Jabra Elite 25e Bluetooth headphones: A solid middle of the road headset with a few compromises

Sometimes I’m a bit of a late adopter when it comes to tech. My first smartphone was a Blackberry at a time when the iPhone 3GS was gaining steam. I held onto my old Windows XP desktop until it no longer could keep up with my day to day needs. Its replacement was a Windows 7 laptop I bought when Windows 8 was the latest hot mess.

Bluetooth headphones was one of those things I never was convinced would be a good experience when I first saw them. The idea seemed simple enough, but I was concerned about a loss in sound fidelity and dropped signals.

Hobbies will change your perceptions overnight. I like to jog, and the most cumbersome part about it is dealing with headphone wires. Do I tuck them into my clothes, or wrap it carefully around my body? It started becoming a bit of a headache.

The Geordi La Forge earset

So I started to flirt with the idea of using Bluetooth headphones. But where to start? Obviously, I need something that won’t be a burden when I work out. Something with a bit of water resistance, but won’t fall out of my ears while I’m moving.

I decided to try out the Jabra Elite 25e headphones. To be honest, they’re a bit of a mixed bag. But I don’t hate them, and they serve their purpose for their price range.

The headphones consist of two in-ear buds with a plastic-like suction cups. The buds have magnets to attach themselves to each other, and are connected to a base that I only can describe as some weird Star Trek-esque neckband. The neckband has a microphone as well as buttons for power and volume.

The in-ear buds fit snuggly. A little 90-degree twist places them firmly into your ears and keeps them there. In my half-hour jogging sessions, I never had the buds fall out. That’s perfect for workouts. Sound quality is solid as well. The voice quality comes out clear, and the bass is average for small in-ear buds. I was able to walk about 100 feet away from them before the sound started to get intermittent crackling.

The neckband is a bit of an issue. It stays around your neck well enough, but every once in a while it’ll shift a bit, requiring you to readjust them. It’s especially annoying if you’re wearing a hoodie or anything that could cover the neckband. It’ll happen less frequently as long as you keep it free of obstruction. The neckband needs a way to adjust it so it can fit a bit more snuggly on anyone’s neck.

An app to download an app

The weirdest part of using the headphones was the software, though. I thought I could just pair the headphones using normal Bluetooth conventions. Boy, was I wrong. Jabra apparently requires you to use their apps to connect it to the headphones properly. The apps are available for Android and iOS.

Now I say apps because Jabra has several that confused me at first. The two major ones are the Sound+ and the Jabra Assist. First I tried using the Sound+, but it’s not compatible with the model I have. OK, that’s annoying. I’ll try the Jabra Assist. I downloaded it, only to find that there was another app it wanted called JabraService. Then I started to notice that both Sound+ and Jabra Assist began to drain my phone’s normally long-lasting battery by about one-percent… per minute. That crossed a line, which led to an immediate uninstallation of both apps. The phone’s battery has been fine since their removal.

Whatever they were doing is violating a major no-no when it comes to modern technology. The headphones work fine with just the JabraService app, so I couldn’t figure out why there was a song and dance just to get it going. Anyone with a short attention span that expects their technology to just work might get frustrated with this experience and return them. It shouldn’t be like that, either. I bought a Sony wireless speaker for my laptop, and the pairing process was your normal smooth Bluetooth pairing. No extra software needed.

If you’re prepared to deal with a byzantine app experience and don’t mind not having something as sleek and sexy as Apple AirPods or the Beats equivalent, these aren’t that bad at $50 USD. Just be prepared to make a bit of compromises. The Jabra Elite 25e are a great starter pair that will get the job done. But if you need something a bit less cumbersome and are more fashionable, then these aren’t the headphones you’re looking for.

Fitbit Alta HR review: fitness tracker vs. smart watch comparison

15,000 steps. My fitbit’s vibrating to let me know I’ve achieved another milestone. Another vanity badge that I can parade around like a young boy scout. And you know what? It’s working. I want to see what the next milestone looks like. The next virtual badge to add to my collection of digital swag. Once you get sucked into achievement hunting, you begin to understand the magic of fitbit.

I’ve been using a fitbit Alta HR for a month to see what it’s like to use a dedicated fitness tracker over a smart watch. And it’s been a pleasant, if not bifurcated, experience.

One thing is for certain, a fitbit is not going to replace a smart watch. It is leagues behind a smart watch when it comes to basic functions. The notifications on the Alta HR are limited to texts with no notification shade to aggregate them. You’re stuck with several non-customizable pre-programmed watch faces. Don’t like it? Too bad.

And don’t bother trying to use your fitbit like some weird James Bond device. It won’t be a calculator, a remote for your phone, you can’t respond back to messages on it, you can’t get weather updates on it, and it won’t do searches.

It’s just here to do one thing, and one thing well: track your health. And it nails it out of the park.

