Step into a world where the focus is keenly set on Apple Watch Feature Comparison. Within the confines of this article, a tapestry of references to Apple Watch Feature Comparison awaits your exploration. If your pursuit involves unraveling the depths of Apple Watch Feature Comparison, you've arrived at the perfect destination.
Our narrative unfolds with a wealth of insights surrounding Apple Watch Feature Comparison. This is not just a standard article; it's a curated journey into the facets and intricacies of Apple Watch Feature Comparison. Whether you're thirsting for comprehensive knowledge or just a glimpse into the universe of Apple Watch Feature Comparison, this promises to be an enriching experience.
The spotlight is firmly on Apple Watch Feature Comparison, and as you navigate through the text on these digital pages, you'll discover an extensive array of information centered around Apple Watch Feature Comparison. This is more than mere information; it's an invitation to immerse yourself in the enthralling world of Apple Watch Feature Comparison.
So, if you're eager to satisfy your curiosity about Apple Watch Feature Comparison, your journey commences here. Let's embark together on a captivating odyssey through the myriad dimensions of Apple Watch Feature Comparison.
I need a great movie to watch what do you want to watch must watch movies to watch you need therapy you need this one bag do you need an iphone to use an apple watch watch we need to talk about kevin you need permission to perform this action
You Need to Watch the Most Underrated Superhero Show on HBO Max
You Need to Watch the Most Underrated Superhero Show on HBO Max
Superman has never been an easy character to relate to. He is, essentially, a perfect being. Because he's the most powerful and morally pure character in the DC universe, there's not a lot of drama or internal conflict to mine from the Man of Steel. Contrast this with Batman, whose dark and flawed character makes him a fan favorite.
Of course, in the Marvel universe you have complex characters like The Falcon and the Winter Soldier, Loki and the current run of She-Hulk, who headline their respective hit shows on Disney Plus. In comparison, Superman & Lois, which aired on The CW network and is now streaming both of its seasons on HBO Max, has flown under the radar. But it may be more impressive because it achieved a seemingly impossible goal: create a version of Superman that retains his Boy Scout personality but still makes him relatable.
The show does so by focusing on the theme of family, breathing new life into the franchise.
As a result, Superman & Lois may be the best iteration of Superman in TV or film. And this is coming from someone who watched Christopher Reeve's pitch-perfect performance at just the right age for it to leave a permanent impression.
The Reeve portrayal is one to be placed on a pedestal. But this new version speaks to me to an almost frighteningly personal degree. The new version of Clark Kent, played by Tyler Hoechlin, has been married to Lois for a while, and has two teenage boys. I'm also a father of two young boys. As amazing as Superman is at averting nuclear meltdowns or fending off rogue Kryptonians, he struggles to be a good father and makes bad decisions with the best of intentions. I can relate. (To the fatherhood bits anyway.)
That's not to say you need to be a father of two to appreciate the show. While it's technically part of the CW's "Arrowverse" universe of DC comic shows like The Flash and Supergirl (sort of... you get more indications at the end of the second season), it stands apart and feels different from everything that's come before it. The budget and production values are markedly higher, and the show is structured differently.
Where The Flash and Supergirl feature a group of do-gooders fighting off a threat of the week, Superman & Lois is a fascinating mashup of a typical comic book show and something grounded, like Friday Night Lights. There's a healthy amount of time spent on developing characters, who act like they're real people and not figures in some drama.
Hoechlin's Superman (or Kent) isn't the only character to root for in this show. Bitsie Tulloch is a force of nature as Lois Lane, showing her strength not just as a hard-nosed investigative journalist but as a protective mother. A large chunk of season 1 sees Lois working with local reporter Chrissy Beppo (Sofia Hasmik) to investigate a story, with discussions of actual journalism work, which again hits near and dear to my heart. Hitting upon the family theme further, season 2 has Lois working to free her sister from the clutches of a cult leader who's more than she seems.
Perhaps the most surprising elements are Lois and Clark's teenage sons, Jonathan (Jordan Elsass) and Jordan (Alex Garfin). These characters could've easily been annoying or gotten wrapped up in the kind of melodrama that typical TV teenagers get into. The show airs on the CW, after all. And at first blush, Jonathan, a quarterback, and Jordan, an awkward brooder, fall into the usual cliches.
But instead, the link between these two brothers, one of whom -- light spoilers! -- develops superpowers, serves as a centerpiece of the show. Yes, they get into conflicts, and there are misunderstandings. There's jealousy and teenage gripes. But at the end of the day, the two talk like actual people and display an enduring level of support for each other.
The core family, flanked by a host of supporting characters who refuse to be typecast or go the obvious route, make for a show that's as enjoyable when they're hanging out at a local cafe as it is when Superman takes on an Iron Man-esque armored adversary. Emmanuelle Chriqui is a Lana Lang who's more world-weary than we remember, while Adam Rayner is deliciously devious as villain Morgan Edge, who gets a more complex arc in the second half that again ties into the idea of family. Wolé Parks, who plays the mysterious "Stranger" (who's definitely more than he seems) has one of the most satisfying character arcs in the show.
