July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Finally, there’s an Android phone that doesn’t make me miss anything about the iPhone. It’s called the HTC One, and it’s the best Android phone I’ve ever laid hands on.

It might also be the best smartphone I’ve ever used.

That’s saying a lot. Until now, the iPhone 5 embodied everything I wanted in an ideal smartphone: a solid-yet-elegant design, seemingly limitless speed, and a great screen. Android phones have certainly come close, but up until now there’s always been something that inexplicably held them back: the Nexus 4’s lack of LTE, the Galaxy S4’s cheap-feeling plastic case, or Android’s own design immaturity until Android 4.0.

What makes the HTC One so great? Simply put, it’s a phone that never leaves me wanting. It has a great camera, it’s freakishly fast, and its screen is fantastic without needing to be oversized. It also packs in several features I never thought I’d want in a smartphone but that I’ve found myself coming back to quite a bit.

Did I mention it’s gorgeous? Holding the HTC One in your hand will instantly make your current phone seem cheap and dated. Yes — even if your current phone is an iPhone 5.

Perhaps most of all, I appreciate HTC’s restraint. Unlike Samsung’s pile-on of features and questionable technology in the Galaxy S4, just about everything in the HTC One feels like a deliberate choice meant to create a better experience. That’s important, as it may just be the company’s last chance to turn its dismal fortune around.

It’s just too bad that most buyers will probably ignore it.

The good: It inspires pure gadget lust

The HTC One is so striking that strangers didn’t hesitate to ask me questions about it. “What is that?,” was a common refrain among New Yorkers as I was testing the phone throughout the city. I could tell they noticed it wasn’t just another Galaxy S or iPhone. It was something completely different — and they just had to know more.

One young couple I talked to, both Android owners, immediately noticed that the HTC One felt more substantial than the Galaxy S phones because of its solid metal case. They also appreciated the clean design of the phone, as well as HTC’s Sense software, which they noted was more tasteful and less intrusive than other Android phones they’ve used. These weren’t gadget geeks either, which made the conversation all the more intriguing.

I’ve tested plenty of phones in New York City, and the HTC One has managed to get me more attention than any other phone from random passersby.

You can chalk up its immediate appeal to that case, which is carved out of a single piece of metal and evokes Apple’s MacBook Air. HTC stacks the phone’s hardware to take full advantage of its limited internal space, which makes for a slightly rounded rear that fits comfortably into your hand. The HTC One feels like an evolved form of last year’s One S, which was one of my favorite Android phones so far. (Since it was only available on T-Mobile in the U.S., most people didn’t even know it existed.)

From afar, the HTC One looks similar to the iPhone 5, but up close it’s distinctly different. The One’s 4.7-inch screen commands most of its front, and it’s flanked by noticeable-yet-attractive speaker grills. Its screen is bright and vibrant with a sharp 1080p display. It even looked flawless under direct sunlight while wearing polarized sunglasses.

I initially thought the One’s stereo speakers were a gimmick (who really uses their phone like a boombox?), but I’ve grown to enjoy its ability to project decent audio. It’s particularly great for watching YouTube videos with friends — and it’ll amaze people used to tinny smartphone speakers. The One also includes Beats Audio support, but, as always, its impact on music quality felt negligible aside from making things a bit louder.

Under the hood, the One packs in a quad-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 600 processor running at 1.7 gigahertz, as well as 2 gigabytes of RAM. Those are the same basic specs as Samsung’s Galaxy S4, and you can be sure that most other new Android phones will match it as well. For the most part, that means you can expect similarly fast speeds across most modern Android devices. The big differentiators for smartphones now are build quality, style, and features — all of which the One excels at.

It’s been a while since I’ve been unable to keep my hands off of a piece of tech, but the One’s combination of confident style, speed, and useful features has made it my go-to gadget over the last few weeks (beating out the iPhone 5 and iPad Mini).

Pages: 1 2 3

Revenues were up 68 percent to $52.2 million, paid memberships were up 60 percent year-over-year — hitting two million just two days ago — and its cost-per-acquisition was down 12 percent. Even total revenue per average paid member (consumers pay a subscription fee to belong to Angie’s List) was up.

The only negative number — a net loss of $7.9 million — was also up, from $13.5 million in Q1 2012. That loss is due to heavy marketing costs as Angie’s List continues to pursue quick growth.

“Our business grew very well in the first quarter, achieving new records for membership, service provider revenue and total revenue, due to continued strong and consistent operating metrics,” Angie’s List CEO Bill Oesterle said in a statement.

While subscriber revenue was up 47 percent to $14.6 million, Angie’s List makes most of its money from service providers — the plumbers and roofers doing the work, who pay to advertise on the site and pay fees when consumers purchase their services on Angie’s List.

That revenue was up as well, increasing 78 percent to $37.5 million.

Consumers must be happy with the service, as the average first-year membership renewal rate is 73 percent, the same as a year ago, and the average overall membership renewal rate is slightly higher, at 75 percent. That does, mean, however, that Angie’s List needs to grow its 2,000,000 members by 500,000 in 2013 just to grow by 25 percent, and marketing costs that the company anticipates reflect that.

Source: Google Finance

Angie’s List stock price over the last three months.

For the second quarter, the company expects revenue of $58.5 million to $59.5 million, with marketing expenses of $27.8 to $28.8 million. At the company’s current customer acquisition cost of $72, that would translate to almost 400,000 new users in the second quarter alone.

“We will continue to invest in acquiring new members, adding advertising service providers and innovating products to drive further scale and penetration, while maintaining secure levels of liquidity,” the company’s interim CFO, Chuck Hundt said.

That will probably translate into another net lost next quarter, but the company is approaching profitability within perhaps just a few more quarters.

As mentioned above, the service just passed two million members on April 22. At the time, Angie Hicks, who co-founded the site with current CEO Oesterle, said that the company’s growth was accelerating exponentially:

“It took us more than 16 years to get to one million paid households but just 18 months to double it.”

Investors have driven the stock, which debuted at $13, from around $10 to the $20 level in the past three months.

Leave it to Sonos to redefine the lowly sound bar.

With the Playbar, Sonos’s new sound bar speaker, it’s officially making a play for the living room. Sonos is best known for its high-quality wireless speakers, which earned it a loyal following among techies and music lovers. Now couch potatoes can take part in Sonos’ vision of a home filled with wireless speakers in every room, all controlled via smartphone, tablet, or computer.

As flat-screen HDTVs got thinner and more fashionable, their built-in speakers became tinnier and weaker. Sound bar speakers emerged as an inexpensive way to bring big sound into the living room without a lot of clutter. For many, the simplicity and convenience of soundbars trumps the fact that they can’t hold a candle to traditional multispeaker home theater systems in terms sound quality.

At $699, the Playbar is definitely in the high-end range for sound bars, a category which has typically served budget buyers. But the Playbar certainly doesn’t sound like any budget sound bar I’ve heard.

The good: Great sound and design, easy setup

No matter what I threw at the Playbar — loud action movies like Fast Five or Dredd (seriously, watch it), classical music, or Deadmau5 — the speaker constantly surprised me with depth and clarity, even at high volumes. It never felt felt like I was listening to a traditional sound bar (much to the chagrin of my downstairs neighbors).

The Playbar didn’t quite match my 5.1 home theater system (which consists of a Harmon Kardon receiver and a Polk speaker plus subwoofer set), but that’s a far more complicated setup. For a single sound bar, the Playbar delivers more than enough sound to fill any living room.

The Playbar packs in nine speakers within its svelte frame, including six midwoofers and three tweeters. It handled low-end sound just fine, but you can also pair it up with the Sonos wireless subwoofer ($699) to truly shake the walls. You can also add two Sonos Play:3 wireless speakers ($299) to serve rear-channel duties, which would give you a wireless 5.1 Sonos home theater solution.

At that point though, you’re paying nearly $2,100 just to avoid speaker wires in your living room.

Like most Sonos devices, setting up the Playbar is a cinch: Find a spot to place the 12-pound speaker, plug it into power, and hook up the optical cable to your TV or cable box. You can either plug it into your Internet router directly with an Ethernet cord or connect it to a $49 Sonos bridge unit (sold separately) for wireless access. You can also connect the Playbar wireless if you have any other Sonos speaker hooked up to your router.

It’s a shame that Sonos still requires the Bridge for wireless access, but it’s mainly due to the unique way the company manages its devices on your network. Instead of talking directly with your router, they form a secure wireless network, dubbed SonosNet. That gives Sonos more direct control of the devices on your network, and it also allows cool features like synchronized playback across multiple devices.

You can control the Playbar with your TV remote (it grabs the IR code during setup) or via one of the Sonos apps. The apps also let you send music directly to the Playbar without having your TV on. Sonos supports popular services like Pandora and Spotify. Playing music from those services is simple, though the playlist functionality on the Sonos app was often awkward to navigate.

Design-wise, the Playbar looks as expensive as it actually is. It’s covered in soft speaker fabric, and its aluminum frame gives it a sense of understated elegance. It teeters right on the edge of blending into a modern living room and loudly making its presence known. The Playbar also easily mounts to the wall (I had it sitting on my TV stand).

The bad: That price, limited connectivity

Sonos devices have always been a bit pricy — mostly because the company aims at quality-focused niche buyers, and not budget consumers. The Playbar continues that trend with its $699 price, well above the $150 to $300 price-range of most budget speaker bars. To be fair, other high-end speaker firms like Klipsch and Yamaha have even more expensive sound bar offerings.

But as I described above, the Playbar’s price becomes a problem once you start adding other accessories. I’ve grown so used to having a nice subwoofer and surround-sound channels, I found it hard to watch action movies with the Soundbar alone. But while I could possibly justify the Playbar’s $699 price given everything it can do, I can’t imagine every shelling out another $1,400 just for a wireless subwoofer and surround-sound speakers.

The bigger problem? You have no other choice when it comes to a subwoofer and more speakers.

A smaller, but still annoying problem is the Playbar’s lack of input choices. You get one optical port — and that’s it. For most people that may be fine, since they’ll just be taking sound from their HDTV. But it doesn’t offer much flexibility — not even a simple line-in jack — if you want to hook up additional devices.

The verdict: An excellent sound bar — if you can live with the cost

Ultimately, the Playbar is exactly what I expected from Sonos: Expensive, but a feast for the ears. I didn’t really expect any less, but it’s a shame that the Playbar’s high cost will keep it out of the reach of many sound bar buyers.

If you’re looking at a sound bar because you want a budget home theater, you have plenty of other options. But if you have the means, and you simply want to bring high-quality sound to your living room without much clutter, then it’s definitely worth considering.

SAN FRANCISCO — After looking at a bunch of data points, the gaming community needs to realize three things: Ladies and old people love games; reviews really do dictate your sales; and your game is good — but marketing will make it even better.

Video game research firm EEDAR revealed its latest findings today at the Game Developers Conference and the results may delight and disappoint you.

Let’s start with the delight.

The ladies, and your grandparents, love gaming, too

It seems a little obvious. Of course women are interested in gaming, but the numbers increasingly support this. According to EEDAR’s research, adult women now represent 30 percent of the gaming population. That’s more than the 17-and-younger boys segment.

The amount of female and, in fact, elderly players has significantly increased with the introduction of the smartphone. Indeed, since the smartphone was released, we have nearly reached an equilibrium between 18 and younger players, 19-49 players, and 50-plus players.

Mobile games have done more than bring new types of players into the pastime. They’ve also changed the reason we play games. Overwhelmingly, 60 percent of people who play mobile games do it simply to pass the time. It has moved from an individual activity that you did in your living room and has expanded into the broader world.

“We basically have a gaming device in every single pocket,” said Geoffrey Zatkin, a researcher at EEDAR. “It’s now social acceptable to play games anywhere.”

Got a bad review? Sorry, that really does suck and might affect your bottom line

Unfortunately, that 1-100 review score your game gets really does have an affect on your sales. EEDAR’s study found that games in the 90-100 review-score range sold many more copies than those who scored in any other levels of reviews. Looking at games only released through from each platform’s launch through December 2012 for the PlayStation 3, the Xbox 360, and the Wii, EEDAR found that only 72 games made it into the 90-100 range. Those games grossed an average of 1,123,000 units sold in their first three months on sale. That’s compared to 454 games that scored an 80-89 review that grossed an average of 449,000 units sold in their first three months.

That’s 382 more games that sold an average of 674,000 fewer units in the same time frame.

EEDAR did a study of three groups of gamers playing PopCap’s casual game, Plants vs. Zombies. They paid everyone $10 apiece and asked each group to read a set of reviews before playing the game — one group read good reviews, one read bad reviews, and the other read a mix (the control group). The results were as expected. Those that read the good reviews all ranked Plants vs. Zombies higher in their own reviews versus the control group and versus the “bad reviews” group.

It got interesting, however, when EEDAR asked each group if they’d rather take the game instead of the payment. Those in the positive group took the game in far greater numbers than those in the negative group, showing that reviews really do affect whether someone is willing to “spend” on a game.

But despite the need to make a really great game, your marketing budget and the timing of your game’s release really could really make the different between a hit and a flop.

Marketing, marketing, marketing = money, money, money

So, you’re about to release a game. You’d better start considering the buzz you want to generate. You have a few ways of doing this: Getting covered in a magazine (see all that review data up there) or a website and buying advertising.

If your game got a bad review, marketing should be your next biggest push.

“Marketing is basically steroids for your games,” said Zatkin.

But marketing is dominated by the big guys — at least in terms of advertising. Over the past few years, Call of Duty has dominated “pop advertising,” or those advertisements you see when you walk into a game store. In 2012, Assassin’s Creed III and Madden NFL 13 also topped the charts in pop advertising positions. But that’s because these games all have huge publishers and big marketing budgets.

How does the little guy get in there? By getting editorial mentions. This can also be a challenge, however. From 2010 to 2012, shooter games dominated the cover-spots on major gaming magazines. Indeed, 53 percent of games featured on magazines were shooters in this time period.

Regardless, marketing is crucial.

He explained in the chart to the right that if you both get great reviews and spend a lot on market, your games are going to sell that much better. If you have low reviews and don’t spend all that much, you’re going to do poorly in sales. But that’s obvious. What about if you compare getting poor reviews and spend lots of marketing money, or the inverse, you spend little money on marketing and get great reviews? Turns out, marketing always wins. If you spend the marketing cash, you are statistically more likely to sell better on the PlayStation 3, Wii, and Xbox 360.

Photos via Meghan Kelly/VentureBeat

---

GamesBeat 2013 is our fifth annual conference on disruption in the video game market. You'll get 360-degree perspectives from top gaming executives, developers, and analysts on what’s to come in the industry. Our theme this year is “The Battle Royal.” Check out full event details here, and grab your early-bird tickets here!

---

Within five minutes of turning on the Boxee TV, I was ready to return it.

It’s Boxee’s second stab at building a set-top box for the living room, but it’s far more focused on mainstream consumers than its predecessor. The $99 Boxee TV includes the usual apps, like Netflix and Vudu, as well as the ability to receive free over-the-air TV channels. But its real claim to fame is the cloud DVR, which allows you to store unlimited television recordings on Boxee’s server.

[Update: Boxee rebranded Boxee TV to simply "Cloud DVR" on April 9th, 2013. This review's title and tags have been updated to reflect the change.]

It’s a device that promised to reshape the way we view TV, a device that Boxee is basically betting its future on — and I couldn’t even navigate its menus without some sort of frustrating glitch or crash.

In its quest to conquer the next big thing, Boxee made a product that failed to get the basics right. The cloud DVR lacks simple features, like scheduling a recording from the channel guide. The remote is a nightmare. And it crashes, a lot.

This review was among the hardest I’ve ever had to write. I’m a huge fan of Boxee, from its hacker roots as a media player for modified Xbox consoles, to its rise as one of the most interesting media startups in New York City. (Mayor Michael Bloomberg recently made a major announcement at Boxee’s office, which former Google CEO Eric Schmidt also attended.)

When Boxee first announced this product, we called its unlimited storage “insane” and dubbed the product “amazing,” because it seemed so promising.

But after living with the Boxee TV for almost two months now, it’s time to call this thing a dud.

The good: Cloud DVR is an intriguing concept

It’s not hard to see why the promise of Boxee TV’s cloud DVR was so exciting initially. Instead of dealing with storage limits on a hard drive, Boxee’s cloud DVR promises an unlimited amount of storage on Boxee’s servers for $10 a month (it’ll eventually go up to $15). The cloud DVR subscription is optional and month-to-month, but as you’ll see, there’s practically no reason to get the Boxee TV with out it.

