Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Kinect for Media Center released, why not wave and shout at your HTPC?

Source: http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/15/kinect-for-media-center/

Kinect hacks previously brought gesture and voice control to Boxee and XBMC, and now that the Kinect for Windows hardware has been released we've got a solution for Windows Media Center. The aptly named Kinect for Media Center brings all the normal playback controls (for WMC and add-ins like Netflix) to your fingertips and lips, at the cost of $6.99. While its control scheme seems to be fully featured there are unfortunately some limitations -- it doesn't work with the Xbox 360 Kinect due to Microsoft's restrictions, and it also doesn't work with WMC extenders. What is included are filters to keep your content from accidentally triggering the voice controls (something some of us have had problems with on the Xbox 360), and configurable settings for right or left hand dominance or sensitivity. You can check out a video demo of the beta version (compare to a demo we saw last year from the makers of the Amulet voice control remotes) embedded after the break, or head directly to the site to try it out yourself if you're sure that finding the remote has simply become to much of a hassle.

Continue reading Kinect for Media Center released, why not wave and shout at your HTPC?

Kinect for Media Center released, ! why not wave and shout at your HTPC? originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 15 Feb 2012 01:34:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink The Digital Lifestyle  |  sourceKinect for Media Center, The Media Center Project (Facebook)  | Email this | Comments

Read More...

GE turns butterfly-inspired tech into cheap, accurate thermal sensors (video)

Source: http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/15/ge-turns-butterfly-inspired-tech-into-cheap-accurate-thermal-se/

GE butterfly sensor
When last we heard from GE and its Morpho-butterfly inspired sensors, all the talk was about detecting chemicals. And, with $6.3 million in funding coming from DARPA, we're not surprised. In the latest issue of Nature Photonics, however, the company's researchers show that the wing-like structures are just as good at detecting heat as they are ricin attacks. By coating them with carbon nanotubes the team was able to create a sensor sensitive to temperature changes as small as 0.02 degrees Celsius with a response rate of 1/40 of a second. The sensors could eventually find their way into imaging devices and medical equipment, and are expected to cost just a fraction of similar technologies currently on the market. Of course, since DARPA is still involved with the project, there are some potential security uses as well -- such as screening devices and fire detection. Head after the break for a video and some PR.

Continue reading GE turns butterfly-inspired tech into cheap, accurate thermal sensors (video)

GE turns butterfly-inspired tech into cheap, accurate thermal sensors (video) originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 15 Feb 2012 02:52:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  sourceGE  | Email this | Comments

Read More...

Gartner: Apple leads the way among smartphone vendors, Android sees slight decline

Source: http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/15/gartner-q4-2011-apple-android-smartphone/

Gartner's latest bundle of smartphone stats has just hit the wires, bringing with it some encouraging news for the folks in Cupertino. According to the firm's Q4 report, Apple finished 2011 as the world's top smartphone vendor by market share (19 percent), thanks to a Q4 that saw the company grab 23.8 percent of the market. During the quarter, Apple sold some 35.5 million handsets to end users, marking a mildly insane 121.4 percent increase from Q4 2010. This surge also helped Apple overtake LG to become the world's third largest seller of all mobile phones, with a 7.4 percent market share last quarter, trailing only Nokia (23.4 percent) and Samsung (19.4 percent). Nokia, in fact, saw some of its lead wither away during Q4, with sales dropping 8.7 percent over the year, to 111.7 million units. On the OS front, meanwhile, Android continues to dominate Q4 with 50.9 percent of the smartphone market, but that's slightly down from the previous quarter, when it grabbed a little less than 53 percent. Gartner attributes some of this to increased sales of the iPhone 4S, though it expects iOS' share to decline over the next "couple of quarters," as fewer users upgrade to the company's latest handset. For more insight and analysis, check out the full press release, after the break.

Continue reading Gartner: ! Apple le ads the way among smartphone vendors, Android sees slight decline

Gartner: Apple leads the way among smartphone vendors, Android sees slight decline originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 15 Feb 2012 04:47:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |   | Email this | Comments

Read More...