That's not to say there isn't loads of action. Superman & Lois takes its time with setting up its plot points, but that expanded budget ensured there are a number of set pieces that displayed the Man of Steel's power. From the cinematography to the special effects, the show is a big step up from the standard CW show and rightfully belongs on HBO Max.
The first season starts slow, but the arcs pick up the pace near the end, with twists and epic battles between superpowered figures, and all the stakes of any major comic book franchise. Plot points and clues buried early in the season pay off with almost overwhelming speed, and you're left with a satisfied conclusion.
It's telling that the final scene of the first season, which created a huge cliffhanger for the following season, isn't about some world-ending threat or new villain. It's about how the dynamics of the Kent family will change in interesting and even awkward ways.
Without any spoilers, the second season takes things up a notch, putting a disturbing mirror to the show and its characters that open up a ton of storytelling opportunities.
Superman & Lois has been green-lit for a third season. So you're safe knowing that your commitment to this first season will get some payoff.
Even for die-hard Marvel fan, this is a refreshing take on the superhero genre that's worth your time.
Sony x80j 4k uhd google television sony x800h review rtings sony x80 tv review sony x80 tv review sony x80j tv review sony x80k tv review sony x80j tv review sony x80k tv review
Sony X80K TV Review: Google TV Smarts, Basic Features and Picture
Sony X80K TV Review: Google TV Smarts, Basic Features and Picture
Sony has been making TVs for 60 years and today it's known for best for expensive, high-performance screens. In 2022 it continued the trend by releasing a kitchen sink worth of high-tech displays, from 8K to mini-LED to QD-OLED, and most demand serious cash. So far 2022 is more about tightening belts than bells and whistles, however, so I took a look at Sony's cheapest TV first. The X80K is a decent all-around performer, and could appeal to TV shoppers on a budget who just want a Sony, but you can certainly do better for the money.
Like
Accurate color
Capable Google TV smart system
Plenty of connectivity
Subtle, understated design
Don't Like
Mediocre contrast and black levels
More expensive than competing TVs with better picture quality
In early summer the X80K costs about the same as the Samsung QN60B and the TCL 6-Series. In my side-by-side comparison of the three in CNET's TV test lab, the Samsung looked slightly better overall than the Sony, with superior brightness and contrast, while the TCL totally trounced them both. That might be a surprise if you're new to the TV buying game and just paying attention to brands -- wait, a TCL looks better than a Sony? -- but if you look at their underlying technologies, it makes perfect sense. The Sony and Samsung use basic LCD backlights while the TCL leverages step-up screen tech, namely full-array local dimming and mini-LED.
Beyond picture I did like Sony's Google smart TV system and no-fuss design, and it comes in a wide array of sizes. Later in the year it's sure to receive hefty price cuts, like TVs always do around the Black Friday and the holidays, that could make it more competitive. For now, however, the X80K doesn't do enough beyond its name to stand out.
Sony KD-X80K sizes, series comparison
I performed a hands-on evaluation of the 55-inch Sony KD-55X80K, but this review also applies to the other screen sizes in the series. All sizes have identical specs and should provide very similar picture quality.
Sony KD-43X80K, 43-inch Sony KD-50X80K, 50-inch Sony KD-55X80K, 55-inch Sony KD-65X80K, 65-inch Sony KD-75X80K, 75-inch Sony KD-85X80K, 85-inch
The X80K series is the entry-level in Sony's 2022 TV lineup, with relatively basic picture features. It's missing the HDMI 2.1 gaming features, 120Hz refresh rate and mini-LED backlight found on step-up models, for example.
James Martin/CNET
Keep it simple, Sony
The X80K blends in rather than stands out with a dark gray color along the bottom of its frame. The other three sides are black and their edges angle in slightly. The stand consists of simple A-shaped legs splayed far to either side. Seen from the side, the X80K is substantially thicker than the Samsung Q60B (2.83 vs. 1 inch), which could be a consideration if you want as flush a wall-mount as possible.
I like Sony's simple remote. The keys are laid out in familiar fashion and the requisite shortcut buttons for YouTube, Netflix, Disney Plus and Prime Video are onboard, and I appreciated the dedicated input key that some clickers lack. I could do without the number key and another dedicated to an over-the-air grid guide at the bottom, but some users might appreciate them.
James Martin/CNET
Google TV: Feature-rich and promo-heavy
Among all of the smart TV systems I like Google TV second-best, after Roku, and its implementation on the Sony X80K is the TV's best feature. Highlights include excellent voice results thanks to Google Assistant, tight integration with Google apps in particular YouTube and YouTube TV, and more apps overall, thanks to the Play store, than proprietary systems like Samsung and LG.
Responses were quick enough but felt a step behind most Roku TVs I've used. Once I selected a profile it took a long second or two for the main For You home page to populate with thumbnails, for example. I didn't love the large chunk of space at the top devoted to promotions of shows and movies on various services. I also wish the "continue watching" row was higher-up rather than placed below the "top picks for you" and apps rows. Top picks seemed to take into account my preferences for sci-fi shows and movies once I went through the "improve your recommendations" screen, but there was still plenty of content I didn't care about. Suggestions across different apps are a fine idea, but I personally the simplicity of Roku app-centric menus.