While you’re probably used to just recording new episodes of your favorite shows with a typical DVR and losing the oldest recordings as it fills up, Boxee’s service lets you record every episode as it airs, for as long as you want, across multiple devices. For media addicts who can’t wait for new show episodes to hit Hulu Plus or Netflix, but who don’t have time to watch everything in their queue, it sounds like a dream come true.

Unfortunately, Boxee TV is limited to recording over-the-air and basic cable channels. That means you’ll only be able to watch and record shows from major networks like ABC, NBC, and Fox — but not shows on regular and premium channels like FX, HBO, and ESPN. You could receive around a dozen channels, or just a handful, depending on availability in your area. Boxee includes a simple antenna inside the box, but upgrading to a more powerful antenna could net you more broadcast channels.

The limitation of free over-the-air channels is something cord-cutting aficionados are used to, since it’s a free alternative to costly cable or satellite subscriptions. And since Boxee TV includes Netflix and Vudu apps, you can augment the limited television channels with those larger content libraries.

Tuning between TV channels is fairly quick on the Boxee TV, at least compared to the way my Samsung HDTV handles tuning.  The device includes two tuners, so you can watch one channel while recording another, or have two channels recording at the same time. In theory, Boxee TV feels like it’s getting close to unifying traditional television and web video, an ideal first sketched out by Google. Google TV still wins out though, since it supports cable and satellite subscriptions, and it has a much stronger selection of apps.

You can stream live television to your computer’s web browser or your iPad with Boxee TV (iPhone and Android support is on the way, even though the company still advertises that it supports “any screen”). I found that cloud DVR recordings looked almost as clear as when they originally aired, while the live TV streaming looked a tad worse. It takes about 10 to 15 seconds for cloud recordings to begin, while tuning into the live stream takes around a minute. (But hey, at least Boxee warns you it could take that long.)

Boxee TV builds upon the interface developed for the Live TV stick, a USB dongle that brought TV functionality to the company’s previous device, the Boxee Box. The interface shows you an attractive display of shows currently on-air, as well as shows scheduled to appear over the next few hours. On your computer or iPad, you can view a more traditional channel guide by logging onto Boxee.tv. The company assumes you’ll be using an iPad or computer as a secondary screen — and you’ll need to, since it’s the only way to schedule DVR recordings.

Boxee has clearly built up an impressive amount of features around its cloud connectivity, it’s just a shame that it gets so many simpler things wrong.

Filed under: Business, Gadgets, Media

Pages: 1 2 3

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

It took about two hours for my initial excitement over the BlackBerry Z10 to disappear.

At first, I was impressed by how comfortable the Z10 felt in my hand and the ease with which it juggled multiple tasks at once. But it didn’t take too long before the BlackBerry 10’s crummy apps, limited functionality, and instability sent me running back to the iPhone and Android (yes, I always have two devices on me).

The phone feels like a beta product, not something that BlackBerry (formerly Research in Motion) has been toiling away at for years. After several delays, BlackBerry simply has no excuse — especially when this is the device that must save the troubled company.

An even bigger problem became clear the more I used the Z10: Who is this thing for? It’s not going to win over gadget geeks with its minuscule app selection (70,000 at launch, but few that you’d actually want to use), and the BlackBerry faithful will likely be better served by the upcoming Q10, which features a traditional physical keyboard. And I can’t imagine that anyone would latch on to its fairly boring interface and lack of personality.

It’s a phone built out of desperation and hubris — not for anyone, or any specific need, in particular.

The good: Classy design, great feel caters to business folk

The BlackBerry Z10 isn’t a complete failure, as it manages to impress at first glance (hence my enthusiastic first look at the phone). From afar it looks a lot like the iPhone 5. Up close it bears a simplicity that’s exceedingly rare as smartphone makers obsess with screen size and design bling. It looks like an expensive device that only business people should be using — which is great for maintaining BlackBerry’s image but somewhat damning when attracting typical smartphone buyers.

With its rounded corners and soft-touch rear cover, the BlackBerry Z10 feels more like an expensive leather briefcase than your typical smartphone. It’s also comfortable to hold and navigate with one hand thanks to a reasonably-sized 4.2-inch screen. BlackBerry could have tried to spar with big-screen Android phone makers, but the smaller screen size shows a certain amount of restraint that I can’t help but appreciate. (It’s also slightly bigger than the 4-inch iPhone 5, so BlackBerry can still hold that over Apple.)

The BlackBerry 10 has a few other things to like as well, though it still has a long way to go. It relies on a gesture-based interface that quickly becomes intuitive — swipe up from the bottom of the screen to show your running apps, swipe from the left edge go backward, and swipe down to reveal more options. A helpful gesture — swiping up, then right — sends you to the BlackBerry Hub, which puts all of your e-mail, texts, Twitter updates, and other communication alerts into a single interface.

Few apps stood out on the Z10 (more on that below), but its browser is worth mentioning. It’s fast, renders web pages accurately, and it even supports Adobe Flash. BlackBerry clearly put a lot of thought into the browser’s rendering engine, which feels as zippy as Chrome on Android and the latest version of the iOS browser.

The phone also sports BlackBerry Messenger, which for some fans may be the only reason they’ll need a new BlackBerry device. At this point, modern messaging apps and services like iMessage and Kik are far more useful than BlackBerry Messenger. But for business people who’ve lived with BlackBerry phones over the past year, it’ll be tough to give up BBM.

Just like the BlackBerry PlayBook tablet, which runs an operating system that serves as the core of BlackBerry 10, moving between multiple applications on the Z10 is fast and seamless. It’s powered by a fast 1.5 GHz dual-core processor and 2GB RAM, so it’s certainly no hardware slouch either.

Call quality and reception was impressive, though that’s something BlackBerry should have mastered by now. Its touchscreen keyboard is fashioned after the physical BlackBerry keyboard, and it’s also helped by some impressive predictive text technology (though BlackBerry hasn’t confirmed this, I believe it’s powered by SnapKeys, the folks behind the excellent Android keyboard).

But despite those few positives, the Z10’s problems make it impossible to recommend.

The bad: No compelling features or apps

For a device that should remind us why BlackBerry is a smartphone brand that matters, the Z10 is surprisingly average.

It has 70,000 apps, but few that you’ll actually want to use. Apps for popular services like Twitter work, but these are riddled with bugs and errors. Twitter would often just stop refreshing my timeline and mentions, and sometimes I had to reboot the app to get it working again. It’s also still missing popular apps like Spotify and Instagram. Don’t expect to keep up with the cool kids with this phone.

Core applications are surprisingly lacking as well. For maps, the Z10 relies on a modified version of Microsoft’s Bing Maps, which doesn’t have nearly as much location data as Google Maps. Simply using the maps application was a pain — it would often take forever to load, and it had issues finding my location. It’s inexcusable for a modern smartphone platform to have unreliable mapping — just look at the backlash against Apple Maps.

The Z10 is all about productivity, except it doesn’t always work properly. My Gmail account stopped updating for days on end, apps crashed frequently, and the phone often got stuck in landscape orientation. All of this led to me completely rebooting the Z10 far more often than I would have liked.

Battery life is somewhat disappointing as well. Sometimes the Z10 would last for a typical workday, and sometimes I had to charge it in the middle of the afternoon. I was never able to figure out what was draining the battery on certain days. At least the battery is removable — it’s an increasingly uncommon feature in smartphones, but something that BlackBerry road warriors should appreciate.

Boring and soulless

What bothered me the most about the Z10 was perhaps more aesthetic than functional. It’s simply boring. The home screen is uninspired (down to generic-looking icons), BlackBerry Hub feels like a messy block of text, and I’ve yet to find an app that truly felt interesting.

I’ve always felt that one of Android’s biggest problems over its first few years was that it didn’t really have a soul. It wasn’t until former WebOS designer Matias Duarte joined up as Android’s director of user experience that Google’s mobile OS finally got a swift dose of personality.

The BlackBerry Z10 doesn’t have that problem. It definitely has a soul, but it’s one of a buttoned-up and humorless corporate drone. Forget about attracting new users: With an image like this, BlackBerry will have trouble holding onto its 80 million users.

I have a feeling BlackBerry knows just how boring BlackBerry 10 currently is, otherwise it wouldn’t have named Grammy-winner Alicia Keys its global creative director. Right now it’s unclear if Keys will have any actual creative input or if she’s just a celebrity name to make younger buyers pay attention. But hopefully her mere presence will be enough to inspire the company.

BlackBerry already has a strong hardware lead in Todd Wood, its VP of design, but the company needs a strong software designer like Duarte to give BlackBerry 10 some character. Judging from some of the most popular apps on iOS and Android, consumers are beginning to recognize the importance of good design. It’s not something that BlackBerry can avoid for too long in its software.

The verdict: This phone isn’t meant for you — or anyone

The BlackBerry Z10 isn’t the worst phone I’ve come across, but I can’t in good conscience recommend it to anyone. BlackBerry still has a lot of work ahead of it in terms of software updates and attracting developers. And maybe along the way, it can also figure out who the heck needs this phone.

BlackBerry-faithful should keep an eye out for the keyboard-equipped Q10. Pricing and availability of that model still hasn’t been announced.

The Z10 won’t be the phone that saves BlackBerry, but at least the company has finally gotten the ball rolling on its next-generation devices.

Hopefully by the next round BlackBerry will figure out who it’s actually serving.

Microsoft’s first Surface tablet was all about disappointing compromise, but the new Surface Pro is full of possibility.

It has an Intel processor, so it can actually run older Windows software. It features a sharp 1080p display that makes text, pictures, and movies pop. And it has has a stylus pen … for some reason.

The Surface Pro ($899 for the 64GB version, $999 for the 128GB model) isn’t perfect, but it comes much closer to Microsoft’s initial vision of the Surface as a machine that can serve as both a fully functional laptop and a solid tablet. Unlike the Surface RT, released just a few months ago, it’s more than just a heavy tablet in a PC’s clothing.

While testing the Surface Pro over the past week, I often forgot that I was using an entirely new type of computing device. It simply felt like a fast Windows 8 laptop. And while it’s far less transparent when used as a tablet, mostly due to its weight, the Surface Pro still worked well enough for casual usage while on the couch or in bed.

It’s close to the no-compromise device I was looking for when I reviewed the Surface RT — though we’re not quite there yet.

The Good: Fast, flexible, and polished

The high points of the Surface RT also apply to the Surface Pro. It features the same polished design, a case made out of a durable metal called VaporMG, and a kickstand that pops out with a satisfying thunk. I was shocked at how well-constructed the earlier Surface RT was, and the Surface Pro gave me the same impression, albeit with a bit more heft.

The Surface Pro weighs just under 2 pounds, compared to the Surface RT’s 1.5 pounds, but the slightly greater weight comes with a payoff; it’s a far more functional machine. The Surface Pro sports a third-generation Intel Core i5 processor running at 1.7GHz, along with 4GB RAM. That’s a huge step above the Surface RT’s Tegra 3 processor and 2GB RAM, and it shows.

Even though it has the same 10.6-inch screen size, the Surface Pro features a much higher-resolution 1080p display than its predecessor. That means it can run HD movies at their highest resolution, and it also makes just about everything on the screen extra sharp. The screen also supports multitouch with up to 10 fingers, while the previous Surface only supported five.

A dream to use

Launching programs, moving around the OS, and opening large media files was buttery smooth with the Surface Pro. For the most part, it managed to keep up with my typical workflow, which involves having several browsers open with dozens of tabs, a media program (Spotify, these days), and an instant messaging client (typically Trillian). In comparison, the Surface RT struggled to launch processor-intensive apps, and its paltry amount of RAM made multitasking a pain.

The Surface RT never quite fit into my workflow because it could only run Windows 8 apps — not so with the Surface Pro. Its Intel processor means it can run any Windows application that ran on Windows 7. I was able to run browsers other than Internet Explorer (there’s still no Chrome or Firefox version for Windows RT), and I even installed iTunes for fun. The freedom and flexibility of the Surface Pro made the limitations of the Surface RT seem even more egregious in retrospect.

Gamers will also appreciate the horsepower behind the Surface Pro, as it’s capable of playing a lot more than just Angry Birds. I installed Valve’s Steam client and was able to pull down Half-Life 2: Episode Two in around 15 minutes. The game took about 20 seconds to launch, and loading the first chapter took only around 12 seconds. That’s about on par with my giant desktop, which has a modern Nvidia GTX 560 video card and a three-year old quad-core processor.

I was able to play Episode Two smoothly at 720p with midrange graphics settings, which was more than adequate for the Surface’s screen size. That’s pretty impressive for a computer with only integrated graphics capabilities. (Going up to full 1080p gaming is perhaps asking for too much: At that setting, Episode Two was playable, but with a low framerate.)

The Surface Pro’s battery life was comparable with other ultraportables, lasting around five hours on a full charge. It’s paltry compared to tablets like the iPad, which typically get around ten hours of usable battery life, but the difference is understandable given the Pro’s size and horsepower.

Ultimately, I was impressed at what I was able to do with the Surface Pro. It’s particularly impressive that it’s lighter than Apple’s 11-inch MacBook Air, which at 2.4 pounds is one of the lightest ultraportables around. This is where the Surface’s dual identity comes in handy: It may be hefty for a tablet, but it’s a featherweight dream when compared to other ultraportables.

I’ve been hesitant to recommend any tablet as a PC replacement so far, but the Surface Pro’s capability to offer the best of a complete PC while also dabbing in tablet territory could make it the only computing device some may need.

The bad: Even more awkward as a tablet

I’m no fan of big tablets, and the Surface Pro is by far the biggest tablet I’ve come across yet. It’s far too heavy to hold one-handed (even for short periods), and its wide screen makes it awkward to balance as well. In a time when we have small tablets like the iPad Mini weighing in at .68 pounds and roughly the size of a paperback, the Surface Pro feels like a dictionary.

But I suppose that’s the price you pay for including the hardware necessary to make it a functional Windows 8 ultraportable as well. I was disappointed in the Surface RT because it felt mostly like a tablet. But because the Surface Pro feels more like an ultraportable, its tablet deficiencies seem less egregious. Eventually, I got used to holding it on my lap or knee for casual web browsing.

When it comes to its size, the Surface Pro sits in a space all by itself right now: It’s lighter than other ultraportables, but far heavier than other tablets. That makes it easy fodder for gadget geeks who want the Surface to fail, but I see it more as a sign that Microsoft is actually daring to be different than the crowd.

I didn’t spend much time with the Surface Pro’s stylus pen, mostly because there wasn’t much of a compelling reason to use it. It’s helpful for doodling in image editing apps, but I’ll never get used to taking handwritten notes on glass screens (sorry, Galaxy Note fans). It was particularly useful for navigating Windows apps that weren’t optimized for touchscreens, though I don’t think that was Microsoft’s intent.

The Windows 8 problem: Apps and stability

Windows 8 apps aren’t exactly helping the Surface Pro’s tablet standing either. Microsoft has managed to get a decent selection of Windows 8 apps, but there’s nothing that feels truly groundbreaking or inspired. I spent most of my time with the Surface Pro inside of the desktop environment running older Windows apps.

Microsoft also has some work to do when it comes to the Surface Pro’s stability. It would occasionally get stuck in portrait mode, and on several occasions, the Surface failed to recognize the touch and type keyboards. Rebooting fixed most of the issues I ran into, but I also had a few blue screen crashes when repeatedly plugging and unplugging the keyboards. (At least Windows 8’s blue screen of death has a frowny face. Upgrade!)

The verdict: This is the Surface you’ve been waiting for

For all of its failures as a pure tablet, the Surface Pro is a compelling offering as an ultraportable/tablet hybrid. The Surface RT gave us a mere glimpse at the future of computing, but the Surface Pro’s combination of power and flexibility brings it right to your fingertips.

It may not be for everyone, but it’s worth serious consideration if you’re looking at Windows 8 ultrabooks. I have a feeling we’ll look back at the Surface Pro as the first time Microsoft’s Surface dream was more reality than hype.

For once, the future seems bright for Microsoft.

Additional takeaways:

• I wrote this entire review on the Surface Pro using the Type Cover (which has mechanical keys) something that I found impossible to accomplish on the Surface RT due to a keyboard bug. I was able to type as quickly as I usually do, and I didn’t notice any significant increase in typos.
• On the other hand, I’m still no fan of the Touch Cover (whose pressure-sensitive keys are embossed into the surface) — I used it to take notes during an interview and was left with complete gibberish.
• Yes, the title of this review was taken from John Woo’s seminal crime drama A Better Tomorrow.

jOBS, the biopic of Apple co-founder Steve Jobs — whose ruthlessness and design-savvy created his celebrity — debuted at the Sundance Film Festival this weekend, and the reviews are mixed.

The biopic stars Ashton Kutcher as Jobs and Josh Gad as Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak. It will be released to the public on April 19, though you can watch a minute-long teaser now.

