2.0 is ready for your mom yet, but it’s definitely ready for anybody reading this.

Google’s apps are simply awesome


Facebook and Exchange integration works pretty well


Second best mobile browser


New look, same feel


Multiple Google account support somewhat limited


Still kinda sluggish at random intervals


No native way to sync music


Crappy music and video player