James Martin/CNET
Google TV's profiles worked well. I was easily able to set up a kid's profile, and I appreciated that appropriate apps like YouTube Kids and PBS Kids were suggested for me to add, and that Netflix automatically invoked the kids profile. During setup I was also prompted to set screen time limits, create a profile picture and more. Google TV's system provides better parental controls than Roku, although Fire TV is similarly robust.
Modest features, extra connections
Key features
Display technology
LED LCD
LED backlight
Direct
Resolution
4K
HDR compatible
HDR10 and Dolby Vision
Smart TV
Google TV
Remote
Standard with voice
As an entry-level TV the X80K's lack major picture-enhancing extras. It has a 60Hz refresh rate rather than 120Hz, although it does offer smoothing, aka the soap opera effect, if you want to turn it on. It supports Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos formats, as well as standard HDR10, as do many other mid-priced TVs.
Four HDMI inputs (One with eARC)
Two USB 2.0 ports
Composite AV input (3.5mm)
Optical digital audio output
RF (antenna) input
Ethernet (LAN) port
Physical connections are better than many basic TVs' however, with a fourth HDMI as well as analog video. It's also the least-expensive TV so far to include an ATSC 3.0 tuner, so it's ready for NextGen TV broadcasts. Such broadcasts are rare today and once they become more common you'll be able to buy a tuner box to allow any TV to watch them, but it's a nice extra on the Sony nonetheless.
James Martin/CNET
Picture quality comparisons
I set up the 55-inch Sony X80K next to its direct competitor from Samsung, as well as less expensive Fire TV and a TCL with superior picture quality specifications. Here's the lineup:
Samsung QN55Q60B Amazon Fire TV Omni TCL 65R646
TV and movies: The Sony delivered the second-worst picture in the lineup overall, beating out only the Omni. Its main weakness was relatively weak contrast, caused by both lighter (worse) black levels and dimmer highlights than the Samsung.
Watching Hustle on Netflix, for example, the black around the credits and the shadows in the locker room were lighter and less realistic than on the other TVs, if only slightly worse than the Samsung and the Omni. The Samsung was also significantly brighter than the Sony in its most accurate picture modes, which made the film's HDR image pop more in comparison. The skin tones of Adam Sandler and the basketball players looked truer than the Samsung and Omni, but overall I preferred the Samsung's picture by a hair.
The story was similar with the challenging Spears and Munsil 4K HDR Benchmark montage on Blu-ray, where the Samsung looked a bit brighter than the Sony. Both outperformed the Omni, which showed less high-level detail in snowscapes for example, but the difference wasn't enough to justify the Sony's much higher price.
The TCL, meanwhile, was superior in pretty much every way to the others, with excellent contrast, deep black levels and powerful brightness that made the Sony, Samsung and Fire TV pale by comparison.
James Martin/CNET
Gaming: Playing Horizon Forbidden West, color was more realistic and accurate on the Sony, and similar to the TCL and LG, while the Samsung in every mode appeared more saturated and, well, game-y. Again the Samsung won for contrast and punch, handily, although to its credit the Sony revealed more details in the shadows, which is an advantage in dark games with enemies lurking in the shadows. The Sony lacked the comprehensive gaming stats display of the Samsung and both had similar (excellent) input lag, but overall I preferred the Samsung's punchier look. The TCL, meanwhile, combined a brighter image than either one with excellent shadow detail and, yes, colors as accurate (and better-looking) than the Sony.
Bright lighting: The Sony measured relatively dim, backing up my subjective impressions, and both it and the Samsung were less-bright than the TCL and a less-expensive Vizio, both equipped with local dimming. Below are my measurements in nits for select comparison TVs in their brightest and most accurate picture modes, using both standard dynamic range (SDR) and high dynamic range (HDR) test patterns.
Light output in nits
TV
Brightest mode (SDR)
Accurate mode (SDR)
Brightest mode (HDR)
Accurate mode (HDR)
TCL 65R635
1,114
792
1,292
1,102
Vizio M65Q7-J01
791
562
764
631
Samsung QN55Q60B
549
343
540
514
Sony KD-55X80K
369
357
446
387
LG OLED65C2
413
389
812
759
Despite its lower light output numbers the Sony is still bright enough for all but the most light-filled viewing environments. As with most TVs, the brightest modes for HDR and SDR (Game and Vivid, respectively) are less accurate. For the accurate results listed above I used Custom mode and I recommend X80K owners do the same to get good color in bright rooms. Note that with SDR, you'll need to disable the Auto Energy Saving setting (Settings > Display & Sound > Picture > Light Sensor > Off) to get full brightness.
The Samsung's screen was better than that of the Sony at dealing with bright reflections in the room. Sitting under bright lights, I saw my reflection in the black screen of the X80K more clearly (and it was more distracting) than in any of the other TV screens.