Reviewers are going back and forth on the actors’ portrayals versus the historical accuracy of the movie. Kutcher got everyone talking about his physical likeness to Jobs after the movie team released a photo of Kutcher’s Jobs sitting next to a “THINK” post. According to reviews, he pulls off Jobs well, capturing his mannerisms and tonality in the movie itself.

But while the actors might make you believe, Jobs-fans may call the movie out for not sticking to Apple canon.

Another point raised: It seems the movie heralds Jobs for his work but might over-exaggerate how meaningful certain moments were — such as when he unveiled the iPod — to accent his significance.

Let’s take a look at the reviews:

The Next Web on the accuracy of Kutcher’s portrayal:

“Kutcher’s Jobs has the hunched, rolling gait of the man, and the kinetic nature of his hands. His flat, piercing stare and clipped delivery works almost perfectly throughout. Even if you’ve spent an enormous amount of time listening to or watching Jobs, you’ll be impressed with his overall performance. There were a few moments where he dropped out of cadence in his speech and such, but the impression that I got on the whole is that he got it right.

I know that his performance as Jobs will get a lot of attention, especially as there are many alive who still have their memories of him fresh in mind. But it’s a fantastic, if not wholly factually accurate, performance by Kutcher.”

CNET on how jOBS doesn’t show enough Steve Jobs grit:

“Only Gad, as Wozniak, gets a scene standing up to the great man — as Woz quits Apple, he criticizes Jobs for losing his humanity amid a single-minded pursuit of making great products. It’s something even Jobs’ staunchest admirers have to wrestle with, and the film could have used more of that.

Others will write of the things “jOBS” omits, gets wrong, or simply avoids. My primary disappointment was in how shallow the film felt, given the extensive historical record. In the early days Jobs’ co-workers had to wrestle with a man who smelled bad, who cried often, who yelled constantly, who missed deadlines, who overspent his budget by millions. … There is great drama to be found in all that, but it is not to be found in the saccharine ‘jOBS.’”

The Verge on jOBS’ set and costumes success:

“The production and costume design are astounding, and it’s not just Kutcher wearing nearly every iconic Jobs outfit (the suspenders, the bowtie, the turtleneck, etc) throughout the film. The filmmakers were able to use Jobs’s childhood home — the legendary “garage” where Apple started — and it really sells the first third of the movie to see it around the iconic location. The offices and fashion play to each era — big glasses, bigger hair, slacks worn high — even if it isn’t necessarily what the individual actually wore in real life. Woz may never have worn that tie, but someone in the 70s did.

The movie is littered with small details of lore that should make Apple fanatics happy.”

Hollywood Reporter on the omission of important details:

“By accentuating the sweet spot that combines the Apple origin story with the drama inherent in Jobs’ struggles to grow and maintain control of his company, Whiteley and Stern [screenwriter and director respectively] get the best return on investment — but at the expense of some important details, including his initial introduction to Wozniak and any specifics about Woz’s personal history. As the two are developing the first Apple computers, the omission of discussion about the operating-system software needed to run the machines also is puzzling.”

If your answer is never, you’re probably 75 or older and think “yelp” is a sound a dog makes.  But for the rest of us, we know that reviews are critical in influencing purchase decisions.  So critical that someone even started a business writing favorable book reviews called GettingBookReviews.com (charging, of course, $99 a pop).

If you’ve ever thought about paying for inauthentic endorsements like this, you better pump the breaks because third party review sites are now making it as obvious as Snooki’s spray tan that you’ve invested in fake reviews.

Yelp recently created consumer alerts for business pages that remain for 90 days when they sniff out phony reviews. The alert reads the following: “We caught someone red-handed trying to buy reviews for this business. We weren’t fooled, but wanted you to know because buying reviews not only hurts consumers, but also honest businesses who play by the rules.”

Similarly, TripAdvisor says they have “zero tolerance for fake reviews.” If they believe that a hotel review is contrived, they will remove the review, ensure that the property is penalized in the site’s rankings, and possibly even post a message alerting millions of travelers on what they’ve found.

Considering the clout online reviews hold in consumer purchase behavior, it’s no surprise that some business owners feel compelled to invest in sham reviews:

• A one-star increase on Yelp leads to a 5% to 9% increase in revenue (source: Michael Luca, Harvard Business School).
• 70% of global consumers trust online reviews, an increase of 15 percent in four years (source: Nielsen).
• 80% of consumers change their mind after reading a single bad review (source: Cone Communications).
• One negative review can cost you 30 customers (source: Convergys).
• 7 in 10 who read reviews share them with friends, family & colleagues thus amplifying their impact (Deloitte & Touche)

But here’s the bottom line:

A few “positive” reviews won’t stop customers from continuing to complain about your crappy service or overcooked food. Instead of taking the easy (and sleazy) way out, listen to the concerns your customers are voicing and improve your business. Social media and third party review sites have put the power in the hands of the consumer. Forever. If companies don’t become customer-focused, customer-centric, customer-obsessed, they risk tarnishing their brand reputation and ultimately, losing their company.

 How to improve online ratings the honest way

The problem that many business owners face is that reviews on third party review sites might not legitimately reflect the satisfaction of their customers. Many know they have happy diners or guests; but as the saying goes, “Haters gonna hate.” Pissed off customers are sometimes more inclined to write a damaging review while the satisfied customers will recommend the restaurant or hotel at a cocktail party instead of putting their praise online.

Here’s the solution:

Find those customers who are enthusiastic about your brand, product, or service (AKA your authentic Brand Advocates), and make it drop dead easy for them to write raving reviews.

1. Ask your customers via email, Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare, website, or elsewhere: “On a scale from 0-10, how likely are you to recommend our brand to your friends?” Those who answer 9 or 10 are your Advocates.
2. Give Advocates the tools to rate and review your product or property, or direct them directly to the relevant third party review site where they can give you a 5-star review.
3. By identifying your Advocates, you’re creating a virtual marketing force that you can leverage for much more than just reviews. They’ll gladly share offers or other announcements like a new location opening, a new chef, or a remodel of your hotel with their social networks. They’ll create personal stories about how they rekindled their love at your resort or made a new friend with one of the gregarious employees who waited on them.

Whatever you do, don’t pay for reviews or recommendations of any sort. There is no longer room for businesses that don’t understand the importance of authenticity and transparency in the era of social media.

Instead, tap into the enthusiasm of your highly satisfied customers and empower them to fight negative word of mouth for you.

By Cara Fuggetta, Marketing Manager, Zuberance (@carafuggetta)

photo credit: Dave77459 via photopin cc

Half of retailers can’t aggregate all their data in one place to make detailed reports and conclusions. 45 percent don’t use available data to personalize marketing communications, and another 42 can’t link data together at the individual customer level.

That is perhaps understandable, because 90 percent of the data that’s ever been created has been created in the last two years, and the rate of data growing is increasing quickly.

But it is also a problem, because big data is the key to knowing your customers, and knowing your customers is the key to being able to sell effectively to them. Big data also has its creepy side, as when Target famously used it to figure out that a girl was pregnant before her father knew.

But many retailers are not effectively pulling together tweets, likes and reviews and matching them against customer lists, transactions, loyalty club memberships, and prospects — which means they are using old dumb marketing techniques in a new smart world.

And missing out on sales.

So online marketing optimization company Monetate, which has access to a huge amount of ecommerce information, has put together the following quick guide for retailers using big data:

photo credit: JD Hancock via photopin cc

A funny thing happened after my drive home from a Los Angeles press junket where MySpace executives Tim Vanderhook, Chris Vanderhook, and Justin Timberlake gave members of the media a detailed tour of the yet-to-be-unveiled site: I changed my mind.

While dictating detailed notes into my iPhone during the drive, I decided that the second coming of MySpace is like an extremely beautiful woman who also possesses the intelligence of a scholar — too much to absorb.

If you can have too much of a good thing, the reincarnated MySpace is that thing, I reasoned.

But when I sat down to write this story and actually started exploring MySpace and its 53 million tracks, I got lost in the experience. Suddenly, the words of the executive brothers from earlier in the day came back to me.

“You give users a couple of days and they become hooked,” CEO Tim said. He was responding to my query as to whether MySpace was too convoluted, too complicated.

He’s right. I’ve spent a few hours with the site. I think I’m hooked.

“The Internet just became boring,” COO Chris said to a room of eight reporters (and several handlers), all of whom were hoping to hear more from Mr. Sexy-Back. “There was nothing fun anymore … I want to make it fun to use MySpace.”

It is fun, and so I have to amend my conclusion to this: Wrapped in a pretty package and equipped with brains to match, MySpace feels too good to be true. It’s not. No joke.

Gushing aside, there’s a full review to be had, not all so glowing, so let’s get to it.

A different kind of space

The profile

Log on to MySpace and you’ll find a design so noticeably different from anything else you’ve encountered that it will be hard to look away.

Designed for artists and their fans, the new MySpace, said every executive and product manager I talked to, is not a redesign. It’s a new product with a new purpose and a design meant to evoke emotion. MySpace wants to draw people into relationships with creatives and the content they produce.

“The standout feature is the design. No doubt,” Chris said. “We really changed the level of expectations of consumers about what design is for a website.”

The site features two separate navigation options. The global navigation bar sits at the bottom of the page and includes links to your homepage and profile alongside notifications and message hubs. The bottom navigation bar also features a “Discover” button that directs you to a portion of the site for music and media exploration, a search button, and music controls to manage streaming wherever you roam. This bar follows you around the site and is meant to help you dive into (and out of) content.

A separate contextual navigation menu rests on the left-hand side of the page and changes depending on the type of page or content you’re viewing.

Justin Timberlake’s stream

On the homepage, you are presented with a stream of content that spans the activity of the people and objects you’ve indicated you care about. You can limit the stream to a specific type of content, say posts or music, or you can view everything. The stream runs on the horizontal, meaning you’ll be scrolling from left to right instead of from top to bottom. Everything in the stream can be interacted with via a two-ring “connection” icon that represents your relationship with that object.

Should a pal listen to a bunch of music, you’ll see the activity in your stream. You can hover over each song to play the track, add it to a music queue, send it in a message, add it to a multimedia collection (called “mixes”), and so forth. Each of these hover cards also highlights similar content and includes percentages that measure the affinity between you and an object.

Hover cards and affinity

If you want to share something, you can find the post button on your homepage. The post experience takes over the entire page, and you can share a 150-character update with a photo or track, and your location.

Searching is automatic. Sure, there’s a button included in the global navigation bar, but you never need it. All you need to do is start typing. The site will automatically return matching songs, artists, albums, people, mixes, and videos as you type.

Search

Music is enmeshed into the entire experience, so for any track you find on the site, you can either click to listen to it or drag it to a hidden music drawer that opens with your action. If you opt to watch music videos, videos are shown in full-screen. You can watch videos and browse the greater space at the same time; the video will continue to play in the bottom right-hand corner of the site as you explore.

Of course, there are cover photos for profiles. MySpace’s only original twist here is to require high-resolution imagery to maintain quality control (now that’s a twist!).

Watching a video on MySpace

Altogether, the many unique design elements and interface choices make for an engrossing but curious flow. There’s a steep learning curve here, though it be may be one that excites new users. Figuring out how some of the features work or deciphering what some of the words mean will either be tedious or enticing tasks depending on your mood.

I suspect you’ll find the stream and its horizontal scroll captivating, the integrated music player in the bottom bar fantastic, and the side reels that slide in for additional info and comments flighty and annoying.

An hour or two into the new MySpace experience and you should have a good idea of how to complete most tasks, though you may find yourself lost down some strange corridor, as was often my experience. You should also start to see why MySpace is a space all its own. Yes, the new MySpace overlaps with Spotify, Pandora, Vevo, YouTube, Facebook, and many other music and social services, but it feels different — special even. Tim, Chris, and Justin have made good on their promise to build a place for creatives.

Time to learn a new language

You don’t “like,” you “connect”

Don’t expect to arrive at MySpace and understand the language. The service has concocted new names for familiar tasks; it’s an approach that strikes me as overwrought.

You don’t make friends, “like” content, or fan or follow celebrities on MySpace. Instead, you “connect” with everything: people you know, artists you love, tracks you like, photos you appreciate, and videos you enjoy.

Connections play a huge, sometimes confusing role in the overall experience.

I don’t understand why you would take the time to connect to an individual artist and also to each of that artist’s songs. In fact, connecting with objects in the same way you connect with people is a bit jarring, even if the process theoretically simplifies the act of indicating interest in things.

MySpace Mixes

You’ll also need to add “mixes” to your lexicon. Mixes are MySpace’s version of Pinterest boards and can be hybrid collections of different media types, serve as playlists, or act as portfolios. You can add to mixes as you browse either via hover cards or by dragging-and-dropping music to the disappearing drawer.

Welcome back profile songs and top 8

Those who loved the MySpace of yore will appreciate that the site’s new owners have returned profile songs to the experience.

You can once again feature your current favorite track on your profile. You can also hit a “Play All” button to cycle through the profile songs of all your connections.

The “top 8″ is another oldie but goodie back on the scene. This profile section displays the people or artists you choose to feature as your eight favorites.

More than just a pretty face

Discover trending content

The new MySpace is easy on the eyes, but its depth may be its most exciting asset — or its most crippling.

“There is a lot going on,” Tim said. “We wanted to provide this experience that has a lot of depth to it. There are other platforms … Pandora, Spotify, but there’s no depth of just learning more and more.”

There is a lot going on. As if streams, mixes, and connections weren’t enough, there’s also a ubiquitous radio feature that employs a custom MySpace algorithm but mimics the functionality of Pandora. A “Spaces” module will house third-party applications at some point. Artists get analytics. You get content recommendations for practically everything.

Is there anything the new MySpace can’t do? Well, yes, music downloads or sales — for now anyway.

Discover is arguably the sexiest section of MySpace, and it’s also the deepest.

This is the area dedicated to media exploration. Here you can find a smattering of editorial features written by staff, check out other MySpace users with similar tastes, find new music, pan through top mixes, dive into videos picked for you, or start your own radio station. Everything in the music and video sections can be fine-tuned by genre or restricted to stuff popular with just the people in your area.

Old-fashioned social networking

Good, old-fashioned social networking, the kind that MySpace originally helped to invent in 2003, asked a lot of every person. You would sign up, create an account, and spend hours filling in the holes of your profile, finding friends to follow or looking for exes to stalk, and perfecting your image.

In more recent years, that social model has been supplanted by one that’s simpler and more immediately gratifying. Take Instagram, where you sign up with Facebook and start sharing or exploring photos instantaneously. Your image is crafted by your photos and there’s very little required of you in terms of time, attention, or comprehension.

New MySpace is a blast from the past. The service does not simplify the social stream, it complicates it. MySpace demands a lot of you. You must learn a new language, adjust to a new navigation, seek out entertainment, and devote time to understanding the nuances of the site.

My fear is that in trying to take people deep into a musical abyss, MySpace will lose those who lack patience. Those who do stick around, however, may never want to leave.

The new MySpace is still in beta. The site is gradually being rolled out to people in waves, starting with artists.

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

The Nexus 4 is one of the best Android phones so far, but a crucial omission makes it an almost laughable upgrade.

The LG-built phone is a faster and overall more polished phone than last year’s Galaxy Nexus (made by Samsung), and yet it doesn’t include support for fast LTE 4G networks, which some of the Galaxy Nexus models did.

Why not? Because Google doesn’t want to be beholden to carriers. But while the reasoning might make sense for Google, it makes no sense at all for you.

And it makes the Nexus 4 seem like an oddly backwards flagship device — especially now that Apple’s competing iPhone 5 does support LTE.

On the upside, it’s one of the best bargains for an unlocked smartphone: It starts at just $299 for the 8 gigabyte version ($349 with 16GB) with no contract. T-Mobile is also offering the 16GB version for $199 with a typical two-year contract.

For those who don’t yet have access to LTE networks, or who simply don’t care about running the fastest cellular speeds (to which I say, huh?), the Nexus 4 will be a delight. It’s nowhere near a revolutionary Android phone, but LTE aside, it’s a decent upgrade over the Galaxy Nexus. It also fits nicely in Google’s new Nexus lineup, which includes the Nexus 7 tablet released earlier this year and the new Nexus 10 tablet.

Shipping without fast wireless broadband is still a shame though. It’s as if, no matter what Google does, it simply can’t release a truly no-compromise flagship phone. And as we’ve seen earlier this year, leading Android manufacturers have wasted no time in one-upping Google’s Nexus offering.

The Good: Bold and speedy

From a distance, you could easily mistake the Nexus 4 for the Galaxy Nexus. They both share the same basic shape and rounded corners, but the differences are clear upon closer inspection. Its screen is completely flat, unlike the gimmicky curved screen in the Galaxy, and its rear is made up of Gorilla Glass, instead of cheap plastic. The Nexus 4 features a slightly larger 4.7-inch screen, but it’s a barely noticeable difference from its predecessor’s 4.65-inch display.

