Completely new processors as well as faster Wi-Fi with regard to Apple's slim desktop.

It truly is telling the latest pair of updates to Apple's iMac all-in-one desktop just weren't announced at one of several company's regular stage displays. Instead, the newest iMac slipped quietly directly into Apple's Web site, the media announced through an understated pr release posted early the next day.

That's for the reason that updates tend to be internal, putting brand new hardware inside an iMac body that received a serious makeover within 2012. Through the outside, here is the same slender screen sitting in addition to an lightweight aluminum stand and minimalist bottom. The design and style was controversial recently, with the actual iMac's razor-thin border and full center making an optical illusion the entire technique was while slim as a possible iPad. We're not quite there still, but also in the second calendar year, the iMac's design and style still thinks modern, and unlike whatever else in the marketplace.

Inside, you'll find exactly the kind of revisions one could expect from the quiet components update. Intel's latest fourth-generation Center i-series processors usually are here, also known through the code branded Haswell. In our tests using other Haswell devices, we've discovered modestly improved upon performance and greatly improved upon battery life, although this latter is not going to matter below.

The actual built-in Wi-Fi have been updated towards the new 802. 11ac common, which gives faster info speeds when attached to a works 802. 11ac router. These two upgrades earlier found his or her way in Apple's MacBook Fresh air laptops back in June 2013.

The SSD internal storage options are now connected via PCIe, which the company says increases drive performance if you order an iMac with either SSD storage or a fusion drive with both SSD and HDD components.

Considered together, these updates will not radically transform the iMac experience. But they will do carry an previously excellent computer's desktop and help it become very up-to-date for your holiday year and outside of, and at this time, it's hard to recommend any midprice or higher computer that does not have Intel's Haswell processors.

One final note for those about to invest in a new iMac: Apple's next operating system upgrade, named OS X Mavericks, is expected sometime in the next several weeks. That leaves early adopters wondering if the update will be free for everyone, if they'll get a free upgrade while other Mac owners have to pay for the update, or if they'll be stuck paying $20 or so for Mavericks so soon after buying their new iMacs.

	Apple iMac (27-inch, September 2013)	Dell XPS 27	MacBook Air 13-inch (June 2013)	Apple iMac (27-inch,November 2012)
Price	$2,199	$2,099	$1,099	$2,599
Display size/resolution	27-inch, 2560x1,440 screen	27-inch, 2,560x1,440 touch screen	13.3-inch, 1,440x900 screen	27-inch, 2560x1,440 screen
PC CPU	3.4GHz Intel Core i5 4670	3.1GHz Intel Core i7-4770S	1.3GHz Intel Core i5 4250U	3.4GHz Intel Core i7 3770
PC Memory	8GB DDR3 SDRAM 1600MHz	8GB 1,600MHZ DDR3 SDRAM	4GB DDR3 SDRAM 1600MHz	8GB DDR3 SDRAM 1600MHz
Graphics	2GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 775M	2GB Nvidia GeForce GT750M	1,024MB Intel HD Graphics5000	2GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 680M
Storage	128GB SSD 1TB hybrid hard drive	2TB, 7,200 rpm hard drive	128GB SSD hard drive	128GB SSD 1TB hybrid hard drive
Optical drive	None	Blu-Ray/DVD/DVD RW combo	None	None
Networking	802.11a/c wireless, Bluetooth 4.0	Gigabit Ethernet, 802.11b/g/n wireless, Bluetooth 4.0	802.11a/c wireless, Bluetooth 4.0	802.11n wireless, Bluetooth 4.0
Operating system	OSX Mountain Lion 10.8.5	Windows 8 (64-bit)	OSX Mountain Lion 10.8.4	OSX Mountain Lion 10.8

Design and features 

The current iMac design blew a lot of minds when first unveiled by Apple in October 2012. The artful photography and clever angles made the system look completely flat, although once you got to see it in person, you could see that the rear panel curves out in the center. So, no, it's not as paper-thin as one might think at first glance, but there's still a notable lack of bulk for a high-powered 27-inch all-in-one. (Note, for example, the thick slablike design of the Dell XPS 27, probably this system's closest competitor.)

