Even though the LG C3 has already been released, the LG C2 is still one of the best high-end TVsyou can get, according to CNET’s David Katzmaier. Featuring an OLED panel, the C2 offers brilliant color reproduction and visual fidelity compared to a traditional LED or QLED TVs. Even better, there’s a substantial deal at Woot that will discount the 65-inch model down to just $1,397, which is a significant 44% discount. An unlike a lot of Woot deals, this TV is offered brand new with a one-year manufacturer warranty.
The TV itself is optimized for a true cinematic experience at home, as its a9 Gen 5 AI processor, 8 million self-lit pixels, 4K resolution, Dolby Vision IQ, Dolby Atmos and a Filmmaker Mode combine to give it “better picture quality than any non-OLED TV,” according to Katzmaier. And if you’re a gamer, this TV has Nvidia G-Sync, FreeSync Premium and a variable refresh rate of 120Hz so you can have lag-free gaming sessions — along with four HDMI 2.1 ports for your consoles or other devices. Katzmaier says these are “best-in-class gaming features.”
There’s also built-in support for Amazon Alexa, Google Assistant, Apple AirPlay and more, which means you can use voice commands to control this set and connected devices. You can also get personalized recommendations for every member of your family by making separate accounts.
However, if you don’t need an OLED TV, there are plenty of other cheap TV deals worth checking out.
For the better part of a decade, the Prusa Mk3 has been the best 3D printer you could buy for less than $1,000, and the Mk4 — the natural evolution of the MK3 — would have retained that top slot if the landscape hadn’t changed so much in the last year. Now, the MK4 is still a good machine, but is it a great one compared to the competition?
If you have been into 3D printing at all in the past 10 years, you’re sure to recognize the shape and even the colors of the Prusa Mk4. Prusa Research has been making open-source printers for as long as I have been part of the 3D printing space, and the iconic black-and-orange bedslinger is synonymous with excellent print quality and a sense of community.
The Mk4 has much the same shape and design as the Mk3 with a lot of refinement. The frame of the MK4 is thicker aluminum than the Mk3, adding stability, something that is needed when you’re accelerating at the speeds these machines now run at. The Mk4 also features a whole new extruder system, called the Nextruder, that uses a dual-gear system to control the flow of materials. This is especially helpful with TPU — the very flexible filament used in phone cases — as it forces the bendy material to behave while running through the nozzle. The nozzle is also swappable using a very easy, hand-tight screw mechanism. This lets you change nozzle sizes between prints, so you can use smaller nozzles for details and a larger nozzle for structural parts.
Really, almost no part of the Mk3 still exists in a meaningful way on the MK4. It looks the same, but every part that can be upgraded has been. Although there’s an upgrade kit available to turn your Mk3S+ into a Mk4, you really shouldn’t bother; you’ll be spending as much and replacing almost all the parts anyway. Just buy the Mk4 and keep your Mk3 for other projects, or, even better, donate it to your local school.
Prusa MK4
Build Volume (mm)
210 x 250 x 220
Hot end
All metal
Extruder type
Direct Drive Nextruder
Nozzle diameter mm
0.4 (0.2, 0.6, 0.8 compatable)
Nozzle max temperature
290c
Build plate max temperature
120c
Official max speed
600mm/s
Supported material
PLA, PETG, ABS, ASA, Flex, HIPS, PVA
Auto bed leveling
Yes
Filament Run out sensor
Yes
Connectivity
USB memory card, WiFi and ethernet with Caveats
Time-lapse camera
No
Slicer
PrusaSlicer
With all of the upgrades, you should expect the Prusa Mk4 to be significantly better than the Mk3 in terms of quality, and that’s difficult. The Mk3 always operated at peak quality for me, and whenever I needed something to print as smoothly as I could, I used the Mk3. The Mk4 offers that same level of quality without improving on it very much. What it does is maintain that extremely high standard while printing at least twice as fast.
I’ve printed for nearly 100 hours so far, using PLA, ABS, TPU and PETG, and every print has completed extremely well, aside from some heavy stringing. Even my CNET test print had a lot of stringing across the peaks, something that doesn’t happen as much these days. Despite using PrusaSlicer — the slicer specifically designed for the Mk4 — I couldn’t get the stock profiles to print without stringing. Every profile needed the temperature turned down by 8 to 10 degrees Celcius.
The rest of the CNET test and every print I printed turned out very well. The details on this red dragon from Fotis Mint are exquisite, though even here, you can see some stringing. Both the overhang test and bridging test were almost perfect, even at the hardest levels, and the tolerance test — one of the hardest tests on the CNET model — showed all four parts to be easily removable. This is a rare thing, happening on only five of the dozens of 3D printers I have tested over the years.
I’m impressed with the quality of the prints on the MK4, and I’m happy to see that even when you print at high speeds, it maintains the quality that we expect from Prusa Research. It’s also worth a special shout-out to the work PrusSlicer does to make sure these models are excellent. The organic support structures that PrusaSlicer uses are nothing short of miraculous and have all but eliminated the scarring that used to occur when printing with supports.
While speed isn’t everything, it’s incredibly important in this modern age. When most of the best 3D printers are now fast 3D printers, Prusa has to keep up with the changing times. They almost didn’t, releasing the MK4 without any speed bump at all over the Mk3. Thankfully, Prusa managed to get an update out within a few weeks, helping to keep it in the top 10 printers to buy. Just two years ago, you could have argued that speed only made the quality worse, and that’s why manufacturers didn’t focus on it, but with the X1 Carbon from Bambu Lab proving you could have both speed and quality, every manufacturer needs to focus on both areas to be successful.
I would also love to see a more user-friendly setup for using a network on the MK4. While it has both Wi-Fi and an Ethernet port, both of them require another piece of software to run other than the slicer, making them complicated. Modern 3D printers should have easy access to remote printing, and possibly even an app. Prusa is well placed to be able to do that, as the company owns into only PrusaSlicer, one of the best slicers around, but printables.com, one of the best repositories for 3D models on the web. These resources should be brought together to make printing on the MK4 from anywhere a breeze. Unfortunately, it requires a mess of shenanigans to accomplish.
Prusa has kept its open-source roots with the Mk4, something that we can all appreciate. The greatest achievement of the Mk2/Mk3/Mk4 series has been the ability to expand, upgrade and tinker with them without fear, as long you follow the open-source rules. This has given birth to some amazing projects, college papers and life-saving techniques, and I think that open-source printers will always have a place in our community. Prusa is one of the last bastions of truly open-source hardware, and I think it can keep that root while still pushing 3D printing forward.
I like the Prusa Mk4, I do, but I think this needs to be the last of this kind of upgrade. Iterative design does great for a while — look at the iPhone as an example — and I don’t have a problem with incremental upgrades, but the MK5, or whatever they decide to call the next machine, needs to be something wholly different and monumentally improved if Prusa wants to stay at the top of the consumer 3D printing market. The Prusa XL, a multi-head tool-changing 3D printer for manufacturing, has a lot of excellent innovations that I would love to see passed down to its smaller sibling.
Lastly is the price. Eighteen months ago, $1,100 for the new Prusa printer would have felt like a perfectly reasonable sum of money to spend. Now, though, we have printers that are almost as good, if not on par with the Mk4, priced considerably lower. Thankfully, you can get the Mk4 in kit form for $800, which is much more reasonable, and I still think if you’re interested in how 3D printers work, then a kit to build is the best way to get into the hobby. If you’re interested only in the end result, though, there are better options out there.