The glass rear obviously evokes the iPhone 4’s design, but now that even Apple has moved away from such a precarious choice, the Nexus 4 looks a bit dated. The holographic grid doesn’t help much either — it’s as if it was designed by a technician trying to evoke high art, but whose only reference was 8-bit video games.

Overall, though, the Nexus 4 feels much more solid than the Galaxy Nexus. I’ve never understood Samsung’s love of plastic smartphone cases, and I felt like I was going to break last year’s Nexus whenever I removed the rear cover. In exchange for a more solid feel, you can’t remove the Nexus 4’s rear — which means you’re stuck with the battery and storage that comes with the phone.

What’s most surprising is that such a solid device comes from LG, a company that has released plenty of Android smartphones, none of which has ever stood out from the competition (Samsung, HTC, and Motorola phones). LG’s design inexperience still comes through in several ways, though: For one, there’s that holographic rear. And the soft material bridging the front and rear of the phone, while comfortable, feels uninspired — especially compared to solid case designs from HTC’s One X series, the iPhone 5, and even Nokia’s Lumia line.

Android has never felt faster

Most impressive about the Nexus 4 is its speed (except for its slow network capabilities). With a quad-core Snapdragon S4 processor running at 1.4 gigahertz and the latest version of Android, Jelly Bean, this phone is simply a speed demon. Grabbing new apps, juggling between them, and loading complex games was the fastest I’ve seen in an Android phone so far — and I’ve tested quite a few of them.

In terms of sheer speed, the Nexus 4 has been my most enjoyable experience with Android so far. I probably shouldn’t be too surprised — I felt the same way about the Nexus 7 tablet, which I called the first Android tablet worth owning. The Nexus 4 has plenty more legitimate competition than the Nexus 7 did, and even then it still manages to feel superior.

Android 4.2, which the Nexus 4 ships with, is all about polish. The overall design of the operating system feels closer to iOS than Android ever has. But by focusing on design, Google didn’t have much time to include new features. The Nexus 4 can send video wirelessly to HDTV’s supporting the Miracast standard, and you can also create 360-degree images with a new feature called Photo Sphere.

Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to test the video streaming feature. And from what I’ve seen, Photo Sphere still needs a lot of work. It’s simple enough to create the 360-degree images, but objects in the pictures often appear distorted. I’ve had far more luck with Microsoft’s under-appreciated Photosynth app.

When it comes to photos, the Nexus 4 finally brings a great camera to Google’s flagship lineup. I’ve been disappointed and mystified by the limitations of the past few Nexus cameras: The Nexus S, for some reason, didn’t have HD video recording, and the Galaxy Nexus had a better 5 megapixel camera with HD video, but it still produced merely average pictures. The Nexus 4’s 8-megapixel shooter is solid for both photos and videos, and it easily stacks up with HTC’s One X camera and the Galaxy S III. It’s not as miraculous as the iPhone 5’s camera or what I’ve seen from Nokia’s Lumia 920, but it’s a solid step up.

The Bad: The LTE problem has to be fixed

It’s simply tragic that, despite everything the Nexus 4 has going for it, the lack of LTE holds it back from being something I can easily recommend. I’ve tested plenty of LTE phones over the past few years, and it’s clear the technology has come far. LTE isn’t the battery hog it used to be, thanks to larger batteries and more efficient chipsets, which makes it perfectly suited for modern ultrathin smartphones.

So why doesn’t the Nexus 4 have LTE? It boils down to politics with cellular carriers and the economic reality of building a single device that appeals to the majority of the world. (The Verge has an in-depth exploration into the topic that’s well worth a read.) Google can’t use LTE networks without working with the carriers, and it doesn’t make much sense for it to spend the money to build in LTE when it’s primarily a feature for the U.S. But no matter the reason, missing out on such an essential feature will be inexcusable to consumers who have access to LTE.

The Nexus 4 supports HSPA+ networks, which both AT&T and T-Mobile are marketing as “4G.” But make no mistake, it’s a completely different level of 4G from LTE. I saw download speeds of around 2 to 3 megabits per second on AT&T’s HSPA+ network and upload speeds slightly below that. In comparison, both Verizon and AT&T’s LTE networks in New York City get me download speeds of 10 to 15 Mbps and upload speeds around 10 Mbps. Depending on where you are, LTE speeds can get even higher.

I can’t fathom why AT&T customers would want to buy a new phone that offers them slower speeds than LTE-equipped alternatives for the same monthly fee. T-Mobile users may find the Nexus 4 tempting since they don’t yet have access to LTE.

Last year’s Galaxy Nexus didn’t ship with LTE, but Google eventually released newer models that included the technology. Google had to give up some freedom with those LTE Nexus devices, though. Both Sprint and Verizon were slow to offer Android software updates, and Verizon initially blocked Google Wallet to promote its own alternatives. Since the Nexus devices are supposed to be “pure Android” experiences, where Google can control the entire software experience, it may be hesitant to be beholden to carriers once again.

I’ll admit, the LTE issue is primarily U.S.-specific. The Nexus 4 will work just fine on plenty of international networks, and if they support HSPA+, it should be plenty speedy. But I can’t help but think that U.S. consumers are getting a bad deal.

After seeing the glory of LTE, there’s no way I can recommend a phone without it. LTE isn’t just about being able to download massive files, its low latency makes almost anything you do on your phone happen instantly and effortlessly. For me, that boils down to a crucial email before I hit the subway, or a quick restaurant search without breaking conversation. Simply put, LTE means no more waiting.

Wrapping up: A solid phone with a critical flaw

Another year, another Nexus. There’s certainly plenty to like about the Nexus 4, especially if you’re not in an LTE-equipped area. If you’ve skipped the Galaxy Nexus, or are just looking to jump aboard the Android bandwagon, the Nexus 4 is a solid option.

But I’m hoping that with its next Nexus phone, Google finally offers us a flagship device that doesn’t leave us wanting. Now that it has a full Nexus lineup, Google should make sure that all of its flagship devices demonstrate the best Android has to offer. That means no more missing features, solid design, and Apple-levels of obsession (which we’re already seeing from Microsoft with the Surface).

There’s nothing too shocking about the first wave of iPad mini reviews, which hit the web last night.

For the most part, reviewers seemed pleased with the iPad mini’s small size and solid design — it’s less than half the weight of the 4th generation iPad, at just 0.68 pounds, and it’s also thinner than the incredibly thin iPhone 5 at 7.2 millimeters. And many reviewers found that it was more convenient to use than the larger iPad. (That’s something I’ve long been arguing about smaller tablets in general, they’re simply easier to hold for long periods of time.)

The glowing reviews came despite the mini’s low 1,024 by 768 resolution. Apple chose that resolution for the mini’s 7.9-inch screen because it’s exactly the same as the iPad 2, which means all iPad apps will run on the smaller tablet without a problem. But that low resolution makes pixels obvious, and it’s a far cry from the drool-worthy pixel densities of the Retina Display iPads. The mini is also much slower than the third- and fourth-generation iPads, but its convenient size seems to make up for that.

The iPad mini starts at $329 for the Wi-Fi only version with 16 gigabytes of storage, which doesn’t exactly make it competitive against 7-inch Android tablets that go for $199. But, as always, it seems Apple is completely indifferent to its competition.

Compared to cheap Android tablets like the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire, the iPad mini “far classier, more attractive, thinner,” wrote The New York Time’s David Pogue. He added, “Over all, the Mini gives you all the iPad goodness in a more manageable size, and it’s awesome. You could argue that the iPad Mini is what the iPad always wanted to be.”

“It doesn’t feel like Apple is racing to some lowest-price bottom — rather it seems to be trying to raise the floor,” wrote the Verge’s Joshua Topolsky. “And it does raise the floor here. There’s no tablet in this size range that’s as beautifully constructed, works as flawlessly, or has such an incredible software selection.”

And then there’s the screen. “The non-retina resolution is the one and only significant complaint I have with the iPad Mini, and it’s an issue that is only apparent to those of us who already own a nearly-new iPad,” wrote Daring Fireball’s John Gruber.

He added, “For anyone else — those who own an older iPad 1 or 2, and those who have yet to buy their first iPad — the iPad Mini’s display will garner no complaints. I prefer the Mini over the full-size iPad in every single regard other than display resolution, and though I (and many of you) obsess over display resolution, it’s not an issue in the mass market.”

Notably, Gruber admitted that he’s still switching to the iPad Mini, even without the benefit of a Retina Display.

Photo: John Koetsier/VentureBeat

It seems like ages ago when Microsoft simultaneously dazzled and puzzled the hell out of the public when it showed off Windows 8 for the first time in June 2011. Since then, we’ve seen Windows 8 evolve and slowly change perceptions about how it works and what devices it’s meant for. Finally, the OS is now available for purchase.

Just like Windows 8 has evolved, so has my opinion of the operating system. After using prerelease versions of Windows 8 for several months, I still prefer Windows 7, but I have no doubt Windows 8 will be my Windows of choice at some point. Microsoft will likely tweak the heck out of the OS after receiving massive amounts of customer feedback (after revealing yesterday that Windows 8 has seen more than 1.24 billion hours of early testing from consumers). In addition, third-party developers will create software that improves the Windows 8 experience. Sweet Labs’ Pokki app, which re-creates the Start button on the desktop, is one such example. Windows 8 is still evolving, and it will continue to do so for some time.

The future of the PC

Windows 8 represents the future of Microsoft and the PC itself. Essentially, the desktop of old is fading away in favor of ultrabooks, tablets, and hybrid devices like Samsung’s Smart PCs. VentureBeat executive editor Dylan Tweney believes Windows 8 will be a “test of whether the company can successfully manage the transition to a new era of computing.” I agree, and I believe Microsoft has the experience and leadership to accomplish this.

But of course, Windows 8 also faces plenty of criticism. The brash cloud computing visionary Marc Benioff, the CEO of customer-relation management giant Salesforce, recently called Windows 8 “the end of Windows” and claimed Windows itself was irrelevant in the new age of powerful smartphones and tablets.

Benioff might have a point: Windows as we know it is over — but Windows 8 could easily sit alongside iOS and Android as another powerhouse in mobile computing. And its real strength is that it’s not just a mobile OS. Unlike iOS and Android, Windows 8 can also power traditional computers without a sweat.

Microsoft’s Surface tablet, which has lots of personality and some noticeable flaws, is one such device that shows Microsoft’s commitment to reshape Windows. Surface is simply a preview of what’s to come in a year (or less). New Windows 8 tablets will be more cooked and the app ecosystem will likely be populated with all kinds of great software soon.

Beautiful, forward-thinking design

Windows 8′s Start screen (see photo above) replaces the Start button on the desktop as the place in which you launch apps. The Start screen is colorful, fun, and useful, and it looks quite similar to the tile-based design found on the Xbox 360 dashboard and Windows Phone devices. The Start menu tiles are helpful because they show real-time information, such as how many emails are unread, stock market prices, headlines, and more.

While the Start screen is easy to customize and understand, many people will want to retreat into the “desktop” mode. The desktop mode does basically everything you’ve done for years in Windows. The most helpful thing to do in desktop mode is to pin all your important programs to the taskbar so you never have to search for desktop-focused apps.

The easiest way to get back to the Start screen when using a keyboard is to tap the Windows key in the bottom left corner. When using a tablet device, you get back by swiping the right side of the screen and tapping the Start icon. When using a laptop touchpad, you swipe the right edge.

If you need to find an app, simply start typing while on the Start screen and a full list of results will pop up. This search function has saved me time when using Windows 8 because it can often find what you’re looking for faster.

Different feel across devices

The worst experience I’ve had with Windows 8 is on a traditional desktop PC with a mouse and keyboard. I truly believe Windows 8 is meant for touch-based devices like tablets and laptops with touchpads (and touchscreens). So things are a bit more awkward using a mouse and keyboard.

Consider right-clicking, which is now completely different from what you’re used to in Windows outside of the desktop interface. Instead of a menu of options appearing right where you clicked, a limited number of options appear at the bottom of the screen, and you have to move your mouse there to select them. This gets incredibly tedious in Windows 8 apps and on the Start screen.

Laptops are another story. It’s not quite as awkward using a laptop with Windows 8 because you have a touchpad. If you have a fairly recent laptop, the touchpad lets you take advantage of cool gestures that speed up using Windows 8. Moving your finger from the left edge of a trackpad scrolls through all of your recently used programs. Or if you swipe down from the top edge of a touchpad, you get the same options you’d usually get from double-clicking a mouse. You can’t use these slick gestures on older laptops, unfortunately.

The best experience I’ve had with Windows 8 so far was on tablets and hybrid tablet/laptop devices. I’ve played with the Microsoft Surface, Samsung’s tablet hybrids, Lenovo’s IdeaPad Yoga, Dell’s convertible XPS 12, and many others. When you can touch the icons on the Start screen, the OS feels much more natural.

Microsoft likes to say that Windows 8 is a “no compromise” version of Windows, but if you really want to feel that way, you need touch interactions. The emphasis on touch makes Windows 8 primed for the next decade of computing, but it also clearly signals the end of the mouse and keyboard as the ideal way to interact with Windows.

Under-the-hood improvements

One of the best things about Windows 8 is that it boots up and runs faster than Windows 7. An extensive study by PCMag indicates much faster boot-up times, higher benchmark scores, and speedier web browsing. Basically, Windows 8 can make a big difference in the performance department — even on some older computers.

This is one reason why I think some Windows XP and Vista users (yes, a ton of them are still out there) would enjoy the bump to Windows 8: Not only will you get a performance enhancement, but you’ll also get better security with software that’s getting many more updates from Microsoft. Make sure you meet the minimum requirements before even considering that upgrade though, because even “impossibly old” machines are beyond Windows 8′s help.

Apps

One of the most important factors for Windows 8′s success, like every computing platform, are the apps that take advantage of all of its features. (Since Microsoft ditched the term “Metro,” let’s call these “Modern” apps.) Some great apps are already in the Windows Store, but it’s important that third parties pump out fantastic software to make Windows 8 more attractive than iOS and Android.

Some aspects of Modern apps for Windows 8 are problematic, especially for desktop users. As I’ve noted before, Modern apps have a serious screen-splitting problem. In Windows 8, you can only allocate roughly 25 percent of the screen to one app while the other 75 percent is taken up by another app. As you can imagine, this layout is not conducive to multitasking. Thankfully, you can still do a 50-50 split, or whatever tiling you’re used to, in the desktop mode.

Relearning Windows

Windows 8 will require some relearning and retraining. Dell has even been smart enough to feature its own Windows 8 tutorials on the Start screen to hand-hold those who might freak out over the changes.

Here’s the good news — even a 3-year-old can use Windows 8. I have faith that anyone reading this article can also relearn how to use Windows and use it effectively. The question is — will people be willing to upgrade and relearn or will you simply adapt only after being forced to with a new PC purchase?

Should I upgrade?

Windows 8 costs $40 to download and upgrade using Microsoft’s Windows 8 Upgrade Assistant. Microsoft says the offer for a $40 upgrade expires on Jan. 31. (You can also purchase a physical copy of Windows 8 in stores for $70.) If you purchased a new non-Windows 8 PC after June 2 and before Jan. 31, 2013, you’re eligible to upgrade to Windows 8 Pro for just $15.

So you’re asking yourself, “should I upgrade?” If you’re normally an early adopter and like the changes described here, yes, you absolutely should give it a shot. If you’re a casual user, I would not upgrade immediately. Try Windows 8 out at a retailer like Best Buy or the Microsoft Store and let Microsoft issue some patches to fix the biggest bugs. Once you’ve tried it and understand how it works, it very well might be worth your money to upgrade.

To truly get the most Windows 8 has to offer, consider waiting until you purchase a new PC. After all, the entire impetus behind Windows 8 is its touch-centric interface and its capability to power new computing devices like the Surface and laptop/tablet hybrids. Given that it’s such a radically different operating system, it makes sense to experience it first on radically new devices.

For more on how to decide if you should upgrade and other must-know things about Windows 8, check out our article 8 things you need to know about Windows 8.

Final thoughts

Windows 8 is vital to the future of Microsoft and the PC market because it blends a touch-centric interface with the Windows we’ve known for years. It’s not for everyone, especially casual Windows 7 users that refuse to relearn Windows. But power users and those who embrace change well will find a lot to like here.

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Apple’s iPhone 5 may not look like a major update at first glance — it’s only 20 percent thinner, and its screen is only a half-inch taller than the iPhone 4S’s — but altogether, the seemingly minor changes add up to something huge.