The screen on the 27-inch iMac, though not a matte display, is less reflective than most, a change that started with the 2012 version. Apple's displays are always bright, clear, and consistent, which makes me wish there was a way to use the display for other devices, a feature some Windows all-on-one PCs offer via an extra HDMI input port.

	Apple iMac (27-inch, September 2013)
Video	Mini DisplayPort (x2)
Audio	Stereo speakers, combo headphone/microphone jack
Data	4 USB 3.0, SD card reader
Networking	Ethernet, 802.11ac Wi-Fi, Bluetooth
Optical drive	None

System configurations

Apple iMac (27-inch, September 2013)
Apple OS X Mountain Lion 10.8.5; 3.4GHz Intel Core i5-4670; 8GB 1,600MHz DDR3 SDRAM; 2GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 775M graphics card; 1TB 7,200rpm hard drive, 128GB solid-state hard drive

Apple iMac (27-inch, November 2012)
Apple OS X Mountain Lion 10.8; 3.4GHz Intel Core i7-3770; 8GB 1,600MHz DDR3 SDRAM; 2GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 680M graphics card; 1TB 7,200rpm hard drive, 128GB solid-state hard drive

Dell XPS 27
Windows 8 (64-bit) 3.1GHz Intel Core i7 4770S; 8GB 1,600MHz DDR3 SDRAM; 2GB Nvidia GeForce GT750M graphics card; 2TB 7,200rpm hard drive

MacBook Air 13-inch (June 2013)
OSX 10.8.4 Mountain Lion; 1.3GHz Intel Core i5 4240U; 4GB DDR3 SDRAM 1,600MHz; 1024MB (Shared) Intel HD Graphics 4000; 128GB Apple SSD

Asus ET2702
Windows 8 (64-bit); 3.4GHz Intel Core i7 4770; 8GB DDR3 SDRAM 1600MHz; 2048MB (Dedicated) AMD Radeon HD 8800M; 2TB 7,200rpm Toshiba hard drive

Read More

Moto G review : an amazing smartphone, done right

Since Motorola was gained by a certain tech giant a year ago, its new possessor hasn't had an especially particularly impact on the way it works. In the relatively recent past, indeed, Motorola managed an alternate gloat hand of Droids, however there was something dissimilar about the Moto X that emulated them. The leading confirmation of a change in course, maybe. In the same vein, the as of late reported Moto G feels really like a Google telephone, and it bodes well.

If the Nexus 5 is for smartphone aficionados, and the Moto X is for upgraders who can't resist the offer of a custom handset, then the Moto G is for those who want a functional device at a reasonable price. At $179 or £135 unlocked, the Moto G slots into the low-cost niche Samsung and others have been steadily cashing in on. That price tag, however, includes an unwritten disclaimer: Sacrifices were made. It's certainly true with the Moto G, but with expectations in check, it's hard to not be impressed with what Motorola has managed to achieve.

HARDWARE

 Motorola isn't selling the Moto G as a shabbier Moto X variant, yet it could have; the telephones look to some extent like one another. Not that this is an awful thing: The X is a brilliant, clean handset. Smartphones aren't generally depicted as "mobile" any longer, yet the term verifiably does apply here. The Moto G is a really one-gave mechanism - an invigorating change from 5-inch-in addition to gadgets we've been evaluating starting late. Its bended back rests fantastically in the palm, and both the grippy matte cases and dimpled flip spreads make for an agreeable outline that is generally suited to augmented utilization.

There are no physical or soft keys on the front face of the device. The standard Android home, back and multitask catches will show up onscreen when required, however overall the bezel below the 4.5-inch display is exposed. The bezel above the screen, in the interim, is home to a sunken, metal speaker grille, the front-facing camera and a little white notification light. As the Moto G's sizes are like the X - its 0.6mm more extended and more extensive, and 1.2mm thicker at its fattest focus - the somewhat littler screen means there's additional clear space underneath the presentation. Still, this is more a perception than a slight - the inside parts need to go some place, all the same.

Around the outside, there's a blank left edge, and a power button and volume rocker on the right. In the mean time, the essential mic and micro-USB port could be found on the base, with the second mic and headphone's jack lift top. The keys on the right edge jut more than we're used to, yet they do process a decent, fulfilling click. All details on the back spread sits around the top edge. In diving request, you'll discover the Polaroid lens with the amplifier grille to its left above a LED blaze, which, thus, is above a little space surrounding the Motorola logo. That is the place your thumb rests when prying the back board off, when you accompany Motorola's directions (and you may as well). Nothing energizing anticipates you under there: only a space for your micro-SIM.