Uniformity and viewing angle: The screen of the X80K sample I reviewed showed no major issues with bright spots or dark areas, and in test patterns appeared more uniform than the Omni and similar to the other displays. Watching hockey I saw very little evidence of irregularities as the camera panned across the ice. From off-angle the Samsung maintained superior black level and contrast but Sony had better color, much like the TVs' respective performance from straight on.
James Martin/CNET
Picture settings notes
The most accurate settings were Cinema and Custom mode for both HDR and SDR, and Custom measured slightly more accurate so I went with that. Game is best for gaming, thanks to its low input lag, and color was similar to Custom and exceedingly accurate.
The X80K offers settings that engage smoothing, aka the soap opera effect, as I prefer to turn it off for TV shows and movies. You can experiment with the settings (Settings > Display & Sound > Picture > Motion > Motionflow > Custom) and it's off by default in the Cinema and Custom modes.
Geek box
SDR
Result
Score
Black luminance (0%)
0.075
Poor
Peak white luminance (SDR)
357
Average
Avg. gamma (10-100%)
2.46
Poor
Avg. grayscale error (10-100%)
2.27
Good
Dark gray error (30%)
2.07
Good
Bright gray error (80%)
3.04
Average
Avg. color checker error
3.08
Average
Avg. saturation sweeps error
2.52
Good
Avg. color error
2.67
Good
Input lag (Game mode)
11.93
Good
HDR10
Black luminance (0%)
0.084
Poor
Peak white luminance (10% win)
446
Poor
Gamut % UHDA/P3 (CIE 1976)
94.73
Average
ColorMatch HDR error
8.08
Poor
Avg. color checker error
1.54
Good
Input lag (Game mode, 4K HDR)
11.67
Good
See How We Test TVs for more details.
Portrait Displays Calman calibration software was used in this review.
§
NextGen TV, aka ATSC 3.0, is continuing its rapid rollout across the country. Major markets like Los Angeles, Atlanta, Denver, Houston and more all have stations transmitting. Meanwhile New York, Boston, and many other markets are slated to have broadcasts later this year. While not every station in every market has a NextGen TV counterpart, more and more are coming on the air.
What's NextGen TV? It's an update to the free HDTV you can already get over-the-air in nearly every city in the US. There's no monthly fee, but you do need either a new TV with a built-in tuner or a standalone external tuner. The standard allows broadcast stations to send higher quality signals than ever before with features like 4K, HDR, 120 Hz, and more. ATSC 3.0 proponents also claim better reception indoors and on-the-go -- whether it's on your phone, or even in your car. The best part is that if you're watching it on your TV it uses the same standard antennas available today.
One potential downside? ATSC 3.0 will also let broadcasters track your viewing habits, information that can be used for targeted advertising, just like companies such as Facebook and Google use today.
Read more:Best TV antennas for cord cutters, starting at just $10
NextGen TV to you
ATSC.org
Here's the top-line info:
If you get your TV from streaming, cable or satellite, NextGen TV/ATSC 3.0 won't affect you at all.
The transition is voluntary. Stations don't have to switch. Many have already, however, for reasons we'll explain below.
It's not backwards-compatible with the current HD standard (ATSC 1.0), so your current TV won't be able to receive it. Your current antenna should work fine though.
Stations that switch to NextGen TV will still have to keep broadcasting ATSC 1.0 for five years.
There are multiple models and sizes of TV with built-in tuners available now from Hisense, LG, Sony, Samsung and others.
As of the beginning of 2022 the majority of the largest markets in the US have at least one channel broadcasting NextGen TV. By the end of 2022, nearly all major and many minor markets will have multiple channels .
Here's the map of actual stations as of January 2022. Orange denotes stations that are live now. Blue is launching before summer. White sometime after the summer.
ATSC
How it will work in your home
Put simply: If you connect an antenna to your TV you will receive free programming, just like most people can get now. Yet, that is selling the potential benefits of NextGen TV short.
NextGen TV is IP-based, so in practice it can be moved around your home just like any internet content can right now. For example, you connect an antenna to a tuner box inside your home, but that box is not connected to your TV at all. Instead, it's connected to your router. This means anything with access to your network can have access to over-the-air TV, be it your TV, your phone, your tablet or even a streaming device like Apple TV. There will be traditional tuners as well, of course, but this is a new and interesting alternative.
This also means it's possible we'll see mobile devices with built-in tuners, so you can watch live TV while you're out and about, like you can with Netflix and YouTube now. How willing phone companies will be to put tuners in their phones remains to be seen, however. You don't see a lot of phones that can get radio broadcasts now, even though such a thing is easy to implement. We'll talk more about that in a moment.
'Voluntary'
In November of 2017, the Federal Communications Commission approved ATSC 3.0 as the next generation of broadcast standard, on a "voluntary, market-driven basis" (PDF). It also required stations to continue broadcasting ATSC 1.0 (i.e. "HD"). This is actually part of the issue as to why it's voluntary.
During the mandatory DTV transition in the early 2000s, stations in a city were given a new frequency (channel, in other words), to broadcast digital TV, while they still broadcast analog on their old channel. These older channels were eventually reclaimed by the FCC for other uses when the proverbial switch was flipped to turn off analog broadcasts. Since a changeover isn't occurring this time around, stations and markets are left to themselves how best to share or use the over-the-air spectrum in their areas.