This isn’t just a revamped iPhone — it’s the ideal iPhone.

That may be tough to believe if you haven’t had the chance to use it yet, especially since popular Android phones like Samsung’s Galaxy S III — with its massive 4.8-inch screen, NFC support, and removable battery — seem to dominate the iPhone 5 in terms of features.

But as Apple has repeatedly shown throughout the years, a great product isn’t made from a checklist of specifications. Instead, it comes from building a great experience, something that Apple has paid significantly more attention to than any other consumer electronics company.

The iPhone 5 is by far the best experience I’ve ever had using a smartphone, even if it’s not the first to feature a 4-inch screen and LTE 4G connectivity. It’s the culmination of everything Apple has been trying to accomplish since it stepped into the mobile industry — the only question now is, where can the company go from here?

The good: Almost everything

Holy crap, is this thing thin and light. Yes, everyone is saying it, but I can’t help but add to the chorus. It could be particularly noticeable because I’ve been using the iPhone 4 and iPhone 4S over the past two years, both of which have always felt a bit hefty (mostly due to the glass front and rear).

With the iPhone 5, Apple went for a sturdier anodized aluminum back, which not only makes the phone much lighter — it weighs 112 grams, while the iPhone 4 weighs 137 grams — but also makes it feel less fragile overall. (The iPhone 4 is actually 4 grams heavier than the Galaxy S III, a figure that’s particularly shocking considering the Galaxy has a huge 4.8-inch screen, while the older iPhone has a 3.5-inch display.)

The 25 gram difference between the iPhone 5 and iPhone 4 is immediately apparent when you first pick it up, and it makes going back to my iPhone 4S feel painful. The lighter weight also makes a big difference in general usage — prolonged reading on the iPhone feels more comfortable, and there’s no stress on your wrist when playing games.

The iPhone 5′s light weight, coupled with its incredibly thin 7.6 millimeter width (a small, but noticeable, difference from the 9.3mm wide iPhone 4), makes it easy to forget you’re holding a powerful smartphone. At the same time, the iPhone 5 doesn’t feel as flimsy as Android competitors with plastic cases.

That sturdiness is a good thing, as you have even more screen to potentially break with the iPhone 5. Evolving from Apple’s traditional 3.5-inch mobile display size, which has so far remained the same since the first iPhone (though other improvements, like the iPhone 4′s Retina Display helped keep the smaller screens fresh), the iPhone 5 features a 4-inch display.

Sporting a 1,136 by 640 pixel resolution, the display isn’t any wider than previous iPhones, but it’s much taller. Now you can watch widescreen movies without black bars on the iPhone’s screen. Text-heavy apps like Instapaper and CNN’s news app feel almost paperback-like with the newer screen. Color accuracy seems slightly improved from the iPhone 4S.  On the home screen, you also get an added row of app icons.

Overall, the bigger screen gives the iPhone 5 and iOS much more room to breathe. It’s still smaller than many Android competitors (indeed, 4-inch Android phones are considered mid-range now), but I think it’s a wise balance between screen size and portability. The taller screen also allows the iPhone 5 to rest more firmly in your hand (though the skinny jeans contingent may have trouble pocketing and retrieving the phone).

It’s all about speed

I was impressed even before turning the phone on, but once you do, Apple’s methodical polish becomes even more apparent. Thanks to the revamped A6 processor, even the most intensive games load quickly. Epic’s Infinity Blade II, for example, took less than two seconds to load from the title screen to gameplay, while it took the iPhone 4S around 20 seconds (!) to do the same. That sense of speediness extends across everything you do on the iPhone 5: apps open faster, multitasking is seamless.

There’s simply no more waiting.

Just how fast is the A6 chip? The hardware gurus at Anandtech put it through a string of tests, and not surprisingly it beat out every other high-end smartphone in most. On average, the iPhone 5 performed around twice as fast as the iPhone 4S. In my usage though, it felt even faster.

With such a powerful processor, it’s fitting that Apple finally made the jump to LTE 4G with the iPhone 5. The new wireless technology promises speeds five to ten times faster than 3G, but just as significant, it offers greatly improved response times. So even if you’re not getting ridiculously fast LTE speeds, the iPhone 5 will still feel zippier than the iPhone 4S when relying on the cellular network, and it’s also better suited for fast-paced online gaming.

Using AT&T’s LTE network in Brooklyn and Manhattan, I saw speeds between 2 megabits per second and 9 Mbps for both uploads and downloads. The 4G network was particularly hammered on the iPhone 5′s launch day with download speeds below 1 Mbps in Brooklyn, but things have picked up since then. While faster than typical 3G, AT&T’s LTE speeds disappointed me because I’m used to seeing download and upload figures between 10 Mbps and 20 Mbps on Android phones. Just like how AT&T’s 3G network crumbled under the onslaught of the iPhone, I’m worried that the carrier’s LTE network is similarly unprepared.

On Verizon Wireless, which had almost a year-long headstart on building its LTE network, iPhone 5 owners in New York City that I’ve talked to reported download speeds around 15 Mbps and upload speeds around 10Mbps. It could just be that AT&T’s LTE network isn’t as mature in the areas I’m testing, but the speed disparity is enough to make me considering jumping to Verizon when I get my own iPhone 5.

Even with my disappointing LTE speeds, the phone still feels zippier than the iPhone 4S. And once I hit killer LTE speeds, the iPhone 5 feels indistinguishable from a home Wi-Fi network (and at times, it performs even better than many home broadband setups).

Next: Battery performance, camera, and the trouble with iOS 6

Pages: 1 2

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Despite some complaints that the iPhone 5 was a “boring” update, early reviews for the phone are overwhelmingly positive, praising its thin and light design, fast processor and LTE 4G speeds, and larger 4-inch display.

The glowing reviews aren’t too surprising — heck, reviewers (including this one) generally loved last years iPhone 4S, which didn’t have any exterior improvements over its predecessor. If anything is boring about a new iPhone, it’s the usual back and forth between gadgethounds expecting something better and Apple fans shouting “I told you so!” when positive reviews hit.

One of the biggest iPhone 5 issues reviewers pointed out is actually an iOS 6 problem: Apple’s new Maps application, which replaces the mainstay Google Maps app. The Wall Street Journal’s Walt Mossberg writes:

The app is in other ways a step backward from the familiar Google app. For instance, while Apple’s maps feature a 3-D “Flyover” view of some central cities, they lack Google’s very useful ground-level photographic street views. And they also lack public-transit routing. Apple will instead link you to third-party transit apps.

These issues will affect existing iPhone users who upgrade to iOS 6, and I suspect the backlash will be tremendous. My biggest annoyance with Apple’s Map app so far is fairly simple: for whatever reason, it doesn’t have any subway station locations for New York City, something that’s been in Google Maps since the iPhone launched.

But while Apple’s new Maps app has its issues, it does finally bring native turn-by-turn navigation to the iPhone, and its 3D map view is impressive.

The New York Time’s David Pogue takes issue with the iPhone 5′s new Lightning dock connector, even though he acknowledges some of its good points (namely, its small size and reversible design):

It doesn’t fit any existing accessories, docks or chargers. Apple sells an adapter plug for $30 (or $40 with an eight-inch cable “tail”). If you have a few accessories, you could easily pay $150 in adapters for a $200 phone. That’s not just a slap in the face to loyal customers — it’s a jab in the eye.

But despite these problems, both Pogue and Mossberg praised practically everything else about the iPhone 5.

The Loop’s Jim Dalrymple points out that not having a screen as large as Android behemoths may actually be a good thing for the iPhone 5:

The most important point of Apple’s larger iPhone screen is that it’s not too large. I know that sounds strange, but bigger is not always better. If the screen is so big that you can’t comfortably operate the iPhone 5 with one hand, then Apple would have failed.

But they didn’t. I am able to easily navigate through the iPhone 5 menus and options using one hand. My thumb reaches the top of the screen to tap on options and hit the back button without shuffling the phone in my hand.

I’ll be getting my hands on the iPhone 5 on Friday, so check back here for our review soon!

Photo: Dean Takahashi/VentureBeat

But dive a little deeper and it seems that OpenTable seems to be doing a lot better in collecting reviews for restaurants: For the top four most-reviewed restaurants on OpenTable in the last four months, the company has collected 6,307 reviews. For those same restaurants, Yelp has collected 4,001 reviews all time. OpenTable has 50% more information on the performance of those restaurants in the last 120 days than Yelp has in its history. OpenTable has collected 40,000 reviews all time for those restaurants, 10x the number of data points.

Yelp did not respond to a request for comment on this story.

The business that Yelp frequently cites as the most reviewed business on Yelp, Bi-Rite Creamery, has 4,969 reviews. (Because it’s not a restaurant that takes reservations, it’s not listed on OpenTable.) Given that OpenTable’s most reviewed restaurant, Founding Farmers, had nearly 2,500 reviews in just the past four months and opened in 2008, it’s a reasonable bet that it has more total reviews than Bi-Rite. In that same four-month period, Bi-Rite had fewer than 350 new reviews added.

(These numbers aren’t as apples-to-apples as I’d like because of differences in data that the two companies provide. But the difference in scale is sizable.)

OpenTable has a big advantage over Yelp: it has the opportunity to close the loop and collect reviews, much like Netflix does once you’ve watched a movie. OpenTable seats 9 million diners a month. After they are confirmed to have shown up by the restaurant, they get an email survey. As a result, OpenTable collects more than 450,000 reviews a month. That’s a very healthy 5% response rate. Companies like Google and Apple could do similarly. If you looked up a restaurant or a business and navigated to it, you could be prompted to leave a review. (Yelp does this if you have checked into a business, but that feature doesn’t seem to be used frequently.)

Why does this data matter? Because more data allows you to make better recommendations.

In categories like restaurants, chefs and menus change frequently. Freshness is important in restaurant ingredients, it’s also important in restaurant reviews.

More data also means you can better personalize based on a user’s habits. Although this isn’t something that OpenTable currently does, personalization is one of the things on the company’s roadmap, CEO Matt Roberts told me in an interview.

The quality of OpenTable’s reviews is also higher because only people whose restaurant visits have been confirmed are eligible to review. With Yelp, anyone can post a review, whether they’ve been to a restaurant or not. This barrier makes OpenTable less susceptible to spam and nasty reviews by competitors. Yelp tries to address this problem with its automated review filter — which has the effect of hiding 21% of user reviews because Yelp can’t figure out whether they’re trustworthy. (It also annoys restaurateurs because they believe that the filter removes positive reviews as retaliation for not advertising on Yelp.)

Because OpenTable is directly paid for by the restaurants that are on the service, some may question the integrity of the reviews.

“There is a process for a restaurant to contest a review,” said OpenTable spokeswoman Tiffany Fox. “But I haven’t heard of it happening very often and to have a review taken down would require a very cut and dry scenario (e.g. the diner said they hated the duck and we don’t even serve duck … here’s the menu.)”

I did find plenty of negative reviews as I browsed around OpenTable.

Having the reviews isn’t enough, though. OpenTable needs to make much better use of them than it does today.

[Top image credit: Africa Studio/Shutterstock]

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Samsung’s latest tablet, the Galaxy Note 10.1, has just about everything you’d want, as well as many things you’d never even think to ask for. But while its theoretically an impressive device, the Note 10.1 is a good example of why cramming in too much hardware and features without a cohesive direction can lead to disaster.

If you couldn’t tell by the name alone, the Note 10.1 is what happens when you marry Samsung’s Galaxy Note smartphone (which has sold surprisingly well despite its bulky 5.3-inch size) with its Galaxy Tab slates. The Note 10.1′s key feature is the S Pen stylus, a radically improved version of the one found with the Galaxy Note, which lets you treat the tablet like a piece of digital paper for scribbling notes and drawings.

With the S Pen and clever multitasking capabilities, Samsung is hoping to elevate the Note 10.1 beyond its tablet trappings and position it as a true productivity device. That’s smart: A common complaint with tablets is that they’re great for consuming media, but without a keyboard, they’re not that useful for doing actual work. But for all of its effort, Samsung has ended up crafting a tablet that could actually make it more difficult for you to get things done.

The Good: It dares to be different

The best thing about the Galaxy Note 10.1 is more conceptual than an actual feature. After being assaulted by dozens of similar Android tablets over the past few years (the Nexus 7 is the only one I’d ever recommend, unless I don’t like you very much), it’s nice to see Samsung actually trying to do something different with this one. Samsung’s vision may not have been entirely successful, but like Ridley Scott’s pretty-but-dumb movie Prometheus this summer, you can at least appreciate the effort.

Even though the Galaxy Note 10.1 was officially unveiled in the U.S. last week, we first saw it back at Mobile World Congress in February. Samsung representatives told VentureBeat that it almost released the Note 10.1 several times this year, but constant retooling held the tablet back. Since February, Samsung has added a slot to hold the S Pen stylus at the bottom of the device (a useful feature, but one that really should have been there since the beginning), and the capability to multitask apps by running them side-by-side.

Samsung was clearly desperate to get this tablet right. Ultimately, we see more desperation than success from the Galaxy Note 10.1, but I’m hoping that Samsung will eventually refine some of the interesting features in this tablet. For one, running apps side-by-side is actually useful on a tablet: You could, for example, browse the web and jot down notes at the same time. But Samsung only offers the feature with a few apps on the Note 10.1, and occasional slowdowns make it a chore. I’m impatient for the day when we can multitask on a tablet as easily as PCs (or at least some PCs), but it looks like I’ll have to wait a bit longer.

I found the S Pen to be an interesting curiosity in the original Galaxy Note, a phone that’s so dorky I couldn’t help but dig it. The stylus is even more useful on the larger tablet screen, since your hand can rest more naturally and you have more room on which to scribble. With 1,024 levels of pressure sensitivity and Wacom technology (beloved by digital artists), the S Pen is by far the most powerful tablet stylus we’ve seen. Handwriting feels more accurate than that of the original Galaxy Note, and I have a feeling that artists will love the S Pen’s flexibility when it comes to drawing and manipulating images with the bundled Photoshop Touch app.

Samsung also added some additional functionality to its S Note software: Now you can draw shapes and write mathematical equations within the app, and they’ll be translated into cleaner versions that look like they were created on a computer.

With all of those improvements, it’s just too bad that Samsung’s Android tweaks hold the S Pen back.

The bad: Just about everything else

The Galaxy Note 10.1 sports a gorgeous 10-inch screen and some blazing fast hardware, including a quad-core 1.4 gigahertz Exynos processor and 2GBs of RAM, and yet the tablet inexplicably feels slow when performing simple tasks. It’s sometimes sluggish when moving between home screens or switching between apps, and it’s particularly problematic when you try to run two apps side-by side.

You can blame Samsung’s TouchWiz software for those issues, which rests atop the Note 10.1’s Android 4.0 operating system. TouchWiz was one of the few glaring issues with the Galaxy S III smartphone, but Samsung is clearly too eager to put its stamp on Android instead of slimming down its software. Not only does TouchWiz make the Note 10.1 occasionally slow, it sometimes gets in the way of the S Pen, which is supposed to be the tablet’s core feature.

Samsung could potentially offer some software updates that makes TouchWiz perform better, and it might improve the Note 10.1’s speed when it upgrades the tablet to Android 4.1, but that’s a long shot. From what we’ve seen in the past, Samsung doesn’t move very quickly with Android updates, and I haven’t seen TouchWiz performance get better over time on any other Samsung devices.

While Samsung touts the tablet as a productivity machine, the speed issues actually make it more difficult to get work done than on Apple’s iPad, which has no stylus and lacks side-by-side app multitasking. It’s particularly disappointing given that the Note 10.1 has more than enough hardware to be speedy. Instead, it’s betrayed by sloppy software.

The Galaxy Note 10.1’s speed issues are even more troubling after the release of the $200 Nexus 7, which offers the fastest Android tablet experience we’ve ever seen. Given that the Note 10.1 is priced the same as the iPad, starting at $499 for the 16GB version, and sports some of the most impressive hardware in a mobile device, there’s just no excuse for not being as fast as a tablet less than half its price.

For $499, the Note 10.1 also feels surprisingly cheap, thanks to Samsung’s love of glossy plastic cases. The rear of the device feels shockingly flexible, and the glossy material is also a terrible fingerprint magnet. Again, the Nexus 7 beats the Note 10.1 on this. The Nexus 7 just feels like a more expensive and luxurious device, which is simply inexcusable for Samsung.

The verdict: The biggest tablet disappointment of the year

Ultimately, the Galaxy Note 10.1 feels like a hodgepodge of great ideas mixed in with plenty of bad ones. It’s almost as if there was no one at Samsung who could simply say “no” to the pile-on of features. In its attempt to create a powerful multitasking tablet, Samsung has created a monster.