	MOTO G
Pricing	$179 (8GB), $199 (16GB)
Dimensions	129.9 x 65.9 x 11.6mm (5.12 x 2.59 x 0.46 in.)
Weight	5.04 oz. (143g)
Screen size	4.5 inches
Screen resolution	1,280 x 720 pixels (329 ppi)
Screen type	LCD
Battery	2,070mAh
Internal storage	8/16GB
External storage	None
Rear camera	5MP
Front-facing cam	1.3MP
Video capture	720p
NFC	No
Radios	GSM/UMTS: GSM (850/900/1800/1900); UMTS (850/900/1700/1900/2100); 21 Mbps HSPA+ CDMA: CDMA 850/1900; EVDO Rev. A
Bluetooth	4.0
SoC	1.2GHz quad-core Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 (MSM8x26), Adreno 305 GPU
RAM	1GB
WiFi	802.11b/g/n
Operating system	Android 4.3 Jelly Bean

SOFTWARE

Not at all like the Moto X, the G doesn't have any extravagant specific processor centers that the previous' Active Display and Touchless Control characteristics use. Our opened unit was appreciatively without bloatware with just Motorola's Migrate and Assist programming going hand in hand with the stock applications. Relocate permits you to duplicate virtually all information from an alternate Android handset with the application introduced to your new G. Support will "take in" certain things about your normal and immediately change various settings therefore. Case in point, assuming that you've a gathering connected to your timetable, it'll captivate a meeting room inviting profile; also, it'll switch to noiseless mode when you're getting a few Z's. Both sound suitable enough, yet in the event that you're anything like me, you'll most likely overlook them.

PERFORMANCE AND BATTERY LIFE

One way we really like to challenge handsets is with an old-fashioned gaming session, and sure enough, the Moto G's got some mettle. We started off with a few quarters of NBA Jam. Our three-pointer percentage wasn't the best, but the G handled it with ease. That Snapdragon 400 didn't even break a sweat during an online multiplayer round of Shadowgun: DeadZone (on the highest graphics setting, no less). Next, we hit the tarmac in Real Racing 3, which has taken some smartphones out of their comfort zones in the past. We gave up trying to find the phone's breaking point after a few smooth laps. If it dropped any frames, it wasn't noticeable, so we headed back into Tiny Death Star to restock our levels, and called it a day.

After being thoroughly impressed with the Moto G's gaming prowess, we were puzzled by hiccups with web browsing. Mobile and desktop sites loaded extremely quickly on good connections, and we didn't have any problems with tiling. What we noticed, however, was a perceptible lag while navigating up, down and around web pages. It's not a huge turnoff -- the delays are fairly minor -- but nonetheless, this isn't something we were expecting.

	MOTO G	MOTO X	HTC ONE MINI	GALAXY S4 MINI	NEXUS 5
Quadrant 2.0	8,723	8,958	5,200	7,250	9,296
Vellamo 2.0	1,962	2,427	2,118	1,980	1,407
AnTuTu 4.1	17,364	20,292	10,048*	13,732*	28,171
SunSpider 1.0 (ms)	1,377	1,023	1,442	1,142	696
GFXBench 2.7 Offscreen (fps)	16	16	15	17	23
CF-Bench	15,030	14,092	6,542	13,646	20,709
SunSpider: lower scores are better. *benchmarked in AnTuTu version 3.X

Speaking of the sort, the Moto G's 2,070mAh battery is non-removable, and is nothing to write home about, either. It'll support you through a full day of moderate to busy use, but no further. It performed as such in our standard battery rundown test, looping a 720p video at 50 percent brightness for seven hours and 48 minutes before blacking out. That's about 30 minutes more than the Nexus 5 lasted, and it's slightly better than average in the grand scheme, but we don't recommend going on a weekend hiking trip without a portable charger for topping up. You know, in case you need to call for help when a bear mauls your pal, or something.