One thing the fitbit Alta HR has over a smart watch like my Moto 360 Sport is automatic activity tracking. The fitbit will notice if you’ve been active for a brief amount of time and start logging your workout session. From a mundane walk to work to a full marathon, fitbit will log your heartrate, time spent exercising, calories burned, and more without human input.

Want to manually track your workout? If you have it paired with a smart phone (which you most likely do), you can start a workout session and get even more details, like a GPS map, map elevation information, and more.

To be fair to the Moto 360 Sport, it did automatically track you when you were moving. Plus the tracking on the Moto 360 Sport seemed more or less in line with what the fitbit was saying, so the sensors on the two devices will get you nice ballparks. But it didn’t have the ability to track your vitals unless you manually tracked a workout either through the built-in Moto Sport app or Google Fit.

Which brings up another thing a fitbit will do without asking: be your coach and motivator. Although I got notifications from the Moto 360 Sport when I would reach a milestone, it wasn’t nearly as in-depth as fitbit’s milestones and badges. It tracks daily steps and lifetime distances in addition to the daily active time goals. Fitbit will send alerts not only when you hit these milestones, but also will give you a summary of how you’ve been doing in either weekly or monthly reports.

And if having a digital coach isn’t enough to motivate you, then look to fitbit’s other options. They built up a sort of social media platform, where anyone with a fitbit account can sign up and find their friends that also bought fitbits. From that point, users can compare their friends’ stats with their own, and cheer or challenge them to keep them motivated.

A bit of a loner? No problem there. Fitbit has you covered. It has built-in challenges with solo adventuring in mind. If you wanted to make a day trip out of hiking at a national park or travelling through a city, you can see if there’s a solo adventure that you can track to get another achievement.

The Alta HR also will track your sleep, though be warned, it doesn’t give accurate results unless you’ve slept longer than three hours. It’ll keep track of your resting heartrate and give a ranking to let you know your progress. Plus you can log your food intake, weight, and the amount of water you drink.

Part of fitbit’s strength is having a comprehensive app available for Android, iOS, and Windows 10. They’re all polished, and unlike an Apple Watch or Android Wear, they can be used across all platforms without any restrictions or incompatibility.

The battery life is phenomenal on the Alta HR. They suggest seven days, and I believe it. After using an Android Wear device where I was lucky to get two days, this seems like a blessing.

If you’re looking to get a fitness tracker, this is the pinnacle of what you can expect. It’s light, water resistant, has a great battery life, works across all devices, and just works as intended.

But it’s not going to replace a smart watch. If you want a smart watch, go get one. Also keep in mind that once in the fitbit world, it’s difficult to take your data and migrate it to another platform. Fitbit built up a walled garden, and they don’t want anyone climbing the walls anytime soon.

MacBook Pro 2018 review: Controversy meets conformity

Apple has been tinkering with their MacBook as of late to usher them into the modern era. But even with all of the changes, Apple kept to a conservative design philosophy that shouldn’t shock most people, save for a very vocal minority.

I got the chance to use a 2018 MacBook Pro as a daily driver. It’s the 15.4 inch version with a 2880 by 1800 pixel display, an Intel UHD 630 GPU, a 2.9 GHz core i9 processor, and 16 gigs of RAM. It’s currently running High Sierra 10.13.6.

It weighs roughly four lbs., and feels comfortable to carry around in one hand or use on a lap. The high resolution screen makes sure everything is crisp and in focus.

On the surface, it looks like another run of the mill MacBook. But once you start playing around with it, you realize that there are some controversial changes.

The biggest one, in my opinion, is the keyboard. Apple chose to use the butterfly keyboard setup first pioneered on the MacBook 12-inch model. You know, the “I’m not a MacBook Air, but I’m totally a MacBook Air” replacement.

The keyboard just feels weird. But I will agree, it takes some getting used to. The key travel is too shallow, and it just doesn’t feel right if you’ve been typing on chiclet and mechanical keyboards your entire life.

It’s a design choice that only shaves off a millimeter of thickness. You have to wonder what Apple’s endgame is when it comes to practicality. The keyboards have had reports of dying due to dust getting in them, which Apple corrected by using membranes to keep out the dust. That’s a sign that they’re making too many compromises just for the sake of aesthetics.

The touchpad also borrows from the 12-inch MacBook. It’s comically huge, and feels very responsive. It also has the force touch ability, where a hard press on something like a word will make Mac OS do a dictionary lookup, among other things. This does get rather annoying after a while, but once you train yourself to anticipate it, you won’t accidentally trigger it.

The other big change is the inclusion of the touch bar. A weird gimmick designed to shut up those that want a touchscreen on a MacBook, the touch bar has received a lot of negative praise.

The touch bar is adaptive, and responds to any apps compatible with it. It replaces the function key row, which you can summon by holding the fn key. It also does auto correct suggestions if you’re typing, and brings up advance features like a scrubber on video editors.