LG's Tegra 3 phone specifications leak, benchmark tests cower in fear

Source: http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/15/lg-tegra-3-phone-specification-leak-tegra3-quadcore/

LG's got a leak and it's revealing some intriguing details on another flagship smartphone -- even backing them up with some screenshots. According to MoDaCo's mole, it will brandish a 4.7 inch (720 x 1280) display, powered by LG's first Tegra 3 quad-core setup. Processor speeds are pegged at around 1.5GHz on a single core, dropping to 1.4GHz during multi-core use. Hopefully, the 2,000mAh battery will withstand all that thinking power, while Ice Cream Sandwich should help push those multitasking chops to its limit. Camera-wise, you can expect an increasingly standard eight-megapxiel sensor, with a 1.3-megapixel camera on the front. There also appears to be some NFC hardware inside, identified by that circular logo at the top of these tantalizing screengrabs -- something we saw on LG's Prada phone 3.0. We're hoping to get a full explanation (and a look at some hardware) at Mobile World Congress. There's just a few weeks to go.

LG's Tegra 3 phone specifications leak, benchmark tests cower in fear originally appeared on Engadget on Wed, 15 Feb 2012 06:40:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink   |  sourceMoDaCo  | Email this | Comments

Read More...

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Browser Speed Tests: Chrome 17, Firefox 10, Internet Explorer 9, and Opera 11.61 [Browser Speed Tests]

Source: http://lifehacker.com/5884941/browser-speed-tests-chrome-17-firefox-10-internet-explorer-9-and-opera-1161

Browser Speed Tests: Chrome 17, Firefox 10, Internet Explorer 9, and Opera 11.61Chrome 17 is out with a new prerendering feature designed to make your pages load faster, and both Firefox and Opera have also released speedy new versions since our last round of speed tests. So, we've once again pitted the four most popular web browsers against each other in a battle of startup times, tab loading times, and more, with more surprising results.

We've been testing browsers for awhile, and we've refined our method pretty well. It's a good mix of both manually timed user experience measures and hardcore JavaScript and CSS benchmarks, plus a new test aimed at seeing what Chrome's prerendering can really do. All tests take place on Windows.

As always, remember that speed is not the only thing each browser has to offer. Each browser has a number of unique features and characteristics, all of which you should factor into making your choice of which to use. However, while most features can be listed on their home pages, you can't easily compare their speed just from each browser's changelog, and that's why we've put this together. It's just one more way to compare the browsers as you make your decision. Also keep in mind that everyone's computer is different, and it's not really the numbers that matter here. Your own tests on your machine could produce very different numbers, but it's the comparison between each browser that matters—on a level playing field, they should rank similar on any computer you test them.

Cold Boot-Up Winner: Chrome!

Browser Speed Tests: Chrome 17, Firefox 10, Internet Explorer 9, and Opera 11.61We've slightly tweaked how we test cold boot-ups since last time. Instead of waiting for the same home page to load, we've decided to time cold boot-ups only until the browser window appears, since that's what really matters to most people: when you can actually start using the browser (clicking bookmarks, typing URLs, and so on). In this test, Chrome came out the pretty clear winner, showing itself before any of the other browsers. It was a close match though, with Firefox taking only about a second more in last place.

Tab-Loading Winner: Opera!

Browser Speed Tests: Chrome 17, Firefox 10, Internet Explorer 9, and Opera 11.61Given nine tabs to load, ranging from Lifehacker to Facebook to Hulu, Opera once again blew everyone else out of the water with an insanely quick time of 6 seconds. Other browsers took nearly 3 times as long, with Firefox and IE hitting 17 seconds and Chrome moving like molasses with 22 seconds.

URL-Loading Winner: Chrome!

Browser Speed Tests: Chrome 17, Firefox 10, Internet Explorer 9, and Opera 11.61We wanted to test Chrome's new prerendering feature to see what kind of difference it made in loading a page after typing it in in the address bar. So, we ran an AutoHotkey script that typed in Lifehacker.com, ran it a few times in each browser, and subtracted the time it took to type the address. While the results were fairly close—within a second from one another—Chrome was noticeably faster, loading pages instantly after hitting the Enter key (as long as you had visited that page once during that session). IE was surprisingly quick, taking a bit less than a half second more, while Opera and Firefox took their own sweet time at 1.35 seconds each to load a new page. It was one of the smallest scales on which the browsers did battle today, but it was still different enough that we though it worth including—and it's actually quite noticeable when you're browsing.