Read More

Pebble Steel review : a stylish smartwatch

Smartwatches are supposed to be pieces of jewelry that are all in all as particular as the cell phones they're appended to, yet rarely are they considered popular. We've seen a handful (or is it wristful?) that are hip, luxurious and lively, yet we've additionally honestly persisted more than enough monstrous choices too. Tragically, none have effectively matched the plushness brands like Seiko, Rolex, Citizen and Victorinox are known for on the simple side. In all actuality, relatively few organizations are in a position to even attempt this. Without an in number engineer stage and ensured degree of profitability, few (if any) smart watchmakers want to take the risk.

It bodes well, then, that an organization like Pebble is exploiting what has all the earmarks of being a totally untouched fragment of the smartwatch market. In only a short year, the early watchmaker rapidly picked up the experience, assets, stage and engineer help needed to even attempt handling such a task. The outcome is the $249 Pebble Steel. It's intended to be a more exquisite adaptation of the first ever Pebble, with few progressions to by and large purpose. Thus, have we at long last discovered a smartwatch that you can feel great flaunting to your business accomplices on the golf course? 

HARDWARE

If you're holding out for a new Pebble with a nifty touchscreen, color display, always-listening mode or voice activation, keep waiting. The Steel isn't supposed to be a next-gen device -- it's designed to be a more expensive version of the original Pebble that appeals to consumers with more... discerning tastes. The Steel, which comes clad in CNC-machined stainless steel (type 316, if you must know), is stately, refined and classy. That's in stark contrast to the original, which we'd describe as "colorful." Sporty. Fun. Its build materials and industrial design are better than any other smartwatch we've seen, and Gorilla Glass 2 helps make the watch feel durable. The catch: The watch's dashing good looks come at a $100 premium over the original.

Before we continue, we want to clarify that the Steel isn't meant to replace the year-old Pebble. It's designed to be a premium option targeted at those who'd otherwise prefer to adorn their wrists with more expensive timepieces. Together, the two watches share the same innards: They use a 1.26-inch e-paper display (with a resolution of 168 x 144), ARM Cortex-M3 CPU, 130mAh battery and waterproof design (it can withstand up to five atmospheres, or 50 meters). There are a few differences, though: The Steel adds an RGB notification light, oleophobic anti-fingerprint coating and a new charger. There's also a clever black band that wraps around the perimeter of the device and acts as an external Bluetooth 4.0 LE antenna, similar to the way Apple integrated antennas into the frame of the iPhone to improve signal attenuation.

The original Pebble gets its sporty look from a long, curved face and recessed sides, whereas the Steel goes with a flat, squarish face and straight sides. The 39 x 36.8 x 10.25mm Steel is shorter, slightly wider and thinner than the 52 x 36 x 11.5mm Pebble, but it's also much heavier (it's 16g heavier with the leather band attached, 59g if you use the metal band). The buttons on the Steel use the same layout as its predecessor, are just a tad smaller, stick out farther from the watch and they're actually easier to press.

 

The Steel comes in your choice of black or brushed stainless (silver), with leather and metal wristbands included in the box. The black model comes coated with a Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD) finish, which provides impact strength and resistance to abrasion; the stainless one, meanwhile, only uses PVD on the bezel. As for the straps, the black leather band is adjustable, while the stainless steel option -- my personal favorite -- has a foldable clasp and links that can easily be added or removed using a tiny screwdriver and pliers. (Each box has extra links and a small screwdriver thrown in, just in case you prefer the DIY route.) Unlike the original Pebble, you won't be able to swap out the Steel wristbands with any standard 22mm strap. You shouldn't have to wait too long for more choices, though, since Pebble's published a 3D model of the watch to make it painless for a manufacturer to produce accessories.

The notification light is nestled in the lower-left corner of the Steel, and is currently only used for one purpose: to indicate that the device is charging. This is a useful new feature, since we always have to double-check the original Pebble to make sure the weak magnets on the charger are actually doing their job. We'd love to see this opened up to developers down the road, though.

Primarily due to the new design, Pebble chose to fit the Steel with a different magnetic charger. The magnet pads are a little bigger than the ones on the original watch, which helps them stick to the device much better. On the first Pebble, we're constantly worried about the charger falling off anytime the watch vibrates from a new notification, and it often takes a few attempts to even fit it properly.