The low-cost Google Pixel 7A, unveiled at Google’s I/O developer conference back in May, has already seen a number of price-cutting deals. And right now Amazon has slashed the price on an unlocked Pixel 7A to just $374 — that’s a $125 savings and a new all-time low for this device, making this an offer that’s hard to beat. We don’t know how long this deal will last, so we recommend making your purchase sooner rather than later.
Even though the Pixel 7A is designed to be an entry-level device, it’s still plenty powerful and has already taken the crown as the best phone under $500. It’s powered by Google’s Tensor G2 chip, the same chip found in the Pixel 7. It also features a 64-megapixel camera and a 6.1-inch, 90Hz display, plus nice extras such as face unlock and wireless charging — notable upgrades over previous Pixel A phones, which help close the gap between the affordable Pixel line and more premium flagships. Mixed usage battery life should be up to 24 hours, too.
Editors’ note, Nov. 1: The Pixel 7A raises the bar for lower-priced smartphones. With the same processor as the Pixel 7, an attractive design and a camera that inherits most of the same features as its pricier sibling, there’s a lot to love about the Pixel 7A. We originally reviewed the Pixel 7A at launch in May but are recognizing it with an Editors’ Choice Award now that we’ve tested other major smartphone releases in 2023. The original review, published on May 10, 2023, is as follows.
Good news, Pixel fans: the Pixel 7 just got $100 cheaper. Well, not really. But it might as well have. Even though Google still charges $599 for its flagship Pixel, it just launched the $499 ( 449, AU$749) Pixel 7A — which includes many of the same benefits at a lower price. (See our full Pixel 7A preorder guide for the current best deals, including a $50 gift card at Amazon, a $50 discount with service activation at Best Buy and a free case and headphones at the Google Store.)
Google announced the Pixel 7A at Google I/O, its annual developer conference where it typically introduces new products and updates to existing ones. Other than the Pixel 7A, which is available now, Google also debuted the Pixel Fold, a new Pixel Tablet and a slew of new AI-powered features for search and other services.
Clearly, Google took feedback on the Pixel 6A into account with its latest entry-level phone. The Pixel 7A gains a 90Hz screen for smoother graphics and scrolling, along with wireless charging and face unlock. Though those may not be must-haves for everyone, they’re common features that the Pixel 6A lacked.
Otherwise, the Pixel 7A has the same Tensor G2 processor as the Pixel 7, a new 64-megapixel main camera and a 6.1-inch screen just like its predecessor. Since the Pixel 7A runs on Google’s mobile processor, you can expect many of the same Pixel-specific features seen on other devices, like the phone app’s Hold for Me setting, Google’s Recorder app and the company’s Real Tone photo processing tech, which is meant to render skin tones more realistically.
Taken together, these changes help bridge the gap between the Pixel 7A and the Pixel 7. At the same time, it can also make the buying decision more complicated if you’re shopping for a new Pixel device.
Google Pixel 7A looks a lot like the Pixel 7
Like the Pixel 6A, the Pixel 7A borrows design cues from its pricier predecessor. That includes the camera bar, which has a matte metallic finish that almost matches the one on the Pixel 7. The Pixel 7A’s camera strip is slightly thinner than the Pixel 7’s, marking one of the few noticeable physical differences between the two devices. The Pixel 7A is also available in different color options compared with the Pixel 7. You can pick up Google’s cheaper phone in white, black, light blue or bright orange, while the Pixel 7 comes in white, light yellow or black.
The Pixel 7A is attractive for a phone in this price range, much like the Pixel 6A. Part of me wonders if Google’s approach to design with its A-series phones motivated Samsung to up its game, too. The Galaxy A54 5G, which costs $450 and is Samsung’s direct competitor to the Pixel 7A, has a glossy finish that makes it feel more premium than last year’s Galaxy A53 5G.
The Pixel 7A has a 6.1-inch screen; the same size as the Pixel 6A’s and slightly smaller than the 6.3-inch screen on the Pixel 7. If you prefer smaller phones, you may find the Pixel 7A easier to use with one hand compared with the Pixel 7. I personally find 6.1 inches to be the right screen size for a phone, since it provides enough space to comfortably read and watch videos without feeling overwhelming to operate.
The biggest change Google made to the Pixel 7A’s screen is its ability to switch the refresh rate between 60Hz and 90Hz depending on what’s on the screen. With this setting turned on, navigating the operating system and scrolling through apps felt smooth and slick. Truthfully, I didn’t always notice a huge difference compared with the Pixel 6A, which has a standard 60Hz screen.
But there were some cases when flipping through my Twitter feed felt noticeably speedy on the Pixel 7A. Regardless, it’s great to see Google incorporating more premium features into its less expensive devices, especially as higher refresh rates are starting to become the norm.
It also helps Google stay more competitive with Samsung, which often trickles high-end features down to its own budget Galaxy phones. The Galaxy A54 5G can increase its refresh rate up to 120Hz, for example, similar to Samsung’s high-end Galaxy S devices.
Google also says it bumped up the Pixel 7A’s brightness, which would address one of my biggest complaints about the Pixel 6A. Unfortunately, I didn’t notice much of a difference. Though I had no problem using the Pixel 7A at 50% brightness or lower indoors, I still had to crank it up to between 75% and 100% outdoors.
Both the Pixel 7A and Galaxy A54 5G are capable of reaching 1,000 nits of brightness at their maximum setting. However, even at lower settings, the Galaxy A54 5G’s screen looked noticeably brighter alongside the Pixel 7A’s.
The Pixel 7A has an impressive camera that produced results similar to the Pixel 7’s. The Pixel 7A has a 64-megapixel main camera and a 13-megapixel ultrawide camera, as shown below, both of which have a higher resolution than the Pixel 7’s main and ultrawide camera.
Pixel 7A camera vs. Pixel 7, Pixel 6A and Galaxy A54 5G
Google Pixel 7A
Google Pixel 7
Google Pixel 6A
Samsung Galaxy A54 5G
Rear camera
64MP main; 13MP ultrawide
50MP main; 12MP ultrawide
12.2MP main; 12MP ultrawide
50MP main; 12MP ultrawide; 5MP macro
Zoom
8x digital zoom
8x digital zoom
7x digital zoom
10x digital zoom
Front camera
13MP
10.8MP
8MP
32MP
Even though the Pixel 7A’s main camera has more megapixels than the step-up model, Google says the Pixel 7’s main camera is more light sensitive and, more importantly, has a larger sensor. But most of the time, I could barely tell the difference between photos taken on the Pixel 7A and the Pixel 7. There were some instances where the Pixel 7 captured more detail, but I had to zoom in on my monitor to tell. I even thought the Pixel 7A did a better job than the Pixel 7 at capturing a portrait of my husband near a window in a mix of indoor and outdoor lighting.
The Pixel 6A has a great camera that snaps crisp and colorful photos, especially for a phone under $400. However, I noticed the Pixel 7A sometimes exposed the subject better, as shown in the zoomed photo of a stop sign below and the photo of my husband. The Pixel 6A was also noticeably slower than the Pixel 7A when taking photos in Night Mode. (Since the Pixel 6A was slower, my cat moved midshot, as you can see below).
I generally prefer the Pixel 7A’s camera over the Galaxy A54’s, since Samsung’s phone made colors look over exposed when shooting outdoors. But the Galaxy A54 5G performed well in a few of my tests, especially when shooting low-light photos. It also has a closer digital zoom than the Pixel 7A, Pixel 7 and Pixel 6A, though its photo came out grainier.
The Pixel 7A’s 13-megapixel front camera can take a great selfie. During my testing against the Pixel 7, Pixel 6A and Galaxy A54, the 7A’s selfie was my favorite because it had the right mix of detail, color accuracy and softening to make my face look flattering.