I personally don’t see it as a bad thing. Not once did it get in my way. It always felt like an option, which is great, because more interface choices is better for consumers.

But I do think Apple should just bite the bullet and adopt a touchscreen for Mac OS. They have iPhones and iPads with touchscreens. Windows laptops have had touch screens for the longest time, and I much prefer a laptop with a touchscreen nowadays. Apple might be delaying adding one on a MacBook because they don’t want to cut into their iPad sales, which seems to be coming closer to being the MacBook’s successor in a decade.

Finally, we have the inclusion of four USB-C ports, with the exclusion of any USB-A ports. This is perhaps the one thing that has gotten the loudest criticism from the tech crowd, especially video editors. Truth be told, USB-C still is in pioneer territory, and trying to get current equipment to work with it usually means dongle heaven.

But I think adopting USB-C is a good thing. The only way it’ll receive more support is if more OEMs start switching over. This is the one feature that I’ll say Apple has had the courage to do.

But it was done aggressively on Apple’s part. My current daily driver, an HP Spectre x360, has two USB-C ports, and one USB-A. Plus it has an HDMI port and an SD card reader. The HP Spectre isn’t alone in giving users an option of both the old and the new.

Getting the new MacBook means revamping your accessories to make it work with your new laptop. And that means dongles. Of course, the smarter solution is to get a hub for it, but that’s only going to be useful if you have a desktop setup. If you’re on the go and need your MacBook to work with your equipment, you might find yourself making a lot of compromises.

I’m not affected by this, since my work requires just a laptop to do properly. But I understand the frustration video editors and others that use their MacBooks as a hub for their other equipment must be feeling.

Overall, I think the new MacBooks have been receiving more hate than they deserve. Truth be told, it’s going to be perfectly serviceable for the average Starbucks dweller using it to compose their blog and sign into Facebook. The battery life is great (I’m getting around 6 to 8 hours), it’s not too heavy, and frankly people like having a MacBook as a status symbol. That branding mindshare is something that even the higher end Windows laptops don’t have.

But the criticism from the vocal minority has some weight. Donglegate is a thing. The touch bar screams meeting half-way and not pleasing anyone. And the keyboard was changed only for the sake of looks, not functionality.

If you’re an Apple loyalist, then you won’t be disappointed. If you need to use a MacBook for work related reasons, and you’re on the fence, be prepared to make changes to work with this machine. If you’re willing to adapt to it, you’ll learn to love it. If you feel the changes are too radical, then you might want to pick up a 2015 MacBook while you can. Or maybe find a Windows laptop that meets your expectations.

 

Google Home Mini review: Hey, Google Home, what is your purpose?

Everyone in the tech community is hyping smart home speakers as the next big thing. I don’t get it.

Don’t get me wrong, the server based tech behind it is impressive. But in the end, they seem to be nothing more than novelties that don’t add any real benefit except to show how “21st century” our lives have become.

At their current price range, I get why they’re taking off. Both Amazon and Google have smart home speakers selling for $30 USD. They make a perfect stocking stuffer this holiday season.

I decided to buy a Google Home Mini to see what the hype was about. The main reasons are because I’m already knee deep in Google services, and the Google Home Mini integrates perfectly with my Chromecast.

Setting it up was fairly easy. Users are directed to the Google Home app on iOS or Android and walked through some basic steps, including training it to your voice.

This brought up my first annoyance with the Home Mini: You have to tweak its settings using the Home app. There isn’t a web page or corresponding app for Windows or Mac. Although this will be a minor inconvenience for some, I really wish Google would provide its services across all devices instead of turtling in the mobile world. I don’t see them doing this any time soon in the current tech climate.

Once users set it up with compatible apps, their Google Home Mini is ready to receive commands. I plugged it into my Pandora and Netflix accounts, and it worked as excpected. The cool part is using it with a paired Chromecast to show Youtube videos, Netflix videos, or photos from your Google Photos album. Users can stop, pause, and play a new video with easy voice commands.

Another neat feature is having Google Home Mini read the news for you, turning it into an on-demand radio. I imagine it probably can do the same with podcasts, but I have yet to set it up to do that.

But what’s the point?

The main problem is that the Google Home Mini just does things that any user can do with a smartphone or laptop. Sometimes using a device is quicker, since Google Home Mini sometimes either can’t understand what you’re saying, or doesn’t have the capacity to execute a specific command.

The main rub is that it still feels like you’re talking to a computer. And people don’t like talking to a computer. It’s the reason why there still is a stigma when you see someone talking to Siri or Cortana in the open.

The speaker’s voice sounds natural enough, but within an uncanny valley. The voice detection is fast, but using the keyword to activate it still feels awkward. And the demographic I feel this is supposed to help the most, baby-boomers and older, really don’t get the point of talking to it except as a parlor trick.

But there is a point.