SOFTWARE

Come for the fancy new hardware, stay for the fancy new software. On the surface, the Pebble's interface is the same one we've grown accustomed to over the past year, with one key difference: You can now find and download a plethora of watchfaces, games, productivity tools and other apps through a centralized app store. This is a significant improvement over the old method, which required Pebble users to endure eternal scavenger hunts through third-party websites and smartphone app stores (iOS' and Android's, to be specific) to get the best apps for their watch. The new store will be available on both Pebbles (existing Pebble owners should see a firmware update in the coming days), but this was the very first time we've had the opportunity to try it out.

The setup process is simple. Before you begin, you'll need to pair the Steel with your phone using Bluetooth and then create a Pebble account (this will require entering an email address and choosing a password). The store uses this to remember your downloads and purchases, so if you have to switch devices or factory-reset your watch, you won't have to gather your apps again -- just enter your Pebble creds and all of your apps magically reappear.

PERFORMANCE AND BATTERY LIFE

Since the Steel has the same components under the hood as the original Pebble, we weren't surprised to see it deliver comparable performance. Part of the appeal of the Pebble line is that neither watch pretends that it's a fully featured smartphone. Instead, Pebble always errs on the side of minimalism over complexity. In short, the Steel doesn't try to be anything that it's not -- it's an accessory that accentuates the functionality of your phone, and that's all.

With that in mind, the Steel performs well. We barely observed any lag or stuttering (including when we entered and exited apps), although on rare occasions, we'd notice an animation stop halfway through (such as when we had to back out of a notification), but this was usually only for a second or two before the processor caught up and got us where we needed to go. We've experienced this enough times on the original Pebble that we weren't surprised, but it's something we hope Pebble can iron out in a future firmware update.

The Bluetooth performance here meets our expectations -- the watch and handset communicate instantly. For instance, it takes only a fraction of a second to fast-forward to the next music track when we push its associated button on the Steel; it's fast enough that my brain perceives the transition as instantaneous and seamless, which is exactly as fast as we want it to go. My only beef is that when I'm switching watchfaces, it sometimes takes a couple seconds for real-time information to pull up -- and this is only a minor inconvenience at worst, especially since we experienced the same issues on the first Pebble. The most crucial information, the date and time, always show up without any hesitation.

We're happy to say that battery life is quite promising. Our tests are still ongoing, as it's difficult to test a smartwatch battery that claims five to seven days of regular use, but here's what we've found so far: After three full days of what we consider to be heavy use -- loading, switching and playing with countless apps as part of this review, using it as a remote for music playback and receiving more iOS notifications than we care to admit -- we drained the battery down to 20 percent. This is a strong indicator that battery life will meet that five-to-seven-day goal with normal usage patterns. Company reps tell us that the new firmware comes with heaps of optimizations to increase efficiency, and so far we haven't found any reason not to believe them. That's a large improvement over the original Pebble, which often couldn't get through three days on regular use.

WRAP-UP

If functionality is the most critical factor for you when buying a smartwatch, the original Pebble is still a better deal at $150. It will do the same things as the Steel, which means there is very little incentive to paying an extra $100 for the nicer watch if that's your motive. Additionally, the first Pebble is also more colorful and customizable, so some might still prefer it over the Steel.

On the other hand, the Steel serves a wide-open market segment: people who want a watch that looks good. Indeed, the Steel blends functionality with an elegant and durable design, and it does a fantastic job at it. You'll get a long-lasting battery (by smartwatch standards, at least), a tough stainless steel body and a solid ecosystem that will continue to grow and get better. It seems like an ideal compromise for those who want a flashy watch that does more than just tell time, and even though it's significantly more expensive than its first-gen counterpart, it's still much cheaper than some of the Rolex-style timepieces you can buy.

Simply put, the Steel isn't going to persuade many people to swap out their perfectly functional Hamilton, Movado or Citizen, but if you're in the market for a replacement and want a smartwatch, this is your best option. What's most important, though, is what the Steel represents: a realization that if smartwatches are going to become mainstream, they'll need to appeal to people who prefer to adorn their wrists with jewelry. At the very least, the Steel is a significant step in the right direction.

Anwar Tad contributed to this review.

Read More