Because there's no new bandwidth, broadcasters will temporarily share transmitters. Two or more stations will use one tower for ATSC 1.0 (HD) broadcasts and those stations will use another tower for ATSC 3.0 (UHD) broadcasts. This will mean a temporary reduction in bandwidth for each channel, but potentially a limited impact on picture quality due to the better modern HD encoders. More info here.
ATSC/TVTechnology.com
While it's not a mandatory standard, many broadcasters still seem enthusiastic about NextGen. At the beginning of the roll-out, then executive vice president of communications at the National Association of Broadcasters Dennis Wharton told CNET that the improvement in quality, overall coverage and the built-in safety features mean that most stations would be enthusiastic to offer ATSC 3.0.
John Hane, president of the Spectrum Consortium (an industry group with broadcasters Sinclair, Nexstar and Univision as members), was equally confident: "The FCC had to make it voluntary because the FCC couldn't provide transition channels. [The industry] asked the FCC to make it voluntary. We want the market to manage it. We knew the market would demand it, and broadcasters and hardware makers in fact are embracing it."
Given the competition broadcasters have with cable, streaming and so on, 3.0 could be a way to stabilize or even increase their income by offering better picture quality, better coverage and, most importantly, targeted ads.
Ah yes, targeted ads…
Broadcast TV will know what you're watching
One of NextGen TV's more controversial features is a "return data path," which is a way for the station you're watching to know you're watching. Not only does this allow a more accurate count of who's watching what shows, but it creates the opportunity for every marketer's dream: targeted advertising.
Ads specific to your viewing habits, income level and even ethnicity (presumed by your neighborhood, for example) could get slotted in by your local station. This is something brand-new for broadcast TV. Today, over-the-air broadcasts are pretty much the only way to watch television that doesn't track your viewing habits. Sure, the return data path could also allow "alternative audio tracks and interactive elements," but it's the targeted ads and tracking many observers are worried about.
The finer details are all still being worked out, but here's the thing: If your TV is connected to the internet, it's already tracking you. Pretty much every app, streaming service, smart TV and cable or satellite box all track your usage to a greater or lesser extent.
Return data path is still in the planning stages, even as the other aspects of NextGen TV are already going live. There is a silver lining: There will be an opt-out option. While it also requires Internet access, if this type of thing bothers you, just don't connect your TV or NextGen TV receiver to the internet. You will inevitably lose some of the other features of NextGen TV, however.
That said, we'll keep an eye on this for any further developments.
Free TV on your phone?
Another point of potential contention is getting ATSC 3.0 tuners into phones. At a most basic level, carriers like AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile are in the business of selling you data. If suddenly you can get lots of high-quality content for free on your phone, they potentially lose money. Ever wonder why your phone doesn't have an FM radio tuner? Same reason.
T-Mobile made a preemptive strike along those lines all the way back in September 2017, writing a white paper (PDF) that, among other things, claims, "In light of the detrimental effects that inclusion of ATSC 3.0 can have on the cost and size of a device, the technology trade-offs required to accommodate competing technologies, and the reduced performance and spectral efficiency that it will have for other mobile bands and services, the decision as to whether to include ATSC 3.0 in a device must be left to the market to decide."
"The market" determined you didn't need an FM tuner in your phone, and in the few phones that had an FM tuner, if you bought it through an American provider, it was almost always disabled.
TV broadcasters, on the other hand, are huge fans of ATSC 3.0 on mobile phones. It means more potential eyeballs and, incidentally, a guarantee of active internet access for that return data path. John Hane of the Spectrum Consortium feels that tuners built into phones is "inevitable," and that international adoption of ATSC 3.0 will help push it forward. Wharton says that the focus is getting TVs to work, but mobile is in the plan.
Then there's portable TVs, of which there are HD versions on the market and have been for years. The next-generation ATSC 3.0 versions of these will likely get better reception in addition to the higher resolution offered by the new standard.
Sarah Tew/CNET
Cost (for you)
NextGen TV is not backward compatible with current TV tuners. To get it, you'll eventually need either a new TV or an external tuner.
However, you shouldn't feel a push to upgrade since:
1. NextGen TV/ATSC 3.0 isn't mandatory, and it doesn't affect cable, satellite or streaming TV.
2. HD tuners cost as little as $30 to $40 now, and NextGen TV tuners, which currently sell between $200 and $300, will eventually be cheap as well.
3. Even after they start NextGen broadcasts, stations will have to keep broadcasting regular old HD.
Here's the actual language:
"The programming aired on the ATSC 1.0 simulcast channel must be 'substantially similar' to the programming aired on the 3.0 channel. This means that the programming must be the same, except for programming features that are based on the enhanced capabilities of ATSC 3.0, advertisements and promotions for upcoming programs. The substantially similar requirement will sunset in five years from its effective date absent further action by the Commission to extend it."