I’m notoriously cynical about tablets, especially those of the Android variety. At this point, I’ve grown numb to the “me too” Android tablets, which generally offer nothing unique to differentiate themselves from the competition. But the Galaxy Note 10.1 is an even bigger disappointment to me because Samsung actually tried to be innovative — it just missed the mark by a mile.

There was plenty of promise in bringing the S Pen to a tablet, but the Galaxy Note 10.1 unfortunately fails to live up to that because it’s ultimately not a very good tablet. No amount of extra accessories, however useful, will fix that.

I’m hoping this isn’t the end of the S Pen. Samsung should keep refining the technology and continue to feature it in upcoming devices (the Galaxy Note II is expected to debut next month). The company has hit on an interesting concept, it just needs to get the execution down.

The Silicon Valley makers of iPhone application Ness have received a five-star review from investors. The company closed a $15 million round led by SingTel Innov8, the venture arm of Singapore Telecommunications.

Founded in 2009, Ness Computing intends to help people discover places. The startup released Ness for iPhone one year ago, and the application pivots around a “likeness” score that predicts how much a customer will like a restaurant, using a 0 to 100 percent scoring system. Users leave bite-sized reviews in the form of one to five-star ratings, and Ness combines those ratings with social data from Foursquare and Facebook to perfect its score.

Ness ultimately wants to tell you more than where to just grab a bite or pick up a cup of coffee; it wants to show you what to do, see, and buy. American Express, existing investors Khosla Ventures and Alsop Louie Partners, and an affiliate of the LeFrak Organization participated in the startup’s latest round, which Ness will use to develop into more of a personal shopping tool for mobile.

The three-year-old company, which competes with Yelp and Foursquare, has the multimillion-dollar confidence of investors because the algorithms used in Ness’s search and recommendations engines can be applied to areas such as bars, nightlife, travel, movies, music, shopping, and beyond, Ness cofounder Corey Reese said.

“The risk area that we’ve mitigated … was that core technology development,” Reese said, comparing the sophistication of his company’s search technologies to those employed by Google, Amazon, and Apple.

But a startup that’s hesitant to share the size of its active user base, as is this case with Ness, is not one that typically instills confidence in its health (at least for this reporter). Reese insisted, however, that Ness intentionally chose not to focus on user growth and opted instead to improve the technology powering the application.

“We’re using this next round of financing to focus on growing the user base and getting out into these additional categories,” he said. “We spent a lot of time improving our recommendation technology, developing our own new algorithms … and we’ve been generating a tremendous amount of data from our users.”

On the data front, Ness users have contributed more than 3 million ratings to the system since the iPhone application’s release last August. On average, people generate 17 ratings the first time they start using Ness, Reese said.

In addition to going after users, Ness will apply its fresh $15 million in financing to move into the new verticals mentioned above, piece together even more signals from channels such as Twitter and credit card transactions to perfect the scoring algorithm, and continue to focus on product craftsmanship, Reese said. The startup also hopes to release an application for Android by early next year.

Ness Computing has raised $20 million in total funding to date.

Photo credit: christian.senger/Flickr

In the constant cycle of tablet and smartphone news, the seemingly minor upgrade to Apple’s MacBook Air barely made headlines. That’s not really surprising, especially after the announcement of the Retina ready MacBook Pro. A next generation Intel CPU and graphics processor, USB 3.0 ports, and more flash storage don’t sound all that impressive.

In reality, this iterative update makes the MacBook Air the perfect laptop.

Same on the outside, shiny on the inside

Generally considered the premier Ultrabook (though it’s not officially labeled one), the MacBook Air is an excellent laptop that offers a near-perfect balance of size and power. It remains the thinnest and lightest 13” and 11” Ultrabook on the market.

I liked last year’s 13” model so much that I bought one, and still find the design and power superb for most personal and work applications. But what’s remarkable about the 2012 model — and this has nothing to do with Apple — is the performance boost gained solely from Intel’s latest Ivy Bridge chipset.

Last year’s MacBook Air ran on the then-new Sandy Bridge i5 processor, and my model was the top-of-the-line i7 with 4GB of RAM, priced at $1,800. The latest unit drops the price by $100 and offers the updated i5 or i7 at faster clock speeds while also doubling the RAM to 8GB. For less money, this year’s stock MacBook Air outperforms last year’s high-end model by 150% for nearly every application. (The 13-inch MacBook Air starts at $1,199 for a 1.8Ghz i5 processor and 4GB of RAM.)

Aside from the internal components, little has actually changed with the MBA. It uses the same heat dissipation techniques, the same basic architecture, the same display, and the same keyboard. There are a few differences, like improved viewing angles and increased brightness on the glossy 1440 by 900 display, as well as better color accuracy, something the 2011 model has serious trouble with. The keys are also slightly elevated for a deeper feeling keyboard, which is more comfortable to type with. Put the two models together however and anyone would have trouble knowing which was newer.

Improved enough to all but eliminate the problems

Stress the laptops, however, and there’s a world of difference. Pull up 20-30 YouTube clips; try streaming several bandwidth- and processor-intensive videos; run intensive applications like Adobe Photoshop with dozens of photos; boot capable games like Half-Life 2 or Flash-hungry titles like The Binding of Isaac…and the 2011 model’s fan will scream bloody Mary, the left side of the keyboard will heat up to around 100°F, and you’ll need headphones and a hard surface to keep going. The fan gets extremely loud and the keyboard gets way too hot. On the 2012 MBA the same thing can happen, but it rarely does.

That is to say, the overheating and loud fan hasn’t been fixed. This newer model is susceptible to both. With enough stress the left side of the unibody shell will overheat and become uncomfortable to type on, especially if you’re out in the sun. The fan can still stir up a hailstorm of noise. But thanks to the improved performance of Ivy Bridge, it’s nearly impossible to run enough everyday applications to stress the Air to that point. Except for intensive games like Half-Life 2, the 2012 MBA remained calm, cool, and pleasant to use. No matter how many browser tabs, office applications, or how much media you have running, the MacBook Air performs flawlessly.

Using the new Ivy Bridge chipset has another exceptional benefit from the higher performance: battery life is greatly improved. On the 2011 MBA battery life ranged from 4-7 hours, and usually closer to the lower side of that if running streaming video or stressful applications. That is boosted to 5.5-8 hours on the newer MBA, which is a remarkable upgrade for an identical 50-watt-hour battery. And because heat is rarely a problem, I averaged closer to seven hours of battery life per charge. (Protip: Use an extension like FlashBlock to disable Flash on any MacBook Air model for a big bump in battery life.)

The perfect ultrabook

In so many ways, the latest MacBook Air is a dream come true for anyone interested in upgrading to a thin, light, and still powerful laptop. Better performance, an improved display and keyboard, greatly improved battery life and thermals because of the performance boost…all for $100 less than last year’s model. Throw in USB 3.0 and the laptop is officially future-proof.

Products like the MacBook Air 13” (2012) make iterative updates like internal components so much more pertinent than evolutionary upgrades. The only downside? People who purchased last year’s model will want to upgrade because the performance boost makes all the difference in the world. If you barely stress the 2011 model now, then hold fast. But if you find that your MacBook Air screams like a banshee and has the average lifespan of a fruit fly, upgrading will be costly, but worthwhile.

Photos: James Pikover/VentureBeat

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

While Motorola’s Droid Razr and Droid Razr Maxx are two of the best phones around now, the pair has, sadly, been available only to customers of Verizon. That’s changing today with the release of the Atrix HD, a phone that borrows heavily from both of its predecessors, while somehow managing to stay really cheap. That’s no small feat, and it makes the Atrix HD the type of device that demands your attention and consideration.

The Good: The poor man’s Droid Razr with a fabulous screen

My initial reaction to the Atrix HD was wondering whether Motorola had accidentally sent me a Droid Razr. While it was clear from press shots that the design of Atrix HD was inspired by the Droid Razr, I wasn’t prepared for just how much the two phones resemble each other. The pair have the same shape, the same Kevlar backing, and the same sturdy look and feel.

Make no mistake, the Atrix HD is AT&T’s very own Droid Razr.

As a result, it’s hard to say that the Atrix HD pushes the design envelope on any level. But then again, it’s not really meant to. Instead, the device aims to be yet another enticing addition to AT&T’s lineup of $99 phones, which is pretty amazing considering the features it offers.

By far the most impressive of these features is its 4.5-inch high-definition display. Dubbed “ColorBoost,” the screen technology displays colors that are bright and sharp, making the experience of viewing things on the phone legitimately enjoyable.

(One thing that I like to do with phone reviews is ask for what I call knee-jerk “blink” reactions from people I know. My mother’s blink reaction: “It’s very light. I want this.” That’s a good sign for Motorola and AT&T, clearly.)

Another feature that still remains one of the best parts of Motorola’s phones is Smart Actions, Motorola’s task automation software. Capable of performing a variety of tasks when certain conditions are met, the application can, for example, turn your phone’s ringer off when you get to work, or automatically send a text message to your loved ones when you get home. The possibilities are very broad, and, fortunately, Smart Actions will suggest actions based on how you use your phone. The functionality remains a big selling point for Motorola’s devices.

I’m also a fan of Motorola’s new Circle Widget, which offers easy access to information like data usage stats, battery info, the weather, and time.

The bad: Dude, where’s my Lapdock?

What’s really surprising about the Atrix HD is that Motorola has stripped from it two of the Atrix line’s most central features: The Lapdock attachment, and its accompanying desktop-like Webtop environment. Together, they allowed past Atrix models to double as ultraportable laptops (albeit with very limited capabilities).

Motorola says that it removed the features from the Atrix HD in an effort to keep the price of the device down — an imperative no doubt pushed heavily by AT&T. Seeing as how the price of the Lapdock was one if its biggest criticisms, perhaps this is a move that won’t significantly affect sales of Atrix HD in the end.

Then again, with Lapdock support gone, why call the Atrix HD an Atrix at all?

And then there’s the battery life, which is, well, not great. Likely for the same cost-cutting reasons mentioned above, Motorola decided to not give the Atrix HD the Droid Razr Maxx’s 3300mAh battery, which was the device’s central selling point.

That’s a disappointment. While removing the souped-up battery does keep the price low and the profile slim, it’s clear that the Atrix HD’s bright 4.5-inch screen takes a major toll on its battery. Let’s just hope Motorola eventually releases a Atrix HD Maxx.

The bottom line: A great buy for $99

The thing worth keeping in mind with the Atrix HD is that all of its features come at $99, a realty that puts the device’s downsides in perspective. Moreover, when you compare the Atrix HD to similarly priced phones on AT&T — the Nokia Lumia 900, the iPhone 4, and the Galaxy S II, for example — it’s hard to find a better deal. That’s bad news for Nokia, sure, but it’s great news for Motorola, which has found a formula for design that works extremely well.

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

The Nexus 7 isn’t a revolutionary tablet, but it’s certainly an evolutionary one: a device that builds on the mistakes and successes of Android tablets thus far. It’s the first to crawl out of the ocean of terrible Android slates, and on the way it’s crushed the slower and weaker Kindle Fire (which was oh-so-close). Call it natural tablet selection.

While the iPad remains the undisputed king of tablets, it’s hard to ignore just how much the Nexus 7 gets right. It’s light enough to hold with one hand, powerful enough to run complex apps and games, and best of all, it’s just $200. Apple may have the shiniest tablet on the block, but the Nexus 7 is by far the best value of any mobile device, be it smartphone or slate.

Before the Nexus 7 was officially unveiled, I argued that we shouldn’t expect anything truly revolutionary from a Google tablet — and I’m sticking to that. The Nexus 7 doesn’t do anything new, it just does it better and cheaper than any 7-inch tablet thus far. And combined with Android 4.1 Jelly Bean, it’s the best experience I’ve had with Google’s mobile OS to date.

The Good: Fast, powerful, filled with Jelly Bean

In my initial hands-on with the Nexus 7, I was shocked by how luxurious it felt for a budget-priced tablet. After spending several days with it, I’m even more impressed by what Asus (which built the tablet under Google’s guidance) was able to accomplish. As I sped through dozens of tabs in Chrome, watched YouTube videos, and jammed through Spotify playlists — often multi-tasking between all of these apps — the Nexus 7 didn’t break a sweat.

Simply put, the tablet never gets in your way, which to me is the hallmark of a great computing device.

It’s no surprise why the Nexus 7 is such a speed demon: It sports a quad-core Tegra 3 processor and 1 gigabyte of RAM, specs typically found in much more expensive devices. Amazon’s Kindle Fire, which struggles just to browse the web and is the only successful Android tablet to date, can’t hold a candle to the Nexus 7.

Asus didn’t skimp on the tablet’s other hardware either (save for the small amount of storage, more on that below). Its 7-inch screen offers a 1,280 x 800 resolution (good enough for 720p HD video), and since it’s an IPS display, it offers rich colors, wide viewing angles, and good outdoor performance. After “testing” plenty of HD video and magazines, I found the Nexus 7’s screen to be among the best on an Android tablet (save for Samsung’s slates).

The hefty 4325 mAh battery is rated for nine hours of video playback and 300 hours of standby. I only needed to charge the Nexus 7 every other day when using it for web browsing, Twitter, and the occasional video. The strong battery life is key, since it will make the Nexus 7 a useful companion to your existing laptop.

While the powerful hardware is great, what makes the Nexus 7 such a joy to use is how much Android 4.1 Jelly Bean improves on the Android experience. You can thank Google’s “Project Butter” for that, an initiative that was dedicated to making Android feel as smooth as butter. New enhancements, like triple buffering in the graphics pipeline and Vsync, which keeps the device’s framerate in sync with the display, make for the most tactile Android experience yet. Overall, it feels like the OS is now ready and waiting for your input — a sensation that iOS and Windows Phone has given me, but never Android.

Since it’s running a full version of Android, the Nexus 7 also gives you access to all of the apps on Google Play. Amazon’s Kindle Fire, notably, only lets you access a select few apps.

Aside from the big fit and finish improvements, Jelly Bean also includes some intriguing voice search capabilities. As always, you can perform web searches with your voice, but Jelly Bean also taps into Google’s Knowledge Base to get you Siri-like answers to simple questions. The OS manages to outdo Apple’s virtual assistant with Google Now, an intelligent search feature that learns your habits and provides information without your input. For example, Google Now can tell you if your bus or train is delayed, without any prompting, as you’re making your morning commute.

I didn’t use the Nexus 7 long enough for it to learn my habits, but I’m intrigued by the possibility of Google Now. The other voice search capabilities work about as well for me as Siri does for the iPhone.

It’s worth noting how Apple and Google are positioning their virtual assistants: For Apple it’s a virtual being; for Google it’s all tied into search. That makes sense for Google, though, as the voice search in Jelly Bean feels like the biggest advancement in the company’s search technology for years.

Eventually, you won’t be typing queries into Google.com — you’ll be speaking them aloud to a search prompt on your mobile (or wearable) device. Jelly Bean gives us our closest glimpse so far into Google’s search future.

The bad: Few storage options

Flash memory is expensive, so it comes as no surprise that Asus went as low as it could to get the Nexus 7 down to $200. With 8-gigabytes of storage, the entry-level Nexus 7 is on par with the Kindle Fire. If you’re going to be streaming most of your media, as I expect many will, this likely won’t be a problem. But eventually, you’ll begin to feel the crunch of storage space, especially as you pile on the apps.

If you need more storage space, your only other option right now is the 16GB Nexus 7 for $250. If the tablet takes off, as I expect it will, I wouldn’t be surprised to see a 32GB version eventually pop up.

It’s funny that, in its quest to create the perfect Android tablet, Asus didn’t include one of the few useful features currently found on many Android devices: support for additional storage with microSD cards. Given that you can now buy a 32GB microSD card for around $20, it seems like a no-brainer to support additional storage cards.

The verdict: The best 7-inch tablet yet

Aside from its limited storage, there’s little I can fault with the Nexus 7. It’s fast, light, and cheap, but it also feels like it costs twice as much. We’ve already seen consumers go crazy for ultra-cheap tablets like the discounted HP Touchpad, so I expect the Nexus 7 to do quite well once it’s available in retail stores (right now you can only pre-order it from Google).

Before the Nexus 7, I’d never have recommended an Android tablet to anyone. The Kindle Fire was a nice effort, but it quickly became apparent that it was too underpowered and limited in its scope. This tablet, in comparison, should please even the pickiest consumers.

I’m still not convinced Google actually understands tablets, but the Nexus 7 proves it’s at least trying to.

Design is determining the winners in everything mobile. The most successful players are focusing on one thing: How to make products, services, and devices as compelling and delightful as possible – visually, and experientially. MobileBeat 2012, July 10-11 in San Francisco , is assembling the most elite minds to debate how UI/UX is transforming every aspect of the mobile economy, and where the opportunities lie. Register here.