Google, Amazon, Apple and Microsoft probably don’t really care that their smart home speakers aren’t where they should be now. These devices are merely gateways to collect data they need for the next generation. And the thing that will improve the next generation is more voice samples. Whichever company gets the most voice samples will have the better algorithm in the end.

Right now it looks like Amazon’s Echo has the lead. They were the first to define this device, letting everyone catch up to them. Google so far looks like they might be the only worthy competitor to the Echo for the time being. Apple delayed releasing their HomePod, which will sell at a premium. And Microsoft’s partnership with Harman Kardon isn’t getting the advertising, marketing or mindshare it deserves.

You’ll most likely be seeing smart home speakers everywhere within a couple of years. And if you’re like me, you probably won’t get it. I see the current generation of smart home speakers becoming the next Nintendo Wiis, gaining a large following due to gimmicky innovations, only to collect dust on a desk.

Preparing for iOS 11: Using an iPad with a keyboard

The iPad is a solid device. But to me, it always felt like a toy designed for lighter tasks like Candy Crush and Facebook. That’s soon to change with the launch of iOS 11, which will make it easier for iPads to multitask, including a native file browser.

To truly become a power user on an iPad though, you’ll have to invest in a keyboard. The iPad Pro has its own custom keyboard, but for regular iPads, Bluetooth is the way to go.

Weirdly enough, one of the better Bluetooth keyboard makers is Microsoft. I picked up Microsoft’s Universal Mobile Keyboard in anticipation of iOS 11, and tested whether an iPad keyboard is a solid investment, or merely a fool’s dream.

The keyboard I’m using is an older version, complete with a folding case that doubles as the stand. Microsoft also makes a foldable version that it sells on its online store.

The keyboard feels solid to use and type on. The keys have a good travel depth and don’t feel clunky or cheap. It connects to its case with magnets, and similar to a Surface keyboard, can be attached and detached with a simple pull.

The keyboard is compatible with Android, iOS, and Windows 8 and above. It can pair with up to three devices, and can swap between the three via a switch in the upper right hand corner.

Several shortcuts work the same way you would expect on Mac OS X or Windows. Holding Cmd + Tab brings up a familiar task switcher, with the last eight apps queued. All of the Cmd combinations work, like Cmd + A to highlight all, Cmd + C to copy, and Cmd + V to paste. And if you get stuck, you can hold down the Cmd button to get a list of available Cmds. Unfortunately, holding the Cmd key in some apps won’t show anything at all.

This is the biggest flaw when using an iPad with a keyboard: Not every app recognizes it. Some apps give you extra control like Safari and the Microsoft Office suite. Meanwhile, apps like Reddit and YouTube just don’t realize that keyboards for iPads are a thing. Nothing works beyond typing in fields.

And that’s for apps with an iPad version. Some apps like Instagram aren’t iPad optimized and refuse to change their screen orientation from portrait to landscape. Not only do you get a lower resolution app, but one that is unusable with a keyboard.

Then there is the other major factor: no touchpad or mouse support. True, anyone can touch the screen to negate this. But it feels incomplete as a power user not to have a touchpad or mouse. Luckily, this isn’t a game breaking feature, but Apple should address it sooner than later.

Aside from that, I noticed a slight delay affecting my typing every so often that I only could imagine as interference from my smartwatch, due to it having its Bluetooth on.

After using this for a couple of days, including writing this blog entry on Microsoft Word, I feel that getting a keyboard for an iPad isn’t as silly as it seems. It makes an iPad a great backup device in case your laptop or desktop breaks down. Or it might make a handy daily driver, ready to take care of your office and productivity needs. Or maybe you don’t feel like lugging around a laptop on a long journey.

As for me, I’ll definitely be sticking with my laptop for the near future. The iPad isn’t there yet when it comes to higher level productivity like software development, photoshop, and video editing. Yes, software exists for this, but the experience is dwarfed by what you’ll get on a Mac or PC. Let’s see if iOS 11 changes this.

iPad 2017 review: Premium in an affordable package

Who is the iPad for? That question is hard to answer. But one thing is for certain: the iPad is a great device that can fill in the gaps a laptop and smartphone can’t cover.

I spent a week with Apple’s new entry level iPad refresh for 2017. This is the first Apple device I bought for myself since my OG iPod Classic from 2007.

Even though it’s an entry level device, it’s gorgeous. The iPad’s hi-resolution screen displays crisp, vibrant images, and the one pound chassis feels both light and sturdy. Apple fans know the drill.

Setting up Touch ID took a few minutes, but it was worth it. It always works. I only wished my HP Spectre x360’s Windows Hello Facial Recognition worked this efficiently.

The iPad’s battery life is incredible. Its battery went from 89-percent to 25-percent within the first day of using it. Most of my activity during this period included web-surfing, watching videos, and communicating with friends and loved ones. The sound is rich for such a petite device, even though the stereo speakers are located at the bottom of the iPad.