In other words, the HD broadcast has to be essentially the same as the new 3.0 broadcast for five years, perhaps longer depending on future FCC actions.
Which brings us to point 3. By the time people had to buy them, HD tuners were inexpensive and are even more so now. The HD tuner I use is currently $26 on Amazon. The first generation NextGen tuners available now are more expensive than that, though they're not outrageous. We'll discuss those below. By the time anyone actually requires one, however, they'll almost certainly be affordable.
Which is good, because there aren't any planned subsidies this time around for people to get a tuner for cheap. I'm sure this is at least partly due to how few people actually still use OTA as their sole form of TV reception. Maybe this will change as more stations convert, but we're a ways away from that.
As you can see, there are lots of parts that need to get upgraded all along the chain before you can get 3.0 in your home.
ATSC/TVTechnology.com
Here's another way to think about it: The first HD broadcasts began in the mid-90s, but when did you buy your first HDTV? As far as the 3.0 transition is concerned we're in the late-90s, maybe generously the early 2000s, now. Things seem like they're moving at a much more rapid pace than the transition from analog to DTV/HDTV, but even so, it will be a long time before ATSC 3.0 completely replaces the current standard.
How to get NextGen right now
LG
If you want to check it out for yourself, many of you already can. The first stop is to go to WatchNextGenTV.com. That website will help you find what stations in your area are broadcasting, or which ones will soon.
Next up you'll need something to receive it. If you're in the market for a new TV there are several options available from Hisense, LG, Samsung, and Sony. Here's our list of all the 2022 TVs with built-in next-gen tuners.
If you want to check out NextGen TV without buying a new television, you'll need an external tuner. It's still early days, so there aren't many options.
The Tablo ATSC 3.0 Quad HDMI DVR
Nuvvyo
At CES 2022 Nuvvyo announced the Tablo, a quad-tuner box that can connect to a TV directly, or transmit over a network to Rokus, Apple TVs, or computers on your home network.
The Silicon Dust has two models, the $199 HomeRun Flex 4K and the $279 HomeRun Scribe 4K. Both have ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 tuners.
If you want a more traditional tuner, BitRouter plans to start shipping its first ZapperBox M1 tuners in the spring. You can reserve one now for $249. It doesn't have internal storage, but BitRouter plans to add the ability to save content on network-attached storage, or NAS, devices via a firmware update. They also plan to add the ability to send the content around your home network, like what the Scribe 4K does.
Zapperbox
Then there's what to watch. Being early in the process, you're not going to find much 4K content, possibly not any. This was the same with the early years of HDTV. It's also going to vary per area. There is certainly a lot of 4K content being produced right now, and that has been the case for several years. So in that way, we're in better shape than we were in the early days of HD.
Basic and paid cable channels over-the-air?
One company is using the bandwidth and IP nature of NextGen to do something a little different. It's a hybrid paid TV service, sort of like cable/satellite, but using over-the-air broadcasts to deliver the content. It's called Evoca, and right now it's available only in Boise, Idaho. Edge Networks is the company behind it, and it wants to roll it out to other small markets where cable offerings are limited, and broadband speeds are slow or expensive.
It's an interesting idea for underserved and often forgotten-about markets.
Read more: Cable TV channels and 4K from an antenna?
Seeing the future
The transition from analog broadcasting to HD, if you count from the formation of the Grand Alliance to the final analog broadcast, took 16 years.
Though many aspects of technology move rapidly, getting dozens of companies, plus the governments of the US and many other countries, all to agree to specific standards, takes time. So does the testing of the new tech. There are a lot of cogs and sprockets that have to align for this to work, and it would be a lot harder to fix once it's all live.
But technology moves faster and faster. It's highly doubtful it will take 16 years to fully implement NextGen TV. As we mentioned at the top, dozens of stations are already broadcasting. Will every station in your city switch to NextGen TV? Probably not, but the bigger ones likely will. This is especially true if there are already other NextGen TV stations in your area. There's a potential here for stations to make additional money in the long run with 3.0, and that's obviously a big motivator.
There's also the question of how much content there will be. If it follows the HDTV transition model, big sporting events in 4K HDR will come first, followed by lots and lots of shows featuring nature scenes and closeups of bugs. Seriously -- this was totally a thing. Then we'll see a handful of scripted prime-time shows. My guess would be the popular, solidly profitable ones that are produced (not just aired) by networks like CBS and NBC.
So should you hold off buying a new TV? Nope, not unless you only get your shows over the air. And even if you do, by the time there's enough content to be interesting, there will be cheap tuner boxes you can connect to whatever TV you have.
For now, NextGen TV seems to be well on its way.
As well as covering TV and other display tech, Geoff does photo tours of cool museums and locations around the world, including nuclear submarines, massive aircraft carriers, medieval castles, epic 10,000 mile road trips, and more. Check out Tech Treks for all his tours and adventures.
He wrote a bestselling sci-fi novel about city-size submarines, along with a sequel. You can follow his adventures on Instagram and his YouTube channel.