The Pixel 7A can shoot 4K video at up to 60 frames per second, just like the Pixel 7, and footage shot on the two phones looked very similar.
You also get many of the same camera shooting modes, backend tech and editing tricks found on the Pixel 7, such as Magic Eraser, Photo Unblur and Real Tone, which you can read more about in my Pixel 7 review. However, the Pixel 7A doesn’t have the Pixel 7’s Action Pan, which focuses sharply on a moving subject and blurs the background. But it does have Long Exposure mode, unlike the Pixel 6A, which has neither of those features.
The bottom line: Even though the Pixel 7 technically has a more advanced camera according to Google, the Pixel 7A’s camera will be just fine for casual photographers. The Pixel 7A should be plenty adequate for the average phone user who primarily wants to take great photos of vacations, family gatherings and social occasions. Those who really want the best camera on a Pixel phone should opt for the Pixel 7 Pro, which has a dedicated telephoto lens and other extras.
Pixel 7A has solid battery life and gains wireless charging
The Pixel 7A can get through a full day on a single charge, though battery life will always vary depending on the phone’s settings and which apps you’re using. My experience varied a little depending on my circumstances.
On a lighter day of use spent mostly at home, I used the Pixel 7A for basic tasks like checking email, playing games for 10 minutes, exporting a few videos and taking photos for roughly 20 minutes. I had 41% of my battery left after about 16 hours.
But on a busier day, when I commuted into the office, streamed music for about an hour during my subway ride and made a video call, the battery was down to 20% after about 13 hours of use. I tried to keep the brightness at 50% on both days, but there were times on both occasions when I set it higher while outdoors. During my testing, I also left the high refresh rate setting turned on and the always-on display option switched off — both of those can impact battery performance.
I ran a 45-minute endurance test that consists of streaming video, making a video call, playing games, browsing social media, and general miscellaneous use to see how much those activities would drain the battery after a full charge. The Pixel 7A had 92% of its battery left after that test, which puts it on par with the Galaxy S23 (91%) but lower than the Pixel 7 (94%).
I also streamed a YouTube video to see how much doing so would drain the battery over the course of three hours. The Pixel 7A performed slightly better than the Pixel 7 on this test, though the results were close.
Pixel 7A vs. Pixel 7 battery test
Pixel 7A
Pixel 7
1 hour
96%
95%
2 hours
90%
88%
3 hours
85%
81%
One major aspect new to the Pixel 7A is wireless charging. Though the ability to power up your phone by resting it on a compatible charger has been standard on many phones for years, it’s typically missing from budget-minded devices. The Pixel 6A doesn’t have wireless charging, for example, and neither does the Galaxy A54 5G.
The Pixel 7A’s wireless charging speed is slower than the Pixel 7’s (7.5 watts versus 12W on the Pixel 7 with a compatible qi-certified charger), and it took 30 minutes to charge from 37% to 47%.
Pixel 7A performance and other features
The Pixel 7A runs on Google’s Tensor G2 processor, which feels smooth and fluid when performing daily tasks, whether that’s playing a mobile game, scrolling through apps or snapping photos.
Performance is rarely a concern on major smartphone releases from companies like Apple, Google, Samsung and OnePlus. But it’s worth mentioning for a phone at this price, because cheaper phones can sometimes come with performance hiccups, as was the case when I reviewed the Galaxy A53 5G last year.
Everyday performance felt speedy, but I did notice that the Pixel 7A exported video a bit more slowly than Google’s other Pixels and Samsung’s Galaxy A54 5G. On average, it took about 22.5 seconds for the Pixel 7A to export a 30-second 4K video to 1080p in Adobe Premiere Rush, which is slower than the Pixel 6A (20.2 seconds), Pixel 7 (18.3 seconds) and Galaxy A54 5G (15.6 seconds).
Still, that Tensor G2 chip is more about the Pixel-specific features you get, rather than speed alone. Those include Google’s Recorder app, Live Translate and Photo Unblur. Google’s Pixel phones also have some handy phone-calling features, like Hold for Me, which allows Google to wait on the line in your stead. Tricks like these help set Pixel phones apart from other Android devices, though Samsung is trying to catch up by bringing more Galaxy-specific tricks to its own devices.
The Pixel 7A launches with Android 13 and will get three years of Android version updates and five years of security updates. That matches the Pixel 7 and 7 Pro, but it’s still behind Samsung, which pledges four generations of Android OS updates and five years of security updates.
Pixel 7A, Pixel 7 or Pixel 6A: Which should you choose?
Given all the similarities between the Pixel 7 and 7A, deciding between the two can be tricky. Google is keeping last year’s Pixel 6A in the lineup for a newly discounted price of $349, making it a tempting choice for those on a budget.
My advice? After spending a few days with the Pixel 7A, I can’t come up with a compelling reason to choose the Pixel 7 instead. The Pixel 7A has the same processor, a great main camera and the same amount of memory and storage. By adding wireless charging and a smoother screen to the Pixel 7A, Google fixed the two major features the Pixel 6A was missing.
The Pixel 6A still has plenty to offer at its new price, including a capable camera and Google’s Pixel-specific software features. If you prefer to save money and don’t mind sacrificing wireless charging, face unlock, and extra photo tools like long exposure mode, the Photo Unblur editing tool and faster night mode capture, then the Pixel 6A is still a worthwhile choice.
However, it’s worth considering Google’s software update cycle. Since the Pixel 7A launched later than the Pixel 7 and Pixel 6A, it’ll get Android version updates for a longer period of time. That could be a good reason to choose the Pixel 7A over the 6A.
Pixel 7A overall thoughts
The Pixel 7A feels like the best value for Pixel fans right now. While you miss out on certain Pixel 7 extras, like battery share, the camera’s Action Pan mode, a larger screen and slightly faster charging, none of those omissions feels like a deal-breaker. In my experience, camera performance is comparable between the two — certainly enough to satisfy the average person.
With the Pixel 7A, it’s clear Google is leaning into competitive pricing as a major part of its effort to bring more Android users into the world of Pixel. My only concern is that Google may be blurring the line a bit too much between its A-series Pixel and regular Pixel. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad Google brought most of the features I asked for to the Pixel 7A. It just means I’ll be expecting more from the Pixel 8.
How we test phones
Every phone tested by CNET’s reviews team was actually used in the real world. We test a phone’s features, play games and take photos. We examine the display to see if it’s bright, sharp and vibrant. We analyze the design and build to see how it is to hold and whether it has an IP-rating for water resistance. We push the processor’s performance to the extremes using both standardized benchmark tools like GeekBench and 3DMark, along with our own anecdotal observations navigating the interface, recording high-resolution videos and playing graphically intense games at high refresh rates.
All the cameras are tested in a variety of conditions from bright sunlight to dark indoor scenes. We try out special features like night mode and portrait mode and compare our findings against similarly priced competing phones. We also check out the battery life by using it daily as well as running a series of battery drain tests.
We take into account additional features like support for 5G, satellite connectivity, fingerprint and face sensors, stylus support, fast charging speeds, foldable displays among others that can be useful. And we of course balance all of this against the price to give you the verdict on whether that phone, whatever price it is, actually represents good value.