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Hotshot investor Fritz Lanman has just launched a new iPhone app called Livestar that aims to upend reviews services like Yelp, Metacritic, and Rotten Tomatoes. It even takes shots at Foursquare.

Livestar’s app lets you see reviews for restaurants, movies, and music from “trusted sources” like newspapers and blogs that are near your location. You can also use your Facebook friends and people in your contact list to help get more recommendations. Eventually, the app will also include categories like TV shows, apps, books, apparel, and wine.

“We want to take the friction out of the reviews process,” Lanman said.

If you take a look at the photo above, you can see that the app includes features we’ve all come to expect from a social networking app. You can see your friends’ reviews and recommendations, a news feed for reading and responding to people’s banter about things being reviewed, and there’s a tab for sending out a note to friends, asking them for help when you want to crowdsource an answer.

Lanman says that Livestar will connect with consumers because it fills the reviews void better than any other alternative. He says Yelp is “controlled by a small hyper-local minority” and is filled with “paid reviews.” Foursquare has “high quality sources” (your friends) but the “signal is shitty and you have to rely on check-ins.” Metacritic, Lanman says, does not let you narrow down sources as well as Livestar, as the app lets you refine the search as deep as “comedy movie reviews by the New York Times.”

At this point, I’m not convinced people will use Livestar over Metacrtic or Rotten Tomatoes because those are well-established services that let you get a consensus of trusted sources and everyday users. But when it comes to restaurants (and in the future, mobile apps), Livestar has a strong proposition. People always need to eat, and there isn’t a popular Yelp-like app that aggregates professional restaurant reviews. The app is also constructed in such a way that you can give a place one to five stars by tapping on a rating, and you don’t have to write a review, so people might use it more than Yelp.

Lanman, a former senior director at Microsoft and an investor in Pinterest, Square, Chartbeat, and other notable startups, adds a high level of pedigree to the project. He’s been a deals guy and a savvy investor for a long while, so it’s interesting to see him at the helm of an iPhone app startup.

Seattle-based Livestar has about 10 employees and has raised $2 million in funding to date, with an impressive roster of investors, including SV Angel, Chernin Group, Morado Ventures, and Beehive Ventures, and individuals like Ray Ozzie, Matt Mullenweg, Don Mattrick, Max Ventilla, Hunter Walk, Mike Slade, and Charles Songhurst.

Check out Livestar’s slick video for more on the company’s vision:

Photo credit: Shutterstock

Design is determining the winners in everything mobile. The most successful players are focusing on one thing: How to make products, services, and devices as compelling and delightful as possible – visually, and experientially. MobileBeat 2012, July 10-11 in San Francisco , is assembling the most elite minds to debate how UI/UX is transforming every aspect of the mobile economy, and where the opportunities lie. Register here.

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

With the Galaxy S III, Samsung is downright flaunting its expertise with Android hardware. From its gorgeous screen, to its smooth curves, the phone is a beauty to behold. The Galaxy S III joins the latest wave of Android phones (which include HTC’s One series) that finally make Android feel like the superpowerful mobile OS Google has always promised.

But it wasn’t always this way — it’s sort of crazy to consider just how far Samsung has come over the past two years. I remember sitting in a Hell’s Kitchen warehouse as Samsung showed off its first Galaxy S models in the summer of 2010. They were sleek and sexy, but what was most remarkable was that Samsung managed to bring the phones to all four major U.S. carriers — a move that helped the company become the new Android king.

With the Galaxy S II last year, Samsung repeated its formula for success, ultimately shipping 28 million phones as of last month. Google too noticed Samsung’s quick rise to success and tapped the company to build its flagship Nexus S and Galaxy Nexus phones.

So it was no surprise when anticipation for the Galaxy S III reached Apple-levels of hysteria. Tech geeks rabidly scooped up every rumor about the next Galaxy entry, but Samsung, to its credit, managed to keep the phone secret via extreme measures.

Now the Galaxy S III is finally here, and it doesn’t disappoint.

The good: Samsung’s best Galaxy yet

Quite honestly, it would have been hard for Samsung to screw up the Galaxy S III. The company has been building killer Android phones long enough that it can design these things in its sleep. And it also helps that Samsung builds the screens and processors that make its Galaxy S phones shine (though the chip situation got a bit more complicated this time around; more on that below).

When you first see the Galaxy S III in person, you can’t help but notice the gorgeous 4.8-inch HD Super AMOLED display. The phone, surprisingly, doesn’t feel excessively large in your hands, thanks to its distinctly minimal front bezel. The screen clocks in at an impressive 720p resolution, and while it’s not as sharp as the iPhone 4S’s Retina Display, you likely won’t notice as you’re drooling over it.

The Galaxy S III’s screen is unsurprisingly bright — even in direct sunlight — but it does go a bit overboard with color saturation. Colors almost pop off the screen, something that looks impressive to the average consumer, but is far from accurate color reproduction. Graphics professionals need not apply to this display.

Form-wise, Samsung boasts that the Galaxy S III has no straight lines. Sticking with its new nature design theme, the phone resembles a river stone smoothed down by water, and it comes in Pebble Blue and Marble White colors. Even though the Galaxy S III’s case is plastic, it feels much smoother and higher-quality compared to past Galaxy phones. I’ve long railed against Samsung’s build materials, as they tend to make its devices feel cheap. With Android competitors like HTC moving towards metal unibody designs, Samsung needs to think twice before relying on plastic for its future phones. (Then again, Samsung’s case allows you to remove the phone’s battery, which HTC’s One series cases don’t.)

The phone runs Android 4.0, AKA Ice Cream Sandwich, the latest and greatest version of Google’s OS. We’ve written extensively about the improvements Google has made with Android 4.0, but in short, this is the update where Android finally gets a soul. The design of the platform is more unified, and overall everything is more polished. You won’t see much of what Google originally intended, though, since Samsung shackled its “TouchWiz Nature UX” on top of the OS. While Samsung’s software is much improved over past versions, I’d still prefer just using the plain Android 4.0 skin. (Intrepid users won’t have any trouble flashing their phones to new Android ROMs though.)

The North American and Japanese versions of the Galaxy S III feature blazing fast dual-core Snapdragon S4 processors running at 1.5 gigahertz. Samsung’s own quad-core Exynos chips power the international variants of the phone, but to fit in LTE 4G radios, Samsung had to opt for the dual-core setup.

No worries, though, the Snapdragon S4 is a massive upgrade over past dual core processors, so you won’t notice the absence of a quad core chip. Doing just about everything on the phone, from swiping through menus, to opening apps, felt almost instantaneous. Just like HTC’s One series, which also sports the S4 chips in America, the Galaxy S III doesn’t feel limited in any way when it comes to horsepower.

I tested out the AT&T LTE version of the Galaxy S III, and as always, I came away impressed with the strength of AT&T’s 4G network. Throughout Brooklyn and Manhattan, I was able to get consistent download speeds between 10Mbps and 20 Mbps, and upload speeds of around 5 Mbps. It could be that AT&T’s LTE network is empty at the moment — I definitely expect those speeds to take a hit once the eventual LTE iPhone launches. When it comes to phone calls (yes, people still use their smartphones for calls), the Galaxy S III impressed me with its clarity.

The phone also sports an 8-megapixel rear camera that can take 1080p HD video, and a 1.9MP front-facing camera. The Galaxy S III’s camera interface is well-designed, and it offers burst and best-shot modes, similar to HTC’s new cameras. Shooting performance was fast (I often had to double-check to make sure the camera actually went off), and generally accurate, though it had trouble with dynamic range. Overall I found the camera to be among the best on any Android phone I’ve tested (check out a few test shots in the gallery below).

Hoping to make the Galaxy S III’s NFC functionality more useful, Samsung has added Beam sharing functionality to the phone, which allows you to share files with other Galaxy S III devices simply by tapping it. The process was a bit confusing when I tested it out during a Samsung demo, but the files zipped along speedily using Wi-Fi Direct. Samsung also unveiled its programmable NFC TecTiles last week, which are launching alongside the Galaxy S III.

With all of those features, it’s a good thing the Galaxy S III sports a huge 2,100 mAh battery. You’ll be able to enjoy the phone’s huge display and 4G speeds all day long. The phone lasted just fine for me throughout a normal workday, but I still had to charge it overnight (then again, doesn’t everyone do that?).

The bad: S Voice is no Siri

When Samsung debuted the Galaxy S III, it showed off S Voice, its spin on a virtual assistant clearly aimed at Apple’s Siri. Undeterred by Apple’s legal team, which has been aggressively charging Samsung with ripping off Apple’s designs, S Voice looks and functions very much like Siri. But, try as Samsung might, the company hasn’t yet cracked the secret to Siri’s magic.

I often had to repeat myself several times to get S Voice to answer my questions, and forget about trying to ask S Voice anything if there’s a bit of background noise. S Voice is also tied to some services, like CitySearch. But in my experience they generally return less useful results than Siri’s services. Asking S Voice for the nearest Japanese restaurant sent me to locations in Manhattan (I live in Brooklyn). When I asked Siri the same question, I was immediately recommended my favorite local restaurant, along with some other local places I didn’t even know about.

The takeaway: This is the Galaxy you’ve been waiting for

Two years after Samsung first showed off its Galaxy S models, the company finally has a no-compromise device that will make iPhone users jealous. (Of course, it also helps that Android is finally at a point where it doesn’t feel like a second-rate platform.) Even though the Galaxy S III doesn’t look radically different from last year’s models, there are plenty of major internal upgrades that make the phone a beast.

If you’ve been looking to jump into Android, especially if you’re currently an iPhone user, the Galaxy S III is your best bet.

Google surprised a lot of people last fall when it announced that it was buying restaurant ratings company Zagat. Now, Google is finally making some moves with the buy via Google+ Local, an overhaul of Google’s local search.

With the revamp, Zagat reviews are now a key part of Google+ Local. The new local search adds restaurant ratings to Google Search, Maps, and as a new tab in Google+. Google will also be updating its Google Maps app for Android and iOS to add in new Google+ Local results.

As for the design, you’ll notice that Google’s five-star reviews are gone and replaced with Zagat’s 30-point scale. On the Google+ side, the Zagat reviews are joined by personal recommendations of connected Google+ users, which adds another layer of relevancy to search results and reviews. Clearly, Google is still serious about integrating all of its services into one cohesive whole.

All in all, it appears that Zagat is finally justifying the $151 million that Google paid for it. At the time of the acquisition, Google said that the Zagat reviews would become a cornerstone of its local offerings. Judging by the recent shifts and changes, its clear that that’s still true.

You can see a video detailing Google+ Local below:

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

Shopping apps are nothing new, but New York City-based Consmr has a grander vision beyond price comparisons: to inform consumers with an in-depth library of product reviews for things like health, groceries, beauty, and baby items. Think of it like a Yelp for consumer products.

Shoppers are clearly biting: the Consmr iPhone app has received over 100,000 downloads in its first two weeks, CEO Ryan Charles told VentureBeat exclusively.

Charles, the former head of mobile at Zagat, launched Consmr’s website a year ago with the goal of populating the site with user-contributed product reviews. By the time Consmr’s iPhone app launched on May 9th, the company had amassed a collection of over 100,000 reviews.

“That was the plan all along,” Charles said in an interview yesterday. He noticed that many competing applications had launched without an extensive review library, and he wanted to offer Consmr’s users something more valuable.

It also would have been more difficult to garner a huge amount of reviews if Consmr launched first on mobile, Charles said. (He points out that the popular foodie app Foodspotting also hit the web first to gather reviews, before going mobile.)

Just like the Consmr website, you can use the iPhone app to search for product reviews. But the Consmr app also allows you to scan a barcode, like so many other shopping apps, to instantly access a product’s page. For such a young app, it’s surprisingly fast and well-designed. It’s simple enough for mainstream consumers to use, but it’s slick enough to impress user interface geeks.

You can share reviews with your friends, and also follow other users to get a sense of their tastes. Consmr taps into your Facebook and Twitter accounts, allowing you to easily find your friends on the service. There are also a handful of celebrities using Consmr, including the online wine guru Gary Vaynerchuk. You can also create private shopping lists on the service (which will likely be shareable in the future).

Charles tells me that he has a passion for curated content in the mobile space. At Zagat, he was responsible for major deals, like the review guide’s partnership with Foursquare.

He was also inspired by how online retailers like Amazon were able to increase sales by letting customers review products. “It [reviews] increases consumer confidence,” Charles said, which was his biggest problem when shopping in retail stores where you have to sift through tens of thousands of product choices.

Consmr is based out of the WeWork Labs in Soho, and the company hasn’t revealed any funding yet (though Charles discussed raising funds last year).

Although it was meant to be a tongue-in-cheek tweet after a particularly disastrous eating experience (not at Applebee’s), it reflects a core consumer problem with Yelp: There is little personalization. Yelp is Digg living in a Facebook and Twitter world. (I documented Yelp’s problems for local advertisers earlier.)

Yelp is still the best source for restaurant and nightlife information in the country thanks to its large database of reviews, but it requires users to do too much work to get information. As with Digg, a tiny group of users provides all of the content on the site. As with Digg, the barriers to participation are too high for casual users. Like Digg, Yelp’s traffic is driven by SEO. And like Digg, Yelp has failed to show any meaningful innovation in the last several years.

Many consumer decisions are based on tastes. A 4-star restaurant for one person may be a 2-star restaurant for another. Something that is the pinnacle of dining for one could be stuffy, pretentious, and overpriced for someone else. I only eat at Pizza Hut or the Olive Garden when I’m really desperate, but those are special occasion places for my parents. I won’t take them to the places I really like to go because I know they would feel uncomfortable there. (I’ve tried.)

Yelp’s default searches make it hard to distinguish between the nice casual places and the truly outstanding restaurants. I’m in New Orleans this week for Jazz Fest and had a wonderful lunch at Satsuma Cafe, which is rated 4 stars. I paid less than $10 for lunch. On Sunday, I’ll be having brunch at Arnaud’s Restaurant, which is rated 3 1/2 stars on Yelp and will likely cost more than $40.

There’s no way that these two places are even remotely comparable. Satsuma is a very accessible place. Arnaud’s is expensive and one that many would consider a bit pretentious. Someone who rates Applebee’s 4-stars is unlikely to appreciate what Arnaud’s is; their opinion is irrelevant to the type of place Arnaud’s is.

Yelp has a lot of data that it doesn’t seem to be using:

• The distribution of ratings by a given rater. I’m a tough grader (as regular readers may have noticed). If I rate something 5-stars, that’s a really big deal. Others give away 5-star ratings like candy. Individual distributions should be factored in.
• Ratings of similar places. Different types of venues should be grouped together, not sorted against an arbitrary scale. I can appreciate a great dive bar like Zeitgeist, but it’s not the same as Press Club.
• Anomalous reviews. If someone regularly reviews low-end places and than has a review at a high-end restaurant, that review should be downweighted versus someone who regularly eats at high-end restaurants.

Yelp can improve dramatically based on the data that it already has.

But it’s missing key pieces of information to make the best recommendations for users: the interests of the reader. More than half of Yelp’s traffic comes from SEO, and Yelp doesn’t know anything about those users, so it has to serve them the same generic content that everyone else gets.

Yelp optimized its site for SEO. There’s a reason that it focuses on long-form reviews with lots of words: It’s great for search. In its S-1, Yelp touted that “We feature full-text reviews, providing detailed, searchable information about local businesses with greater depth of content than most competitive offerings” and that those reviews contained an average of more than 100 words. Yelp’s claims are similar to newspaper restaurant reviewers who looked down on Yelp because they provided higher quality. (The “100 words” stat likely includes the portions of the review spent talking about being dumped by the girlfriend at dinner or the horrible day at the office, which seems to be a staple of many Yelp reviewers.)

Although some mocked Google’s purchase of Zagat as the equivalent of buying Encyclopedia Britannica to fend off Wikipedia, as long as Yelp follows a publishing model, it’s just another point on the same spectrum.

Local needs a low-friction, low-effort way to get recommendations. It needs a model similar to that of Netflix, where each rating is personally relevant, not universally irrelevant.

But that requires scale of data that Yelp doesn’t have. For that reason, companies with real data on their users, such as Google, Twitter, Facebook, and American Express will eventually eat Yelp’s lunch.

[Image credit: Tony Bowler/Shutterstock]

It’s big. It’s boxy. And it can power tunes cordlessly for 15 hours.

Jawbone unveiled the Big Jambox today, a large wireless speaker that improves upon its popular and smaller older sibling in practically every way. With the Big Jambox, Jawbone continues to cement itself as an innovator in the oft-forgotten realm of audio devices, and it has crafted a device that’s even more useful than the original Jambox.