JavaScript Winner: Chrome!

Browser Speed Tests: Chrome 17, Firefox 10, Internet Explorer 9, and Opera 11.61As usual, Chrome kicks butt when it comes to JavaScript performance. Firefox takes a distant second, with IE and Opera trailing behind. Nothing new here.

DOM/CSS-Performance Winner: Opera!

Browser Speed Tests: Chrome 17, Firefox 10, Internet Explorer 9, and Opera 11.61Once again, these results should be pretty familiar. Opera smoked the competition during the CSS tests, more than usual, while Firefox, Chrome, and Internet Explorer all ate its dust in 2nd, 3rd, and last place respectively.

Memory Usage (with Nine Tabs Open) Winner: Firefox!

Browser Speed Tests: Chrome 17, Firefox 10, Internet Explorer 9, and Opera 11.61This time around, we've left our no-tabs-memory-usage scores out of the final tally, since we didn't find that they really mattered in real world usage. When it comes to memory usage with nine tabs open, however, Firefox reigns supreme—which, even though isn't a new result, is still shocking given the fact that Firefox used to eat memory like it was Pac Man and memory was little white dots. Unlike last time, this time Firefox edged out Opera, showing its truly committed to this lower-memory browsing, while Chrome and IE took up a fair amount more memory on their own.

If you're curious about each browser's memory usage without nine tabs open, we still measured it; we just didn't put it in the graphs. Chrome actually wins the battle of base memory usage at only 42 MB, with Opera close behind at 48 MB. Firefox and IE use up closer to 63 MB of RAM without any tabs open—negligible in the grand scheme of things, but interesting to know, considering how bad Chrome is at managing memory once you open up a few tabs (and how Firefox squeezes into first place).

Memory Usage (with Nine Tabs and Five Extensions) Winner: Firefox!

Browser Speed Tests: Chrome 17, Firefox 10, Internet Explorer 9, and Opera 11.61It looks like using extensions may raise each browser's memory usage, but not in a way that differentiates them in these tests. Firefox still comes out ahead when you install five extensions, with Opera behind it and Chrome in last place.

Overall Scores

We tallied the place rankings for each browser and assigned them point values, then divided them by the total number of points each could have gotten for an easily readable scale. This time around, we started counting the memory use scores for half, since with and without extensions they're two sides of the same coin (and we didn't want memory over-represented in the battle). The scoring system isn't perfect, since it also doesn't take into account by how MUCH each browser might win a specific battle—but everyone wants to see a winner, and it at least gives us that. We urge you to look closely at the above results and determine which browser fits your needs best rather than just looking at the final scores. If tab loading times are what really irk you, factor in tab loading times moreso than memory usage or cold boot time when picking which browser fits your speed needs. And, as we already said, remember that there's a lot more to browser choice than just speed—this is just supposed to rank them in ways one can't see from each browser's "feature" page. The scores are:

  1. Chrome: 69%
  2. Firefox and Opera: 63.2%
  3. Internet Explorer: 48%

Chrome, for the first time in a long time, leaped into first place, no doubt due to its new prerendering feature and always-awesome JavaScript tests (not to mention a slight win in cold boot times). Firefox and Opera actually tied for second place, with Firefox winning in memory usage and Opera taking home blue ribbons in tab loading and CSS performance, though looking at the scores, it's easy to see that Opera's wins were more drastic than Firefox's—meaning that we'd probably give the edge to Opera, if asked. Internet Explorer came in last, placing well enough in every competition but excelling in none.

It's clear that each browser is improving quite a bit with each new version, and each has pretty clear strengths in the realm of speed. While loading a group of bookmarks (or restoring an old session) in Chrome is remarkably slow, loading a page from the URL bar feels instantaneous, while Firefox has learned its lesson with memory usage. Opera loads a group of tabs with shocking speed, as usual. Hopefully, this trend continues into the future and we see more competition between each browser for title of the fastest.


Our tests aren't the most scientific on the planet, but they do reflect a relatively accurate view of the kind of experience you'd get from each browser, speed-wise. Let us know if your experience differs—or if the speed losses are worth the browser's other features—in the comments.

Read More...