Google Pixel 7A vs. Pixel 7, Pixel 6A
Google Pixel 7A
Google Pixel 7
Google Pixel 6A
Display size, tech, resolution, refresh rate
6.1-inch FHD OLED; up to 90Hz refresh rate
6.3-inch OLED; FHD+; up to 90Hz refresh rate
6.1-inch OLED; FHD+; 60Hz refresh rate
Dimensions (inches)
2.9x6x0.35 inches
6.1×2.9×0.34 inches
6×2.8×0.35 inches
Dimensions (millimeters)
72.9×152.4x9mm
155.6×73.2×8.7mm
152.2×7.18×8.9mm
Weight (ounces, grams)
6.8 ounces; 193 grams
6.9 ounces; 197 grams
6.3 ounces; 178 grams
Mobile software (at launch)
Android 13
Android 13
Android 12
Camera
64MP main; 13MP ultrawide
50MP main; 12MP ultrawide
12.2MP wide; 12MP ultrawide
Front-facing camera
13MP
10.8MP
8MP
Video capture
4K at 60fps
4K at 60fps
4K at 60fps
Processor
Google Tensor G2
Google Tensor G2
Google Tensor
RAM/storage
128GB + 8GB
128GB + 8GB
128GB + 6GB
Expandable storage
None
None
None
Battery
4,385 mAh; wireless charging
4,355 mAh; wireless charging
4,410 mAh
Fingerprint sensor
Yes (under screen)
Yes (under screen)
Yes (under screen)
Face unlock
Yes
Yes
No
Connector
USB-C
USB-C
USB-C
Headphone jack
None
None
None
Special features
Magic Eraser, Real Tone, Photo Unblur, Face Unblur, Long Exposure Mode, Hold for Me, Wait Times, Direct My Call, Live Translate
Magic Eraser, Photo Unblur, Real Tone, Face Unblur, Long Exposure Mode, Action Pan, Hold for Me, Wait Times, Direct My Call, Live Translate
Magic Eraser,Real Tone, Face Unblur,Hold for Me, Wait Times, Direct My Call, Live Translate
Editors’ note, Nov. 1, 2023: It’s 2023. Apple hasn’t released any new iPads all year. Apple is likely to make refreshes across the lineup next year, which is why I recommend waiting on buying any iPad at all. While Apple’s 10th-gen basic iPad has USB-C, a better processor, a larger screen, better-positioned front camera, newer keyboard case options, and it works with the newer low-cost Pencil introduced recently, it’s also more expensive. Until we know what 2024’s models might be, I lean towards recommending the least-expensive iPad (which is the 9th-gen) for kids and anyone who wants a basic tablet. If you want to spend more, consider the 10th-gen model, or an M1-equipped iPad Air if it’s on sale.
My original review from 2021 is below.
The 9th-gen iPad isn’t new. It isn’t fancy. It has a big old circular home button. It still has big bezels around the screen. There’s no USB-C. No Magic Keyboard or newer Pencil support. But I’m OK with that, for its price, and you or your kids might be, too.
I wrote this review on the new ninth-gen iPad. I’m able to do this because the iPad allows connections to keyboard cases, like the Apple smart keyboard cover I’m using to write this. It’s not as good as the Magic Keyboard for iPad Pro and Air, but it’s good enough (and costs less). And good enough is exactly what the ninth-gen iPad is: In fact, compared with all other iPads right now, it still covers all the bases just fine. Let me explain.
iPads are secondary devices for most people. Maybe even tertiary devices. After phones and laptops, of course. But they’re also pretty essential and useful for a lot of people. Families, kids. That’s why budget factors heavily into iPad purchases. In that regard, the basic iPad (still called “iPad” on the box) should be your default pick. Right now, Apple has two basic iPads: the 10th-gen model, and this one. The 10th-gen is more future-proof, but the 9th-gen costs less. It’s inexpensive but still versatile: This iPad works with the Apple Pencil for sketching (although it’s the first-gen Pencil) and with keyboard cases (although not the Magic Keyboard), and has a big enough screen to feel laptoplike (unlike the Mini, which is lovely but expensive and for me, too small). And there’s more storage, which helps.
The lowest-priced iPad has always been a trickle-down device, gradually getting upgrades other iPads got years ago. The same is true here: a new A13 processor, a zooming-in Center Stage camera that the iPad Pro got this spring and True Tone on the display for ambient color temperature adjustments. This iPad may eventually disappear from Apple’s lineup, to be replaced by the 10th gen iPad released in 2022, but for now it’s the safest low-cost iPad purchase if you don’t want to spend a lot on something else. You could spend more on the 10th-gen model, too, but that model ends up going up above $500 for the accessories and storage you’d likely need.
Design: The same
It looks exactly the same as last year. It has that old circle Touch ID button. It still uses Lightning, not USB-C. And, you know what? It’s fine. It works with last year’s iPad cases. And it’s the last iPad on Earth that has a real headphone jack. And its starting price is the same. But Apple’s bumped the storage up, finally, with 64GB on the $329 ( 319, AU$499) version — you could survive with that, just about — and 256GB on the $479 version, which I’d recommend without a doubt if you’re planning to download any movies for travel, or any content-making apps.
If you didn’t have any big emotions about last year’s iPad, this year’s basic model won’t wow. It would be nice to have less bezel, switch away from Lightning and also, to have stereo speakers. (Sound only comes out of one side of the iPad in landscape mode, like always, but the fancier iPads fix that. Answer: Deal with it or use headphones.)
Pencil support is fine, but that older Pencil has nowhere to go unless you buy a case that has a loop to hold it (those do exist, like Logitech’s keyboard folios). And the front-facing camera is still stuck on the side in landscape mode, which is how you’ll have it set up for laptop-style use.
Center Stage: Zooming-in FaceTime and Zoom calls
You’ll notice that when you launch video chat on the new iPad, it’ll start zooming in on your face. That’s Center Stage, a feature that leans on the wider-angle iPad front-facing camera to zoom in during calls.
In general, Center Stage is a useful tweak to the video chat experience, especially from a distance with families. Like a Facebook Portal and a few other devices, it’ll follow you around. The autotracking works smoothly, almost like a panning camera. But on a few FaceTime calls, using a prerelease iPad, I found stutters. (Maybe a software update will fix that). It works with Zoom, and whatever video chat apps want to support it (it’s openly available for any video chat app to incorporate).
Center Stage can be turned off by swiping down from the Control Center and toggling it with the Video Effects button, and some video recording apps like Filmic Pro use it. But Apple’s built-in Camera app doesn’t take advantage of it, oddly.
One note: On my review iPad I found a few times that Center Stage made FaceTime calls seem to stutter. It might be something Apple needs to address in an iPadOS update.
Performance: More than good enough
The added A13 processor upgrade makes it fast enough for most needs and then some. On benchmark tests, it’s about as fast an iPhone 11 (no surprise, since it has the same processor). It’s fine for multitasking, gaming and video and doesn’t seem to lag.
And its front camera is notably better: crisper for video calls, with a digital-zoom face-following Center Stage mode that works with Zoom, FaceTime and other apps, making it a better family video-chat screen from a distance. They’re not amazing cameras, but they’re suitable, and better than on most laptops. The front camera went from a 1.2 megapixels to a 122-degree wide-angle 12 megapixels, which makes a real difference, and also lets that camera zoom in using Center Stage without losing effective resolution.
Battery life feels largely the same in daily use so far: Apple keeps leaning on the “10 hours of battery” promise as always, and I find that iPads generally last a whole day of normal use.
Boring, but recommended
Seriously: The 10th-gen iPad has a lot of my favorite features, but it’s more expensive and doesn’t have the same case and Pencil situation as fancier iPads do. The iPad Mini costs more, lacks the same keyboard support and is probably too small. The iPad Air has a faster M1 processor, and I personally love its design, but it’s a more expensive proposition. And the iPad Pro models (expected to get major upgrades in 2024) are in a totally different price tier.