It’s funny how much companies can change in the span of a year. In 2010, Jawbone was only known for its Bluetooth headsets, but it changed things up last year with the Jambox wireless speaker — which quickly turned into a runaway success — and the Up fitness wristband. Unfortunately, a widespread defect forced Jawbone to offer full refunds for the Up shortly after it launched (sales still haven’t resumed), but that’s not slowing the company down.

I had a chance to jam out with the $299 Big Jambox over the weekend. And after testing it with plenty of tunes from Air, Gorillaz, Screaming Females, and a plethora of bombastic movie scores, I think it’s safe to call it another potential hit for Jawbone.

The Big Jambox sounds so good that it could end up being the only speaker many consumers need for music and movies. And since it’s portable — weighing in at 2.7 pounds with a built-in battery that lasts for up to 15 hours of music playback — it’s also one of the most useful speakers on the market.

(Of course, the Big Jambox doesn’t fully replace the need for a real home theater system, or a fancy bookshelf setup for music. But it’s ideal for consumers who don’t want to deal with the complicated setup and exorbitant expense of other solutions.)

The Good: Great sound, looks, and utility

While the original Jambox did a fine job of filling a small room with sound, its diminutive stature limited its capabilities in large living rooms and outdoors. You can have a cute dorm room jam session with the original Jambox, but with the Big Jambox, you can hold a party that will truly annoy your neighbors.

At first glance, the Big Jambox merely looks like Jawbone’s first speaker made larger. It has the same boxy Yves Behar design and steel mesh grill. But under the hood, things are dramatically different. The Big Jambox sports two active neodymium drivers and two bass radiators (in the front and rear). The device’s enclosure is also entirely sealed, which increases power and volume efficiency.

The Big Jambox also sports a decent amount of computing power, which drives a multiband compression feature that removes distortion, and a loudness compensation algorithm. All of this means that you can play the Big Jambox at high volumes without any distortion — something that even more expensive speaker setups can’t offer.

Just like the first Jambox, the new version can play audio from any Bluetooth-enabled device with a range of 33 feet. Of course, there’s also a 3.5 millimeter line input for non-wireless devices. The Big Jambox also adds some very useful on-board buttons, including a dedicated Bluetooth pairing button, as well as buttons for controlling music playback. And after countless reports of the original Jambox dancing itself off of tables, Jawbone has wisely decided to add rubber feet to the Big Jambox.

Unlike the original, this Jambox can support multiple Bluetooth devices as once, so you and your friends can all take turns DJing at parties.

I threw practically every musical genre at the Big Jambox and still came away impressed. It excelled at mid- and high-range notes, which made it ideal for Air’s unique soundscape and most electronic music. The Big Jambox had some trouble with extremely low-frequency notes, which are typically handled by external subwoofers, but it was nothing deal-breaking.

LiveAudio, Jawbone’s 3D audio technology, comes pre-installed on the Big Jambox, and it does a surprisingly great job of making audio sound more expansive. The software emulates left- and right-channel separation, so music that takes advantage of stereo positioning sounds especially good. I tested out LiveAudio on the original Jambox, but the Big Jambox can do a lot more with the technology thanks to its larger size.

The device is also well-suited for movies and TV — at least, if you’re not willing to set up a decent surround sound system. Unsurprisingly, the Big Jambox pumped out sound richer and louder than the built-in speakers in my plasma TV. Sound quality in HDTVs has actually gotten worse as sets have become thinner, so practically any external speaker setup would be an improvement.

Jawbone also touts Big Jambox’s “Type-1″ speakerphone compliancy, which means it passes a certain baseline of quality for enterprise use. I still use the original Jambox as a speakerphone today, and the Big Jambox improves upon it by allowing for group conference calls. Its omnidirectional microphone is positioned on top of the speaker, which makes it perfect for placing in the center of a table for group calls.

While the Big Jambox sounds great, its best feature is the ability to continue sounding great pretty much anywhere. Unlike traditional speakers that rarely ever move, the Big Jambox’s large battery and light weight makes it the perfect speaker for any room. It can move with you from the living room, to the kitchen, and even outdoors, without being chained down by wires.

The Bad: No Airplay, Wi-Fi, price may be tough to stomach

The original Jambox atop the Big Jambox

For some reason, consumers always seem to skimp on audio technology. Far too many people live with the iPod’s crummy white headphones, and only certain audiophiles (like this writer) will invest in a killer home theater setup. At $299, the Big Jambox may be too expensive for the typical consumer, though I’d wager that once they see how useful it can be, they won’t mind the cost.

Jawbone is also holding steady with the original Jambox’s $199 price, which means the Big Jambox is a pretty great deal considering how much better it sounds for $100 more.

It’s also surprising that Jawbone didn’t upgrade the device with Airplay (for potentially better sound quality from iOS devices) and Wi-Fi functionality, though I honestly didn’t miss either since Bluetooth worked well enough. Both of those technologies also could have cut into the Big Jambox’s playback time — Bluetooth was always designed as something for low-power devices.

The Lowdown: A surprisingly killer wireless speaker

I’ve been testing out several wireless audio products over the last few weeks, and the Big Jambox ranks among the leaders. It’s gorgeously designed, sounds fantastic, and is one of the most useful devices I’ve reviewed.

Unfortunately, I haven’t had a chance to test out the Sonos Play:3, which is the Big Jambox’s direct competitor at $299. But the Big Jambox stood up well against my Audioengine 2 computer speakers, as well as my home theater setup (a Harmon Kardon receiver with Onkyo speakers + sub). That alone tells me that Jawbone has crafted something special.

The Big Jambox will be available on May 15 for $299, with pre-orders starting today.

July 9-10, 2013
San Francisco, CA

Early Bird Tickets on Sale

T-Mobile’s iconic ad girl, Carly, has been in the news quite a bit lately, after ditching her pink dresses for black leather and a Ducati in the carrier’s new ad campaign (Lisbeth Salander says hello, by the way). But in many ways, the new HTC One S makes a greater statement for the struggling carrier.

The 4.3-inch One S, available on April 24 for $199 (with a two-year contract, and after a $50 rebate), is a bundle of superlatives. It’s HTC and T-Mobile’s thinnest phone ever, at just 7.95 millimeters; it’s T-Mobile’s fastest phone ever, thanks to its powerful dual-core Snapdragon S4 processor; and it’s the sleekest Android handset I’ve tested so far, due to its impressive unibody design.

The phone is by far the best device T-Mobile has to offer, but it’s not without its flaws (more on those below). The real question: Is it enough to stop T-Mobile from hemorrhaging subscribers? And can it keep the T-Mo faithful from pining after the iPhone (which T-Mobile has no signs of getting this year)?

The good: Finally, an Android phone that feels sexy and tough

I’ve already spent some time with HTC’s entire new One lineup at Mobile World Congress, but I was still taken aback when I opened up the box for T-Mobile’s One S. The phone’s design is immediately striking, with smooth, ergonomic curves, and an aluminum unibody design (except for the antenna section) that encourages you to hold it. It’s thin without feeling brittle, which also makes it perfect for sliding into just about any pocket.

Unfortunately for T-Mobile customers, its One S lacks the futuristic “microarc oxidation” process that the black version of the phone sports, which is supposed to give it a feathery touch. Still, I have no complaints about the anodized gray aluminum in T-Mobile’s One S. (And it may be for the better, as the microarc models apparently have chipping issues.)

Just like the iPhone and Nokia’s Lumia 900, the HTC One S provokes an emotional response that Android devices, including the flagship Galaxy Nexus, have been lacking for some time. The phone is well-suited for Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich, an update which brought some much-needed heart and soul into Google’s mobile OS.

Speaking of Ice Cream Sandwich, the combination of Android 4.0 and the HTC One’s Snapdragon S4 processor really makes the One S scream. It’s one of the few Android phones (along with the Galaxy Nexus) that have let me effortlessly launch apps, move between screens, and do just about anything without stalling. Of course, HTC had to ruin things by including the latest version of its Sense interface, which adds an unnecessary UI layer on top of Android. Sense 4.0 is less of a distraction than past versions, but it’s still fairly useless (more on that below).

One of the big draws for HTC’s entire One lineup is the improved camera software and hardware, which the company calls “ImageSense.” The One S includes an 8 megapixel camera with an f/2.0 lens and a backside illuminated sensor — basically, it should be able to snap really nice pictures. The camera can also shoot 1080p high-definition video at 30 frames per second.

It’s helped by HTC’s new camera app, which is the best camera software I’ve ever used on a smartphone. The app loads almost instantly, without fail, and it lets you take both video and pictures from the same screen. Notably, you can also snap photos while video is being recorded (which are basically just screenshots at the video resolution). Check out a few test shots from the One S camera in the gallery below.

The One S supports T-Mobile’s fast 42 megabits per second HSPA+ network, though unfortunately I didn’t get to see the device’s full speeds. Earlier today, T-Mobile sent out a note to reviewers saying that early versions of the phone couldn’t take full advantage of the network, though it promised that the phone will get a software update to fix the issue before it’s released.

The bad: HTC Sense and Beats Audio need to die

Back when Android a barren wasteland of design and user-friendliness, HTC’s Sense interface was a breath of fresh air. The company had been working on customer interfaces since the days of Windows Mobile, and in Android, HTC had found the perfect platform for perfecting its interface ambitions. But Android slowly evolved, and now with Ice Cream Sandwich, Google has finally created a mobile OS that feels as natural as iOS.

At this point, Sense really isn’t helping Android — it’s just getting in the way. Sense 4 is less cumbersome than the last version, which slowed down Android phones with flowery effects and transitions, but it still makes the One S feel slightly removed from its Android core. The Sense dialer is a nightmare, for example.

And because of Sense 4, HTC also didn’t include the software-based Android navigation buttons found on other ICS devices. On the One S, the Android Back and Home buttons are once again physical keys at the bottom of the phone. There is a software menu button, but it clashes horrible with the design of Android 4.0.

At least Sense gives us a nice way to multitask on Android 4.0, with a card-like interface that’s reminiscent of webOS.

The HTC One S is also T-Mobile’s first device to include Beats Audio hardware, but that really doesn’t mean much. The audio technology, popularized by Dr. Dre and his ugly headphones, distorts music on the phone by pumping up the bass and volume. It’s honestly a shame that HTC invested $300 million in Beats Audio, because the brand is shaping up to be as much of a marketing gimmick as Monster Cables.

It’s also a shame that, for a device which sports some of the best Android hardware ever, HTC skimped on the One S’s display. It sports a 4.3-inch screen Super AMOLED screen running at a 960 by 540 resolution, and as is typical for that screen technology, the One S has slight issues with color accuracy. The resolution also feels low after prolonged usage, but it may just be my eyes are spoiled by the crazy high pixel density on the new iPad and iPhone 4S.

If screen quality is important to you, check out the 4.7-inch HTC One X, which sports a higher resolution Super LCD screen.

The takeaway: The best phone yet on T-Mobile, and one of the best Android devices

While T-Mobile customers still don’t have the iPhone, I have a feeling that the One S will be more than enough to tide over many of them. It’s thin, light, and offers one of the best Android experiences yet (aside from Sense). I was a bit disappointed that T-Mobile didn’t land the bigger HTC One X, but after testing out the One S for several days, I’ve grown to appreciate the thinness its smaller screen allows.

HTC promised earlier this year that it would focus on delivering fewer devices, but with an increased emphasis on quality. The One S — from its design, to its powerful hardware — proves that HTC has followed through with that promise.

For reasons known only to AT&T executives, the Nokia Lumia 900 launches in the U.S. today, Easter Sunday.

If you can find an AT&T store that’s open today, you can pick up the Lumia 900 for just $99 plus a two-year data contract (or $450 off contract). Or bop over to the  AT&T Wireless site to order one, if you prefer. The minimum contract is $40 (for 450 minutes) plus $20 for a paltry 300MB monthly data plan or $30 for a more reasonable 3GB. In other words, you’ll be committing to at least $60 per month for the next 24 months. (The early termination fee, should you want out of your contract before then, is $325 minus $10 for each full month that you’ve been on the contract.)

Is this your next phone? There are a lot of reasons to like what Nokia is putting down with this Windows Phone 7-based handset: A big, 4.3-inch screen, an 8 megapixel rear camera and VGA front-facing camera, 4G LTE data capability, and the $99 price. In fact, it may be the cheapest way to get an LTE smartphone right now.

On the other hand, it’s running Windows Phone 7, an operating system that still lacks some of the niceties of more established mobile operating systems. Multitasking is extremely limited compared to iOS and Android, the browser has some limitations, and there are only 70,000 apps or so in the Windows Marketplace, a little more than a tenth that of the Android Market and iPhone App Store.

To help you make up your mind, we’ve rounded up a collection of the internet’s top reviews of the Lumia 900. Of course, you won’t want to miss VentureBeat’s review of the Nokia Lumia 900 on AT&T, by our own Devindra Hardawar.

And, check out the Lumia 900 specs in detail on our smartphone comparison subsite, which will also let you compare it to other smartphones. And now, on to the review roundup.

New York Times:

“The Lumia 900 is fast, beautiful and powerful, inside and out,” David Pogue writes. However, he points out that while Windows Phone 7 has many of the most popular apps, many others are missing:

Many of the essentials are there: movie apps like Netflix, IMDB and Flixster; restaurant apps like Yelp and OpenTable; check-in apps from Delta and American Airlines; popular apps like Groupon, Foursquare, Kindle, Spotify, Twitter and Facebook. A few of my other favorites also made it: RunPee (tells you when during a movie it’s safe to leave the theater without missing anything important), Speedtest (measures Internet speed) and FlightTrack (tells you everything about your flight).

And, of course, Angry Birds.

Unfortunately, there’s an even longer list of important apps that aren’t yet available for WP7 phones: Yahoo Messenger, Dropbox, Pandora, Mint, Bump, Draw Something, StumbleUpon, Pinterest, Urbanspoon, Hipstamatic, Instagram, Barnes & Noble Reader, Cut the Rope, Scrabble, Words With Friends, Google Voice, AOL Radio. Bank of America has an app, but Citibank, Chase, HSBC, Capital One, American Express and other big banks don’t.

Plenty of my less famous favorites are also unavailable: Line2, Hipmunk, Nest, Word Lens, iStopMotion, Glee, Ocarina, Songify This.

Wall Street Journal:

Writing for the WSJ and AllThingsD, Walt Mossberg says that he like the phone, but concludes that ultimately it doesn’t have enough to recommend it over the iPhone 4 (also $99) or iPhone 4S, or the Android-based Galaxy II Nexus:

If you’re looking for a $100, high-end smartphone, or are a Windows Phone fan who has been waiting for better hardware, the Lumia 900 is worth considering. But the phone had just too many drawbacks in my tests to best its chief competitors.

The Verge:

In all, it’s a fantastic piece of technology. It just looks and feels like nothing else on the market. It hits all the right notes for me. A little bit retro, a little bit futuristic, with just a touch of quirky humanity in its otherwise very machined design. This is the Nokia I grew up with, and it’s clear the company hasn’t lost its ability to enchant through hardware.

Engadget:

While we wouldn’t color this AT&T debut as a failure, we wouldn’t call it a crowning achievement either. Apart from a stated preference and dedication to Microsoft’s Windows Phone OS, savvy geeks on the cusp of the next best thing won’t necessarily want what the 900 has to offer … Does the Lumia 900 fail to find its place amongst other smartphone hulks? Well, yes. But again, it’s playing in a league of Windows Phone’s single-core own. With the careful cultivation of a cultish, fashion-conscious consumer following, however, this could very well be Nokia’s greatest hit.

CNET

The LTE speeds, high-end features, and crazy-reasonable $99 price tag make the Lumia 900 a sure choice for Windows Phone fans looking for a statement piece to help them stand out. It’s also great for people on the fence with Android or iOS who are interested in trying a new operating system, and for people transitioning to their very first smartphone.

TechCrunch:

Jordan Crook compares the Lumia 900 to the iPhone 4S and concludes with an appeal to consider it, for the sake of a more competitive phone market:

Please just consider Windows Phone. You don’t have to buy it — hell, you don’t even have to like it — but giving it a chance in your mind will allow for the emergence of a third mobile ecosystem. And as competition grows, our phones will only get better and better.

VentureBeat:

The Lumia 900 is the best Windows Phone yet, and it’s the first phone I’ve seen to truly unleash the potential of the platform. If you’ve been at all interested in adopting Windows Phone, it’s the only option worth considering at this point.

But while it’s nice to finally see a true flagship Windows Phone, the platform still needs plenty of marketing and carrier support to stand a chance. … Perhaps because there’s so much at stake for all the companies involved, it feels as if the Lumia 900 is the first true Windows Phone. And I think for many consumers, that’ll likely be the case.