Apple Watch 'Pro' Rumored to Feature Bigger Display, Body Temperature Sensor
Apple Watch 'Pro' Rumored to Feature Bigger Display, Body Temperature Sensor
Apple is expected to unveil three versions of its smartwatch this fall: the new SE, Series 8 and a high-end model, called the Apple Watch "Pro." The latter will feature a major redesign, longer battery life and a body temperature sensor, among other upgrades, according to a Sunday report from Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.
Gurman says the high-end Apple Watch's screen will be 7% larger than the standard model and sport a fresh design that is an "evolution of the current rectangular shape" without being circular. The Apple Watch "Pro" is also rumored to feature a more durable titanium body.
As for health features, the high-end Apple Watch is said to have a body temperature sensor. A previous report from Bloomberg suggests the sensor will be able to detect fevers and tell you when to check with a dedicated thermometer or consult a doctor.
The Apple Watch "Pro" may offer longer battery life, as well. Gurman suggests the high-end Apple Watch will support multiple day uses on a single charge through a new low-power mode.
Apple has yet to announce a release date for its upcoming Apple Watch, but rumors point to a fall launch alongside the iPhone 14 and AirPods Pro 2.
Apple didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
Vivo X50 Pro review: A solid all-rounder for camera lovers
Vivo X50 Pro review: A solid all-rounder for camera lovers
The Vivo X50 Pro is a midrange phone on the higher end of that spectrum and has many of the trappings of an enticing flagship. Starting at approximately $670, you get a crystalline screen, 5G, a powerful battery, a speedy display and fast charging. But the phone also has a camera feature that undeniably distinguishes it from its rivals. The X50 Pro is the world's first mass-produced phone with a built-in gimbal camera system that allows you to capture smooth, fast-action video with the click of a button. Out of Vivo's trio of X50 handsets -- which the Chinese phone-maker is marketing as a professional photography flagship -- the X50 Pro is the only one to boast this futuristic feature. But Vivo did make a few compromises. For instance, it lacks stereo speakers (a big drawback for music lovers like myself) and it isn't water resistant, which many phones of this class are. It also has a midrange processor (Snapdragon 765G) instead of the most adva nced chipset available.
If you're not fussed about shooting action video, you're better off buying Vivo's base X50 or the OnePlus Nord. Both have comparable specs but don't charge a premium for advanced video gimbals and hardware. The X50 and Nord feature a quad-camera system led by a 48-megapixel shooter, the same chipset and a fast display, but are nearly $100 to $200 cheaper respectively. But if being splash-proof is important to you, consider the iPhone 11 ($500 at Best Buy).
Vivo doesn't currently have plans to officially release the phone in the US. But X50 phones have been released in parts of Asia and Europe, so they'll be reasonably easy to import. Pricing also varies based on country with prices trending higher in Western countries. In India, the base variant (with 8GB RAM and 128GB storage) starts at 49,990 rupees (approximately $670, £510 or AU$930), while in Eastern Europe it starts at the equivalent of $780.
Vivo's X50 Pro features a 6.5-inch AMOLED display.
Sareena Dayaram/CNET
The X50 Pro's gimbal camera delivers
The X50 Pro has multiple rear cameras. The entire setup uses a gimbal-like system and a combination of optical image stabilization and electronic image stabilization to produce incredibly stable video. Vivo says its gimbal system reduces shakiness by up to three times compared to traditional stabilization technology, thanks to a "double ball structure" that allows it to rotate on three axes.
I captured a bunch of video in different lighting conditions to see how well the X50 Pro stacked up against another phone known for its video-camera prowess, the iPhone 11 Pro Max. In short, the X50 Pro performed very well. When I recorded video while walking in daylight and panning the cameras from side to side, I didn't see much of a difference between the two phones. Both captured stable footage without any obvious jerkiness.
The differences were noticeable, however, when running, especially in darker conditions. Although the X50 Pro's output was steady and seamless, there were several times when the camera went out of focus and blurred slightly.The iPhone 11 Pro Max's footage, on the other hand, always remained in focus but was extremely shaky. In the end, I preferred video from the X50 Pro because it was easier for me to watch stable video with occasional blurs rather than jerky footage. Apart from video, another use-case for the gimbal system is taking photos while zooming. I was able to more easily capture some great photos zoomed in because of the stability it provided.
Bottom line: The X50 Pro's gimbal-style camera is impressive and generally delivers what it promises. But it cannot replace a full-sized gimbal -- it is built into a phone after all. And while its technology is unique, its videos aren't earth-shatteringly better than, say, what you get on the pricier iPhone 11 Pro Max.
The X50 Pro's design is slender and classic
Though its design isn't wholly unique, the Vivo's X50 Pro is still a sleek phone with a classic aesthetic. I prefer designs like this because they're more enduring rather than envelope-pushing trends that seem to fade away (remember pop-up selfie cameras?). The X50 Pro has a spacious 6.56-inch curved display with a discreet hole-punch selfie camera. On the back there's a larger than average rectangular protrusion that's home to a rear quad-camera module and the phone's headline gimbal feature.
The X50 Pro comes in gray, which I love. Its subtle sheen adds to the phone's premium look. Overall the X50 Pro is neither heavy or exceptionally lightweight, but it is relatively slim, which allows me to type out emails and messages using one hand.