For now, I still think the basic unexciting iPad wins out. Especially if the price hits $300 for holiday season sales. But other sales could change that metric fast. There’s still no perfect iPad right now, and in the meantime I’d opt for the cheapest option until things maybe settle down a bit more in the future.
Editor’s note, Nov. 1, 2023: Although it was released back in 2021, the Roku Express 4K Plus remains our Editors Choice pick for 4K streaming devices in 2023. Even two years on, the Roku Express 4K Plus remains responsive running Roku’s latest software, maintains its simple app-based menus and is a more than capable streamer that offers impressive value for the money. As we mentioned in our Streaming Stick 4K review, the differences between the Express 4K Plus and Stick 4K are minimal and since both are regularly on sale we recommend going with whichever of the two is cheaper. We give the Express 4K Plus the slight edge mainly because it often is at a lower price. Check out our Roku Streaming Stick 4K vs. Roku Express 4K Plus comparison for more details.
Our original review, from May. 11, 2021, is as follows.
The Roku Express 4K Plus sets a high bar for features and value, beating out other Rokus like the $50 Streaming Stick 4K, as well affordable streamers like Google’s $50 Chromecast with Google TV and Amazon’s $50 Fire TV Stick 4K.
SimpleRokuinterface? Check. 4K HDR streaming? Check. Wired Ethernet support with an optional adapter? Yup. Cheaper cost? At $40 compared to Roku’s own Streaming Stick 4K’s $50 sticker price, the Express 4K Plus has that, too. After using the device for a few days, watching everything from Netflix and Disney Plus to Apple TV Plus and YouTube TV
, I can say the Roku Express 4K Plus deserves CNET’s Editors’ Choice award as the best streaming device for the money.
A simple, familiar design
As with other recent refreshes, such as Roku’s 2020 Ultra or Apple’s new Apple TV 4K, the outside of the Express 4K Plus will look awfully familiar. It’s slightly larger but keeps the half-moon dongle design of the cheaper, HD-only Express, and on the rear, there’s an HDMI output and a Micro-USB port for power, as well as a reset button.
The front is glossy and nondescript, with just a single indicator light. The bottom is where you can apply the included adhesive strip to attach the miniature box to the back or bottom of your TV. Because the Express 4K Plus ships with Roku’s “point anywhere” voice remote, you can hide the box pretty much anywhere near your TV and it will still work — it doesn’t require direct line-of-sight to control the player.
In my testing I had the Express 4K Plus placed behind a few-years-old Samsung 4K TV and encountered no issues controlling it with the remote. I was also able to power the Roku directly from my Samsung’s built-in USB port, no power adapter required. Using the device with a 2019 TCL 6-Series Roku TV similarly produced no issues. Assuming you have a fairly recent TV with a 5V USB port, the Roku should work fine hiding using your TV’s power.
In addition to the tape, Roku includes Micro-USB and HDMI cables and AAA batteries for the remote, along with a wall adapter for power in case you need to use that instead. Keeping the Roku plugged into the wall for power, as opposed to your TV, can also save a few seconds of boot-up time.
While it would’ve been nice for Roku to finally embrace USB-C, on this device — which is meant to be plugged into your television and left alone — I don’t mind the use of the aging port.
The remote has the same simple layout and design found on other Rokus, with TV volume controls on the right-hand side. There is no rechargeable battery or always-listening microphone (for that you’ll need to shell out another $30 for the company’s Voice Remote Pro), but it is a perfectly good controller that paired instantly with both the Express 4K Plus and easily controlled volume, mute and power on my TV.
The only real difference I noticed was a new shortcut key: this remote has the new Apple TV Plus button to go along with dedicated keys for Netflix, Disney Plus and Hulu.
Note: An Express 4K without the “Plus” in the name will be available for $35 at Walmart. The only difference between this device and that one is the Express 4K Plus comes with this better remote as opposed to a simple, IR one that lacks voice and TV control. I’d recommend spending the extra $5 to get the Express 4K Plus.
Solid 4K HDR streaming
Running on Roku’s latest OS 10 software, the interface is largely the same as all its recent devices, complete with the same shortcomings such as the limitations of its voice assistant compared to those of Amazon’s Alexa and Google’s Assistant.
That said, all the apps I tried on the Express 4K Plus seemed to open and load quickly and painlessly. I had no problems opening shows or movies on Disney Plus, Netflix or Apple TV Plus, and playback of a baseball game on MLB.TV or a Champions League soccer match on YouTube TV both opened and loaded quickly. I noticed it was also slightly zippier opening apps compared to my Streaming Stick Plus.
(I was able to get YouTube TV to reinstall from a backup of older Rokus despite the company’ ongoing carriage dispute with Google, which has also added a way to watch YouTube TV through the regular YouTube app.)
I had to go into my TV’s settings to make sure my Samsung was set properly to HDMI UHD Color to enable 4K HDR. Once that was set up, the Roku was able to take advantage of the higher quality streams. I had no such issues setting up 4K HDR on the TCL.
I was equally impressed with how well the Express 4K Plus handled Apple AirPlay, which, as with all recent Rokus, is available on the device. Streaming videos off of YouTube or mimicking myiPhone’sscreen worked fine, and I was even able to play games cast from an iPhone via Apple Arcade or the Xbox Cloud Gaming iOS beta.
The former worked a lot better than the latter, and while the Roku isn’t designed to play games, it worked well enough casting that I do wonder if apps for cloud-based gaming could be in Roku’s future.
Also new on this Express 4K Plus is the ability to connect Ethernet, a feature that on its players has most recently been limited to its Ultra boxes. As with other streaming players like the Amazon Fire TV Stick 4K. I used a $12 cable from a company called UGreen. With this, I simply plugged in the cable to the Roku’s micro-USB port, connected the adapter’s USB power to my TV’s USB port and plugged in an Ethernet cable.
The big difference between this and the Ultra is that the Express 4K Plus lacks Dolby Vision support. Seeing as how rival $50 streamers such as Google’s Chromecast with Google TV and Amazon’s Fire TV Stick 4K both support Dolby Vision, it would have been great to see Roku include it here. On the other hand, we don’t consider Dolby Vision a must-have, in part because it’s not a major image quality upgrade over standard HDR.
Dolby Atmos audio is supported by the Express Plus 4K on certain apps if you have the proper sound system.
Roku Express 4K Plus vs. Roku Streaming Stick 4K
The biggest question for those looking at Roku’s lineup is probably which of these two devices you should buy. Roku prices the Express 4K Plus at $40, while the Streaming Stick 4K sells for $50. What does that $10 difference get you? Not a whole lot.
The main difference is that you get Dolby Vision on the Streaming Stick 4K, plus a sleeker stick design that is good for wall-mounted TVs and long-range wireless. Dolby Vision support is the biggest selling point here, given that the Express 4K Plus can easily tuck under or behind a TV. Roku also never quantifies its Wi-Fi improvement and I’ve found that signal on the Express 4K Plus works fine, and unlike the Streaming Stick Plus, this device is compatible with Ethernet adapters for wired connections if needed.
So is Dolby Vision worth the extra money? For some people, maybe. But it’s a feature that is only useful for those who own TVs that also support Dolby Vision. If you own a Samsung TV, for example, don’t bother — your TV doesn’t support it. And even on TVs that do support Dolby Vision, its improvement over standard HDR is usually minimal.
My pick? Save the $10 and get the Express 4K Plus.
Roku Express 4K Plus or Chromecast with Google TV?