And its performance is nothing short of phenomenal for a $330 USD device. I don’t remember the iPad stuttering or freezing while using it. Plus it has a headphone jack. Who can complain about that?

iOS 10 again

Using the iPad also meant familiarizing myself with iOS again to anticipate its nuances and quirks. Aside from using a friend’s iPhone or helping someone with minor settings, I haven’t formally used iOS on a serious level.

The 2017 iPad comes with iOS 10, and I’m happy to see that it’s made huge improvements over what I remember last. I love the new widgets on iOS’s lockscreen. They work similar to the live-tiles on Windows 8 and 10, giving information at a glance while keeping the aesthetics intact. They’re not as powerful as Android’s widgets, but they’re just more pleasant to use.

The notification shade works like its Android and Windows Phone counterparts. Swiping up from the bottom brings up an action center with shortcuts for brightness, night-mode and Bluetooth. A quick swipe down in the screen’s body will trigger spotlight, which works as great in iOS as it does on MacOS. Android doesn’t have anything similar to spotlight, even though it has much tighter Google Search integration.

The split screen mode in iOS works way better than the Android implementation on Marshmallow. The split screen emulates the look and feel of its MacOS counterpart, with the ability to swap in compatible apps in a tray. The split screen isn’t as powerful as the Windows 10 implementation, but it’s great to use nonetheless.

Plus there are some great touch gestures on the iPad, including multi finger swipes to open the multitask window and go back to the home screen.

And the home screen is where my love for iOS turns back to mere lust. I know the saying goes that if it ain’t broken, then don’t fix it, but iOS’s home screen leaves a lot to be desired. It’s just a row of icons. Sure, you can rearrange them, remove them, and place icons inside of each other to create folders. But it is in serious need of an organized tray like what’s in Android and Windows 10. I feel disorganized when looking at the iPad’s home screen. I know it’s a style choice that millions have little issues over, but it does bother me, and I’m certain it bothers others.

And then there’s the keyboard. This isn’t as big of an issue since Apple allows third party keyboards. But the Apple Keyboard sure likes to force its way back even when it’s no longer the default. It made some improvements with predictive text, but it still feels a generation behind Google’s and Microsoft’s keyboards, especially with a lack of swipe and no emoji prediction. In spite of it, I got used to the stock keyboard.

This is another minor gripe: the universal settings. I’m used to the way Windows and Android works, where the app settings are contained in the program you’re using. The settings do work well, though, once you get past the fact that you have to check this highly centralized location and scroll through a list of directories before finding the app you want to tweak.

First Class Software

Needless to say, the app experience on iOS is pleasant. There are a few exceptions on the iPad, though, due to the apps not scaling properly on a larger display. Instagram comes to mind. The weird thing is the Windows 10 Instagram app scales beautifully, so I imagine they’re going to make an iPad version soon enough.

Some of the stock apps that came with the iPad are a treat to use. The News app is great. Apple’s design philosophy works well with a print format. The camera is super responsive, though it could use more pro-features to take advantage of non-optimal light situations. Don’t take pictures on an iPad though, unless you have to.

And Safari surprisingly wasn’t completely terrible to use. It even supports extensions, something Chrome mobile for Android doesn’t do. A native Ad-Block Plus extension without rooting or weird tricks? Yes, please.

Of course, not everything was perfect. I synced the iPad with iTunes, and it destroyed my music’s metadata. I’ll have to rely on third party support for my music for the time being.

The stock photos app could use a bit more polish. It doesn’t show photos in reverse chronological order, and there doesn’t appear to be a way to change it. Plus it could really use the ability to look at photos on the cloud, like on Dropbox or Google Drive or OneDrive.

And for some reason, the iPad didn’t include some basic apps, including calculator, weather, and stocks. Luckily there are great third party alternatives to replace them that scale well on an iPad’s screen.

But the weirdest things were the quirky behaviors iOS did every once in a while. For some reason, I had to sign back into my Apple account several times, even though I made sure I was logged in. And I encountered a weird bug that made my iPad logged off the wifi every once in a while it was on a guest network. My Android phone didn’t have any issues with the guest network’s wifi, though.

Jack of all trades

The iPad is in a weird spot. The tablet market has plateaued, much like the desktop market. Now you have smartphones getting bigger, and laptops incorporating features tablets used to claim, like touch screens and portability. Tablets seem irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

But after using the iPad, I get why this device sold so well. And I see why Apple fans have a hard time giving up their iDevices. Cupertino spent a lot of time crafting the look and feel of this device to the point that you have to hold and use it for a bit to just get it.

The iPad now occupies the third spot in my unholy trinity of smart devices, next to my laptop and smartphone. It can’t replace my laptop, which I need for work related reasons. And it can’t replace my smartphone. But what it does well is cover the weaknesses of one device over the other based on use case.