The X50 Pro's screen has a higher 90Hz refresh rate than most phones, which have 60Hz displays. It offers a silky smooth experience, which I really like, though it's not as high as the 120Hz screens on the OnePlus 8 Pro and Galaxy S20.
Vivo's rear camera setup is headlined by a 48-megapixel shooter.
Sareena Dayaram/CNET
The X50 Pro's multiple cameras have range
In addition to the phone's main 48-megapixel sensor, there are two telephoto shooters and an 8-megapixel ultrawide-angle lens. These multiple cameras offer plenty of variety and range in terms of photographic possibilities, which I really appreciate. For example, the ultrawide camera has a 120-degree field of view, while the periscope zoom camera can zoom in on an object up to 60x.
In general, the X50 Pro captured crisp and vibrant photos that captured my surroundings wonderfully and with accurate colors. But in certain lighting conditions, during sunset for example, photos were more saturated and punched-up in the X50 Pro than the iPhone 11 Pro. Whichever photo you prefer is likely a matter of personal preference, but you can see the difference for yourself in the photos below. Keep in mind that the monitor you're viewing these pictures on has an affect as well.
The Vivo X50 Pro captured a fiery yellow-orange sunset (left), while the photograph taken by the iPhone XS Max (right) was more true to life.
Sareena Dayaram/CNET
This photo was taken indoors with the default lens. As you can see, there was natural light pouring through the windows and it wasn't the easiest lighting conditions for the camera to work with, but the image came out well.
Sareena Dayaram/CNET
This image was taken using the default shooter and is more saturated in the photo than it was in real life.
Sareena Dayaram/CNET
This image was taken at night using the camera's dedicated Night Mode setting.
Sareena Dayaram/CNET
The phone's 60x zoom, known as "Hyper Zoom," doesn't close in as intimately as the Galaxy S20 Ultra's 100x "Space Zoom," but I was still blown away by the sheer power of it. Photos were blurry, but they still retained detail that I couldn't see with my own eyes. And when I didn't need to zoom that far, I was also able to take sharp and detailed images at 5x optical zoom, which few phones have.
Vivo's X50 Pro has range. Using its 60x hyper zoom, I was able to zoom into the sign on the hotel on the opposite side of the harbor. I couldn't see the sign with my naked eye and did not know it existed till I zoomed in with the phone.
Sareena Dayaram/CNET
This image was taken on default settings (1x).
Sareena Dayaram/CNET
Zooming in 5x.
Sareena Dayaram/CNET
Zooming in 10x.
Sareena Dayaram/CNET
The four zoom modes side by side.
Sareena Dayaram/CNET
The phone's ultrawide lens captured sprawling landscapes and sunsets. Colors, however, weren't as true to life as they appeared when I took pictures with the X50 Pro's other lenses in most lighting conditions. For some reason, blues were darker on images taken with the ultrawide lens. This isn't a major flaw, but color accuracy is super important to photographers, and they're who Vivo is actively courting with this phone.
X50 Pro's software features and UI
The X50 Pro runs FunTouch OS 10.5 on top of Android 10. It's a clean interface that's easy to use. There was some bloatware, but most of it could be turned off and it didn't bother me much. The X50 Pro also comes with dark mode, an always-on display option and an app drawer. It also has circular icons, which I prefer to the rigidness of square ones.
Like most Android 10 phones, you'll use swiping gesture controls to navigate through the phone. But the phone does have some unintuitive controls of its own. In the early days of my reviewing the X50 Pro, for example, I accidentally hung up on a bunch of incoming calls. That's because to answer a call you need to swipe down as opposed to up, which is the more common direction on Android phones.
X50 Pro battery and performance
The X50 Pro's battery comfortably lasted me throughout the day with mild usage. That means I used it for light gameplay, reading the news on various apps, answering emails, scanning my social media account and chatting with loved ones on WhatsApp. When I continuously played an HD video on Airplane mode for battery tests, the phone lasted 15 hours, 22 minutes at 50% brightness.
When it did eventually run out of juice, it took the phone between 52 to 73 minutes to reach a full charge using the bundled 33-watt flash charger (during the three times that I tested it). That's a pretty good time -- most premium phones take about 90 minutes to fully charge. By comparison, Apple says the fast charger that comes with its iPhone 11 Pro can hit a 50% charge in 30 minutes. Fast charging is super handy, especially for those occasions when I'm about to leave my apartment and I realize my phone is almost dead.
The phone's Snapdragon 765G processor (the G stands for gaming BTW) is a lower-cost option for phone-makers to equip their phones with 5G. It isn't as powerful as the Snapdragon 865 chipset (as seen in the OnePlus 8 Pro and the Galaxy S20 line), but the 765G provided more than enough power for all my processing needs. The X50 Pro stacked up well in benchmark tests against other phones equipped with the same chip like the OnePlus Nord and LG Velvet. And when I played more demanding, graphics-intensive games such as PUBG, I didn't notice any lags or stuttering. The gaming experience was immersive and graphics were crisp.