Google’s Chromecast with Google TV is the closest competitor to Roku’s players. We compared the latest Chromecast with Roku’s Streaming Stick Plus in December, and while Google’s player has excellent search and voice control, it was hard to beat Roku’s super-simple interface.
While it remains to be seen what kind of updates Google will give its revamped Google TV platform at its I/O developer conference
, for now, Roku remains the choice for most people, especially when you consider the Express 4K Plus is $10 cheaper than Google’s player.
When we reviewed the Nothing Phone 2 we said that it was a phone that definitely stands out but that it would be even better if it was cheaper. Someone at Amazon must agree because right now you can pick one up while saving a very respectable $92.
That means that you won’t have to pay the usual $699 price to get your hands on one of these phones. Instead, you’ll hand over just $607 if you’re quick — and we do mean quick. Not only does Amazon have a limited number of these handsets available at this special price but it seems to be getting dangerously close to single figures, too. If a new Nothing Phone 2 is on your wishlist now might be the time to treat yourself.
It’s also worth noting that this deal is only available on the white model, although the dark grey model is still cheaper than usual — you’ll pay $629 rather than $699.
You’ll get the same great phone underneath no matter which color you choose. That phone comes with 256GB of storage and 12GB of RAM with both paired with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1 chipset. In terms of display, the 6.7-inch OLED panel is nice and big and the variable 120Hz refresh rate means all of your apps will be buttery smooth in use.
Other notable features include a pair of 50-megapixel cameras out back and a 32-megapixel selfie camera, while 15-watt wireless charging is aided by fast wired charging that fully powers the phone in just 55 minutes.
With so much to like and a price to match, all you need to do now is make sure you get that order in before it’s too late.
There’s another chance at finding love for beloved previous cast members from TV’s most popular reality show, with new spin-off series Love Island Games hitting streaming services.
Once again exclusive to Peacock in the US, the new show is set to bring together former Islanders from the UK, US, Germany, Sweden and Australia to an all new villa in Fiji.
Familiar faces taking part include Curtis Pritchard, who finished fourth place on the 2019 series of Love Island UK, alongside 2018 contestant Meghan Barton Hanson, musician Kyra Green from Love Island USA season 1 and Mitch Hibberd and Tina Provis from the Aussie version of the hit show.
Love Island UK’s Maya Jama will host, while Iain Stirling will be on hand to narrate all the drama-filled “twists and turns.”
Don’t miss a moment of all the steamy drama from the villa by following our guide to watching Love Island Games from anywhere in the world.
When does Love Island Games start?
In the US, Love Island Games starts on Peacock on Wednesday, Nov. 1, with new episodes hitting the service six days a week, much like the original UK show.
How to watch Love Island Games from anywhere on VPN
So what if you’re traveling outside your home country and want to enjoy the show or want an added layer of privacy for streaming? There is an option that doesn’t require searching the internet for a sketchy website: You can use a VPN, or virtual private network.
With a VPN, you’re able to virtually change your location on your phone, tablet or laptop to get access to the show. If you find yourself unable to watch locally, a VPN can come in handy. Plus, it’s a great idea for when you’re traveling and find yourself connected to a Wi-Fi network and want to add an extra layer of privacy for your devices and logins.
Most VPNs, like CNET’s Editors’ Choice, ExpressVPN, make it easy to virtually change your location. Looking for other options? Be sure to check out some of the other great VPN deals.
Watch Love Island Games in the US
Can I stream Love Island Games in the UK and Australia?
At the current time of writing, there’s no confirmed broadcaster for the new spin-off in either of these two territories. With ITV the original home of the Love Island franchise, as well as the broadcaster of the US and Australian versions of the show in the UK, our expectation is that the show will eventually appear on the network at some point soon.
Similarly, with Channel 9 having broadcast previous seasons of both Love Island USA and Love Island UK, as well as being the home of the show’s Australian version, it’s looking like the free-to-air network will be the Aussie home of Love Island Games at some point in the future.
Watch Love Island Games in Canada
Streaming service Crave will be showing Love Island Games in Canada, with episodes available in tandem with their release on Peacock in the US.
Tips for streaming Love Island Games using a VPN
With four variables at play — your ISP, browser, video streaming provider and VPN — experience and success may vary.
If you don’t see your desired location as a default option for ExpressVPN, try using the “search for city or country” option.
If you’re having trouble viewing after you’ve turned on your VPN and set it to the correct viewing area, there are two things you can try for a quick fix. First, log in to your streaming service subscription account and make sure the address registered for the account is an address in the correct viewing area. If not, you may need to change the physical address on file with your account. Second, some smart TVs — like Roku — don’t have VPN apps you can install directly on the device itself. Instead, you’ll have to install the VPN on your router or the mobile hotspot you’re using (like your phone) so that any device on its Wi-Fi network now appears in the correct viewing location.
All of the VPN providers we recommend have helpful instructions on their main site for quickly installing the VPN on your router. In some cases with smart TV services, after you install a network’s app, you’ll be asked to verify a numeric code or click a link sent to your email address on file for your smart TV. This is where having a VPN on your router will also help, since both devices will appear to be in the correct location.
And remember, browsers can often give away a location despite using a VPN, so be sure you’re using a privacy-first browser to log into your services. We normally recommend Brave.
Foldable phones are still niche, but in 2023 you can find one from almost every major smartphone maker. While there’s more choice than ever before, it can still be a challenge to know whether buying a foldable phone is the right decision.
Foldable phones have been available for almost half a decade, with the first models from Samsung and Huawei having in 2019. But their high prices, limited software functionality and fragile designs initially made them hard to recommend.
A lot has changed over the last four years. Not only are there more options, but cheaper devices like Motorola’s $700 Razr (2023), which arrived in October, are starting to emerge. And while there’s still plenty of room for the software experience to evolve and improve, companies like Samsung, Google and Motorola made strides in 2023.
The larger outer screens on Samsung’s Galaxy Z Flip 5 and Motorola’s Razr Plus, for example, make it possible to actually use apps without opening your phone rather than just checking notifications. Google’s Pixel Fold has a new language translation feature that leverages both the external and internal screens.
More foldables launched this year than ever before, with new devices from Samsung, Motorola, OnePlus, Google, and Oppo hitting the market. Sales of foldable phones are expected to increase this year, with the International Data Corporation reporting a 43.9% boost compared to 2022 and Counterpoint Research pointing to a 10% bump in the second quarter of 2023 alone.
If you’re thinking about buying a foldable phone, consider your budget and how you intend to use your phone, among other factors. Check out CNET’s list of the best flip phones and best foldable phones to learn more about our top picks.
What’s your budget?
The most important question to ask is how much you’re willing to spend on a new phone. Even though foldable phones aren’t as expensive as they were back in 2019, they’re still significantly pricier than most standard phones. The Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 5 and Google Pixel Fold, for example, start at $1,800 without a trade-in, while the Galaxy Z Flip 5 and Motorola Razr Plus cost $1,000. Motorola’s 2023 Razr is the cheapest of the bunch at $700, but you have to sacrifice that larger external screen in exchange.
Book-style foldable phones like the Galaxy Z Fold 5, OnePlus Open ($1,700) and Pixel Fold are among the most expensive phones you can buy. But flip phones are priced around the same as premium non-folding devices like the iPhone 15 Pro and Pixel 8 Pro, both of which start at around $1,000. So if you’re used to budgeting for a device in that price range, splurging on a flip phone won’t feel much different.
Don’t forget to keep an eye out for discounts and trade-in deals to make those prices more palatable. But keep in mind that many of those deals usually ask that you meet some type of requirement, like opening a new line with a carrier or trading in a relatively recent phone.