The iPad is far better for casual use than my smartphone is. And when I don’t need to do serious work, but need to have a larger screen on me to demonstrate or review something, the iPad’s lighter footprint, phenomenal battery, and ease of use makes it better to carry around than my laptop.

If you don’t need to do extensive photoshopping, video-editing, programming, server hosting, or triple-A gaming, then using an iPad as a daily driver seems like a reasonable choice. I know I’m going to continue using mine.

Macs vs. PCs: They’re not that different, after all

Long have I been a Windows desktop user. In spite of some major shortcomings, Microsoft managed to make major improvements to its operating system that kept me from switching to a Mac.

But I’m willing to keep an open mind. Recently, I’ve been using a Macbook Air for work. And I can see why people like them so much.

So how does OS X El Capitan (now MacOS) compare to Windows 10? Surprisingly, they’re more similar than they are different.

What’s similar

The first thing I noticed is that both MacOS and Windows 10 have easy to use interfaces for finding stuff. Apple uses the Finder/spotlight function, while Windows uses the search/Cortana function. Apple’s solution seems a bit more integrated than search on Windows from my experience.

For example, spotlight seems a bit quicker and returns more relevant results from either the desktop or online resources like Wikipedia. Search will default to Bing a lot, which isn’t bad, but could use a bit of improvement.

They both have an integrated notification shade hidden on the right hand side. Windows 10 calls this the Action Center. MacOS not only collects your notifications, but also has the iOS widgets like calendar and stocks. Windows 10 has these located in Cortana in the search function.

They also have virtual desktops. But MacOS handles it much better than in Windows 10. Making an app fullscreen will automatically create a virtual desktop. Users can switch between them using a three finger gesture on the Macbook touchpad, or dismiss the virtual desktop by minimizing the app window.

Windows 10’s virtual desktop is more manual. You have to drag your apps into a new virtual desktop. Switching between them requires either using a three-finger gesture on your touchpad (if your Windows laptop supports it) or pressing Windows Key + Tab to show the virtual desktop menu. Long time Windows users probably will find it easier to Alt + Tab between apps and forego using the virtual desktop altogether.

But one thing they share in common that Windows gets right is the split-screen function. Microsoft calls this snapping, and it’s super easy to use. Just grab your app with a mouse or the touchpad, and drag it to whatever corner you want. Microsoft made this easier in Windows 10 with the inclusion of multiple sizes for snapping as well as using the Windows Key + arrow keys to snap via the keyboard.

This is an opaque thing to do on MacOS. Users have to open the app and look for the green button in the upper left hand corner, then hold it for the snap function to take place. MacOS only supports dual-screen split-screen at the moment, and worst yet, it only supports split-screen for select apps. You can split-screen any app on Windows 10, making the Mac implementation feel like a major step backwards.

What’s different

Honestly, not a lot is different between the two operating systems, and chances are these distinctions will get fuzzier as time marches on.

For one, Windows 10 has the start menu, which received a lot of controversy due to its removal from Windows 8. It’s not that big of a feature, though. All a user needs to do in Windows 8 and Windows 10 is press the Windows Key and start typing to search. This is how a user navigates around MacOS, and it works just fine.

MacOS has a Launchpad that honestly reminds me of Apple’s take on Windows 8 fullscreen start replacement. The major difference is Launchpad is modelled after iOS. Again, a regular user never needs to touch this at all.

The starkest difference is mostly hardware related. There’s no denying this: Apple touchpads just work better than Windows variants. But that’s not to say that Windows touchpads suck. Some do, but not all.

However, the touchpad is always guaranteed to be good on a Macbook. All the gestures work and don’t require adjustments out of the box. Whereas users don’t know what to expect with a Windows touchpad.

The touchpad on my Lenovo Ideapad works great, but is missing some handy gestures like virtual desktops. Other Windows touchpads either aren’t responsive, or have custom gestures based on the manufacturer’s needs. If you need a solid touchpad, stick with Apple.

And the software side tends to be a mixed bag. Best case scenario is a user is going to spend most of their time on the browser, so both systems got you covered. The desktop apps’ quality depend on the developers. Some tend to be more polished on MacOS, some are more polished on Windows. I’m a big Office user, and can’t stand using the Microsoft suite on Macs. But that’s Microsoft’s fault more than anything.

Gaming companies tend to favor Windows, but that’s not a deal-breaker if you need a desktop for work alone. Microsoft managed to address software concerns that developers had by including the Bash terminal in the Windows 10 anniversary edition. Although it is a work in progress, it allows access to open-source tools without requiring workarounds.

In the end, would I recommend switching? That’s a tough call. I honestly feel that both systems are more alike nowadays than they are different. Apple and Microsoft have been improving their operating systems for over a decade, and know what works and what doesn’t. They both have reached a convergent design philosophy where one company will come up with a feature that the other will unabashedly copy. The community is the biggest benefactor in this arrangement.

The only thing I would recommend is doing research on what you need from your laptop or desktop before buying. For example, if you want a laptop that will last, you probably should consider spending more on a premium model like a Macbook than getting a bargain model PC. If you know you want to game on your desktop, getting a Windows machine probably would make more sense than a Mac. Just realize that the Mac vs. PC arguments mean less nowadays than they did in the past.

Chrome 53: Lighter, Better, Faster, Stronger (on Desktops)

After stripping back features, it looks like Google’s flagship Chrome browser is making additions to compete with its rivals on Windows desktops.

Chrome released version 53 earlier this week, and they fixed one of its greatest weaknesses for laptop users: Battery life. According to a video posted on the official Chrome blog, Google’s browser increased its battery by close to two and a quarter hours when watching Vimeo on a Surfacebook.

In addition, Chrome supports a design overhaul with Material Design and color emojis. Chrome also is faster and more responsive than previous versions.

With a startup time of 1.89 seconds on my laptop (with a dual-core i5 processor, 8 gigs of RAM, and an SSD), Chrome is almost as fast as launching Microsoft Edge, which I clocked at 1.56 seconds. They’re both lightyears ahead of Firefox, though, which languished with a boot time of 11.33 seconds.

One has to ask where the renewed vigor is coming from. As of late, Google has been content to treating Chrome for the desktop as a red-head stepchild, pushing features for Android and iOS first.

Chrome previously announced they would retire Chrome Apps for all desktops except the Chromebooks. They removed the Chrome app launcher, and Google Now notifications as well.

The video Google posted appears to be a response to the one Microsoft made showing Chrome’s battery deficiencies compared to Edge, Firefox and Opera.

What’s really telling about Google’s video is that they tested it on Microsoft’s flagship product with a competing third party video site. It’s no secret that Google is a Mac OS X shop in all but name, keeping a few Windows machines around for testing purposes only.

Chrome hasn’t had to feel threatened about other browsers, since it dominates the desktop. According to StatCounter, Chrome is on roughly 62-percent of desktops and laptops as of August. Firefox is in second at roughly 15-percent, and Internet Explorer is over 10-percent.

But Chrome’s growth on desktops is beginning to taper. It went from 62.38-percent in July to 62.3-percent in August, according to StatCounter.

Pokemon Go: Catch bugs in game, experience bugs on screen

Grown adults throughout the world have succumbed to nostalgia, as the release of Pokemon Go takes them back to a time when portable devices used 4 AA batteries, had a pea soup screen and no internet. But is the new game worth the hype? Yes and no.

Pokemon Go is the first major release for Android and iOS from Nintendo and The Pokemon Company. They placed Niantic, a former Google subsidiary, in charge of crafting the free to play adventure game. The game borrows from Niantic’s previous work, Ingress. For those unaware, Ingress was a game that let Google gamify their Google Maps Point of Interests (POI), like Foursquare.

Pokemon Go allows players to create an avatar that travels throughout the real world in search of pokemon. The pokemon appear on the phone screen using augmented reality, allowing the player to capture them by tossing a pokeball at them. If successful, the pokemon will join your collection.

Players can level their avatars by catching more pokemon and doing things like visiting PokeStops (former Ingress POI) and evolving their pokemon. Players can also control special PokeStops called gyms, where players can battle each other’s pokemons. Players get assigned one of three teams at level 5, and only one team can control a gym.

This sounds fun, right? It is! The idea of traversing the real world and capturing virtual creatures is an entertaining concept. Plus, not only do players get out of the house, but they get to see what the landmarks are in their neighborhood.

I want to love this game. Really, I do. But after spending a week with the game, the launch is full of so many problems that I would be negligent at the least if I didn’t point them out.

A great example happened yesterday: I was searching for an uncommon pokemon in my area, when it appeared in front of me. Whenever you see a pokemon on the map, you touch it to switch the map to the augmented reality mode. Only in this case, touching the pokemon on my screen did squat. For several minutes, I was poking at my phone screen trying to activate the event, to no avail. The pokemon got away without a care in the world, and my frustration with the game increased.

That’s not the only issue. The biggest one is the performance  dropping in AR mode on my Nexus 6 with no warning, to the point where the game is unplayable. I’m talking about less than five frames per second bad.

And then there is the major battery drain. Pokemon Go drained my battery by 50-percent within an hour. My phone lasts a day before I have to charge it again, but not in this case. I imagine it’s because the game is communicating with the grid. Hardcore poke-addicts should consider investing in a battery pack or two.

I’ve seen the game fail to load, fail to update its information, and just plain fail to do basic tasks. The first day it rolled out to the world, the servers crashed. Needless to say, the launch product needed way more attention to detail than they gave it.