Are you careful with your phone?
While today’s foldables are sturdier than earlier models, the simple fact that they have hinges and bendable screens still makes them more delicate than regular phones. Shortly after Google launched the Pixel Fold in June, some Reddit users reported broken screens, for example. Most foldable phones aren’t dust resistant and have a lower water resistance rating than standard devices like the Pixel 8 and Galaxy S23 lineup.
If you work outdoors, have a tendency to drop your phone or handle it roughly or prefer not to use a case, you’ll want to be careful when switching to a foldable phone. It’s also a good idea to familiarize yourself with repair options from the device maker as well as third-party services.
Is it the right time to buy a foldable phone?
Like many electronics, foldable phones are often released on a seasonal basis. You’ll want to consider this to avoid spending $1,000 or more on a device that may soon feel outdated. While you can sometimes find compelling discounts on older models, it’s usually a good idea to opt for the latest version if you can.
Companies only usually support their phones with new versions of Android for a few years. The Galaxy Z Flip 5 and Z Fold 5 will get four generations of OS upgrades, for instance, while the Pixel Fold and Razr Plus get three years of Android platform updates. Buying the newest model ensures that your phone will continue to get software updates for as long as possible.
Samsung typically releases its new foldable phones around August, although it introduced the Galaxy Z Flip 5 and Z Fold 5 slightly earlier than usual this year in July. If Google releases new Pixel Fold devices on an annual pattern, we can expect the second-generation model in June. Motorola hasn’t followed an annual cycle with its Razr phones, but the high-end Razr Plus also arrived in June while the cheaper model debuted in the US in October. The OnePlus Open, which is the brand’s first foldable phone, also launched in October.
The Black Friday shopping weekend is also a great time to look out for deals on foldables, especially since new models for the year have already launched. The Galaxy Z Fold 4 was on sale last year, and Samsung also held its own Cyber Week sale around the same time.
What do you want from a new phone?
This is probably the most significant consideration aside from your budget. Foldable phones are expensive and have some shortcomings compared to regular phones.
For example, they can sometimes feel bulky and awkward to use when closed thanks to their unconventional designs. The cameras on foldable phones often aren’t as advanced as the ones you’ll find on premium non-folding phones like the iPhone 15 Pro, Galaxy S23 Ultra and Pixel 8 Pro. There’s also a slight learning curve that comes with using a foldable phone for the first time, especially for larger book-style foldables. And most importantly, many of today’s foldables still have a visible crease that runs across the screen.
But those compromises can be worth it for the right audience. If you watch videos and play games on your phone often, a phone-tablet hybrid like the Galaxy Z Fold or Pixel Fold could be worth it. When I switched to the Galaxy Z Fold 4 for several weeks earlier this year, I loved having a larger canvas for writing and reading emails. I even left my tablet at home during a flight and used my phone solely for watching Netflix on the plane. Think long and hard about whether you need a phone that can double as a tablet and are willing to pay a higher price for that benefit.
Flip phones are for those who want a regular-sized phone that can fit in pockets and purses more easily. Since phones like the Motorola Razr and Galaxy Z Flip essentially have a built-in kickstand, they’re also ideal for those who like to take selfies and group photos without finding someone else to take the picture.
Newer flip phones like the Galaxy Z Flip 5 and Motorola Razr Plus also have cover screens that allow you to run full apps when the device is closed. Not only does this make it easier to quickly check Google Maps or Spotify from the palm of your hand, but I find that it can turn my phone into a mini smart display. When I tested the Razr Plus, for example, I enjoyed propping it open like a tent to play music, view album art and skip to the next song in my playlist while doing household chores.
With that in mind, flip phones are best for those who prioritize convenience and portability above almost everything else in a smartphone.
Overall, deciding whether to buy a foldable phone comes down to your budget and what you’re looking for in a new phone. Factors like durability and timing are also important to consider, but it all comes down to how much you’re willing to spend and what you’re hoping to get from your device. What is certain, though, is that 2023 was a big year for foldable phones, and they’re likely to continue improving in 2024 and beyond.
Editor’s note, Aug. 12: The Quest 2 increased in price Aug. 1 by $101. That makes it less of an impulse purchase, but still a CNET Editors’ Choice for now. Below is our updated review.
There’s a pair of magic goggles I’ve gone back to again and again over the last two years, opening up worlds of games, theater, conversations, art and experiences that are tough to even describe. The Meta Quest 2 (formerly, and sometimes still, the Oculus Quest 2) is an improved, less expensive sequel to the 2019 Oculus Quest. It’s already been my portable holodeck, my little magic fitness room, my escape space and one of my favorite game consoles.
However, it’s no longer the budget buy it once was. A surprise $101 increase in the headset’s price means that hardware that used to cost $299 for 128GB of storage and $399 for 256GB is now $400 or $500. That’s a big price jump for aging hardware, even if Meta is offering a free download of Beat Saber as a $30 consolation prize. In a year when everything seems to be getting more expensive, it feels like an unwelcome slap in the face.
Does that mean you should hold off on buying it? All indications are that Meta’s next pro-level VR headset coming later this year will be even more expensive, and a true Quest 3 may not come until 2023 or later. But the reality is, there isn’t any standalone VR headset in existence with the app library or value that the Quest 2 has, even at its higher price.
Meta upgraded the base storage on the entry-level Quest 2 last year, doubling it from 64GB to 128GB. 128GB should be more than enough storage for most, but serious VR gamers will appreciate the 256GB storage tier step-up — there’s no way to expand storage otherwise.
While the Quest 2 is aging, it keeps impressing me. The Quest 2 keeps improving its software: It can get phone notifications, pair with keyboards and connect with virtual meeting apps, do basic fitness tracking and wirelessly stream from PCs. It’s still the best self-contained VR headset right now, and the most affordable for its features.
But, yeah, you have to accept that this is Facebook’s world (and that involves possibilities for future ads, too). While the Quest will soon allow account creation without using a Facebook login, it’s still worth keeping in mind the Quest 2 isn’t designed for kids, even though lots of parents I know have kids who use it. Parental controls are steadily being added, but they’re still not at the level of everyday game consoles like the Nintendo Switch, Xbox or PlayStation.
The Quest 2 has a VR-optimized Qualcomm Snapdragon XR2 processor, a higher-resolution display than the older Oculus Quest and Rift headsets, and it works surprisingly well as a tethered or wireless PC VR headset, in case you need it to.
I find I use the Quest 2 mainly as a game console, or a fitness device, or as a social tool for meeting with friends in virtual worlds. I don’t use it all the time. It’s an experience I dip into once in a while.
If you think of the Quest 2 as a game console, it’s a fantastic little game and experience machine. It might even be my second-favorite game console right now next to the Nintendo Switch. But if you imagine it fulfilling needs for work and the rest of your life, it raises deeper questions and complications.
Oculus Quest 2: How the VR Headset Compares to the First Quest
Mark Zuckerberg and Meta remain focused on trying to turn VR into a better work and connectivity tool, but all of that’s still very much a work in progress. There are work apps in the Quest app library, but none of them work well enough for me to use them. Horizon Worlds and Horizon Workrooms are trying to build out social places for work and play.
Meta’s social media ambitions are clearly aligned where VR and AR are heading, and the Quest 2 still feels like the centerpiece of those efforts. Meta is allowing accounts to bypass needing a Facebook account login soon, but to be clear, you’ll still be under Meta’s umbrella in some way or another.