You wouldn’t expect bugs this massive from a Nintendo IP, and you can’t excuse it by saying this is a mobile game, and Nintendo can cut standards there. It shows a lack of leadership on Nintendo’s part.

And then there is the game itself. Not going to lie: the game is rather shallow. Pokemon itself is a shallow game by industry standards, but this game managed to strip it down to its barest elements. Previous pokemon games focused on battling your pokemon with others, allowing players to choose their pokemon posse and grow them at their will. This game focuses more on the collection part than anything else.

But you know what? Who cares?! It’s pokemon on a smartphone, and that alone means this product will be successful. The game’s launch already increased Nintendo’s stock by 25-percent. And Niantic can fix the bugs in the near future. The game is already a hit throughout the world, and that matters a lot.

What will the future bring for Nintendo? It’s hard to say, but one can speculate that the success they’ve found with Pokemon Go will encourage the company to focus more on mobile offerings. Whether this is a good thing or not will depends on Nintendo’s direction.

In the Mobile Realm, WebKit is King

There’s a healthy battle on desktops between three web rendering engines: WebKit and its derivative Blink, Gecko, and Trident and its derivative EdgeHTML. Chances are unless you’re using Firefox or Internet Explorer/Edge as your main browser, you’ve been using some form of WebKit.

On the mobile side, though, the battle is over: WebKit won the smartphone and tablet race. Show’s over; everyone else can pack up and go home.

But even though there exists a de-facto monoculture on the mobile web, alternative rendering engines haven’t given up yet. Mozilla and Microsoft still attempt to remain relevant in a mobile world that has long forgotten them.

How do they compare? In this non-scientific observation, Chrome, the de-facto Android browser, spars with Firefox’s mobile version for Android and Microsoft’s Edge browser for Windows Phone.

The results

In a non-scientific comparison, Chrome beats out both Firefox and Edge in the HTML5 test. Chrome 51 gathered 518 out of a possible 555 points. Firefox 47 came in second with 483, while Edge 13 scored 442 points.

Firefox comes out on top on the CSS3 test, passing 904 tests out of 1610. Chrome comes in second with 880, and Edge passes 715 tests.

Using the now dated SunSpider test for JavaScript performance threw another curveball. This time Edge beats out the competition with a total completion time of 1024 milliseconds. Chrome took 1127.7 milliseconds to complete the test, while Firefox completed it in 1267 milliseconds.

Using the Jetstream test flips the results around again. Chrome scored a 30.747. Firefox scored a 26.993, while Edge scored a 15.502. The higher the number, the better.

The worldwide WebKit

Why is WebKit everywhere? It might surprise people when they find out WebKit is an Apple product. Apple made Safari’s rendering engine open-source in 2005, never anticipating it would dominate the web realm within a decade.

Others piggybacked on Apple’s efforts and used WebKit as their own rendering engine. But in reality, it was Google’s Chrome browser that threw the rendering engine into the limelight. Chrome’s skyrocketing popularity worldwide combined with Safari being the default and only browser engine on iPhones and iPads to create a scenario where developing for the mobile web means developing for WebKit, whether you want to or not.

Google forked WebKit into Blink in 2013 to keep its web engine up to date. Today the Blink engine powers Chrome, Opera, Amazon’s Silk Browser, and other browsers. Apple continues to use WebKit for both Safari’s mobile and desktop versions.

Meanwhile, Firefox didn’t make any waves on the mobile side, despite remaining relevant on the desktop. Some speculate it might be because of a lack of key features like a data saver mode or poor performance compared to its counterparts. But the main factor keeping Firefox down is that it’s not a default browser on any Android device.

Firefox tried to remedy this by making a Firefox phone. It was a failure. By the time Firefox launched it in 2013, both iOS and Android created a walled garden of apps and services that makes it difficult for any new players to break into the mobile market.

Firefox said it would discontinue Firefox phones by May 2016. Firefox had to compromise and make a Firefox browser for iOS with WebKit to attempt to recover some of its lost numbers.

And even though Microsoft made Internet Explorer and Edge the default on Windows Phones, its poor mobile sales made it difficult for the web engine to see high adoption rates. It doesn’t help that Microsoft never attempted to ship Internet Explorer or Edge on another operating system.

As of writing, Chrome is the most used mobile browser worldwide. According to StatCounter, Chrome has 38.23-percent of the mobile market, with Safari at 18.95-percent. Internet Explorer is holding on with 1.61-percent, and Firefox is so low, it didn’t register on StatCounter’s worldwide chart.

Meanwhile, two mobile browsers that started as J2ME applications for flip phones still have a significant amount of share worldwide. Opera has 10.77-percent of the market, and UC browser has 14.24-percent.

The reason why they weren’t included in the test is because Opera Mini and UC browser use server side rendering to speed website delivery and compress data, and don’t fit into the traditional web browser category. The data compression is a valued commodity, since Opera Mini dominates Africa, while UC Browser is strong in South and East Asia.