Read more: Why You Should Buy a Nintendo Switch Lite and Oculus Quest 2, Instead of PS5 or Xbox Series X
More game console than work device
If you treat the Quest 2 as a motion-enabled game console for your face and hands, or a way to socialize with friends in magic worlds where you can run around as invented avatars, it’s fantastic. It’s also a great little machine for playing Beat Saber. The Oculus Quest was already the best self-contained VR headset on the planet, and the Quest 2 is even better.
The experiences I’ve had in Oculus Quest have been surprising and strange, magical and active. The Quest 2 looks to be walking that same path with its curated app store and self-contained ecosystem. The full-motion six degrees of freedom (aka 6DoF) tracking, using four in-headset cameras, is all the same right now. The controllers are complex but well-designed. It’s more of a VR mini game console than anything, but its other tools — virtual big-screen computer monitors, fitness training software, immersive theater portals — could add dimensions you may not even have considered.
There are work tools in the Quest ecosystem, and ways to have virtual meetings: Spatial’s app brings people into shared spaces with workflows and cloud storage tools. Virtual monitor apps like Immerse can turn the Quest into a virtual series of monitors for your real computer. Plug in a USB cable, and the Quest 2 can be a PC VR headset and work with a lot of Steam apps as well. Meta’s Horizon Workrooms shows possibilities, too. I’d still consider these work apps experimental right now, though, and not essential.
Still, the Quest doesn’t really interface with Apple iOS or Google’s Android OS, although it pairs with a phone app like a smartwatch for some basic syncing and screen casting. You can’t just hop into a Zoom call or share a doc, and the flow between my virtual computer work life and the VR virtual flow isn’t there yet. I hope it can arrive because in my opinion, VR headsets should be more like immersive visual headphones. Right now they’re more like customized and different toolkits with positives (physical immersion) and negatives (no face-to-face camera conversation, and no easy work tools like a mouse and keyboard).
A great example of VR’s limits is the Quest 2’s still-evolving hand tracking. I can use my hands to reach out and touch things, controller-free, which is wild. But I can’t get physical feedback, and mastering the specific gestures needed to open an app, drag an object somewhere or type a response to a message feels extremely difficult.
What’s excellent
The display resolution:The 1,832×1,920-per-eye pixel resolution is improved from the 1,400×1,600 on the older Quest, and it makes everything smoother, removing a lot of the “screen door” pixelation. The Snapdragon XR2 processor also cuts down on the lower-res halo on the edges of the display that happened previously due to fixed foveated rendering (which only made the center of the display look ultrasharp to help the older processor). It’s more universally clean and crisp now, although there is still some pixelation at the edge of your vision if you look carefully.
Built-in audio doesn’t need headphones: The ambient spatial audio that comes out of the side straps is fine, and I prefer it to using headphones. It sounds a bit better to me than the first Quest. There’s also a 3.5mm headphone jack.
The XR2 chip looks pretty versatile, still: Qualcomm’s XR2 chip remains the best standalone processor for VR at the moment, and VR graphics on recent games have been pretty impressive. The Quest 2 can also handle hand tracking and mixed reality by overlaying virtual objects with its black and white passthrough cameras.
The refresh rate is smooth:The first Quest could run at 72Hz, a bit less than PC VR headsets that can go to 90Hz. The faster the refresh rate, the smoother the experience. The Quest 2 can even do 120Hz for some games and apps.
The size and weight aren’t bad: The Quest 2, at 17.7 ounces, or 503 grams, is not super light, but it’s still pretty portable for a self-contained headset. It’s still a pair of goggles, but it’s possible to carry it around. The elastic flex straps are easy to pack down, too, although the Quest 2 still isn’t as portable as an iPad or a Nintendo Switch.
Great controller battery life: The revamped Oculus Touch controllers have the same buttons and analog sticks and triggers, like a split-apart PlayStation controller. But the new controllers are bigger and sturdier-feeling, and have a bigger button area with a thumb rest. The controllers still use AA batteries as opposed to being rechargeable, but last a lot longer on a single battery: Mine lasts on a pair of AA batteries for months. Also, the battery cover doesn’t randomly slide off like it sometimes does on the older Quest controllers.
The game library: The Quest 2 is full of great VR game options. Many of these games can even look as good as their PC versions, although there may come a time in the next year or two when the hardware starts to feel its age.
What’s a bit of a letdown
It’s not as friendly to my larger glasses: The eye area on the new Quest is a bit smaller, and the included foam padding feels firmer and cushier. But my glasses now seem a bit more jammed in than on the older Quest. Meta sells a fit pack ($50) with a few different snap-out foam frames for different face types, so maybe I need one of those.
It takes a long time to recharge:The headset lasts two to three hours, which is like the last Quest. I find battery life can run down in just one evening, and then I need to recharge. And recharging takes a long time — an hour or more, which means you’ll need to take a VR break whether you like it or not. Meta does sell an Elite Strap with an extra battery pack, plus a helpful case, which helped my longer-term play sessions a lot.
The included USB-C cable is a lot shorter now: The original Quest included a super long USB-C cable that could be used to charge while playing, or tether via USB-C to a PC. The shorter charge cable with the Quest 2 makes that impossible, but guess what? Meta sells a longer cable for $80 (or you could buy your own for PC tethering via Oculus Link).
No expandable storage: The 128GB on the $400 Quest will hold enough games and apps for most people (a few dozen, roughly). Still, no expandable storage means that you need to choose carefully. Hardcore VR users should consider the 256GB option.
The LCD display’s blacks aren’t as black as the original Quest OLED: The fast-switch LCD on the Quest 2 is generally better, but the black levels are clearly less black. In a darkened virtual movie theater or with a dark game like The Room VR, I’m a lot more aware of the display’s light. (On the upside, bright images and text like web pages seem more vivid.)
IPD adjustment for my eyes was a bit of a learning process:The older Quest fit my eyes perfectly, and also had an interpupillary distance slider to fit eye distances for nearly anyone. The Quest 2 replaces the slider with three preset eye distance settings (53, 63 and 68mm) that are meant to fit most people, but at first my vision didn’t feel 100% with any of them. Over time, I readjusted the straps to my head and started to get better results. I also have thick prescription glasses, FYI.
You can’t really use it in sunlight: The Oculus Quest 2 is like a vampire — keep it indoors. Direct sunlight can cause permanent damage to the displays if beams go through the inner lenses, and when I played outside, the headset tracking had some trouble finding the controllers. It’s a reminder that VR headsets still aren’t everyday take-absolutely-anywhere things quite yet, though I’ve done some outdoorsy experiments from time to time.
A possible magic doorway to more, but what happens next with Meta?
Meta’s road to the future is set toward augmented-reality smart glasses that can blend the virtual and real, but that could still be years off. In the meantime, the Quest 2 could have enough onboard power to evolve new ideas for the company’s immersive work. Its pro-level headset, Project Cambria, should introduce better controllers, more mixed reality, eye and face tracking, and a better display. It could be another bridge to where Meta’s AR ambitions lie, but at a much higher price. The Quest 2, meanwhile, could hang on as a more “budget” device for everyone else.
Besides whatever concerns about Facebook and data you may have, there’s also the question of how open Meta will allow its VR universe to be. While the Quest connects easily with PCs, what about the future of phones? How will the Quest dovetail with the apps we use every day? Right now, it doesn’t. Mark Zuckerberg keeps pledging that the Quest’s future will be open. But the future ahead will be about phones and tablets that plug into VR and AR, and the Quest needs to find a way to be part of that future, too.
For now, the Quest 2 remains a memorable VR and experiential headset, and the best self-contained device VR has ever had. The only question is how much better it can get.
