NiniaPimp Magazine

Features you don’t get
Unfortunately, Verizon’s iPhone lacks two very important features present on ATTT’s device. Because CDMA essentially separates voice and data into two “pipes” (GSM uses only one), you won’t be able to stay on a call and use the Web browser, Google Maps, or any app that requires a data connection (you’ll receive a notification if you try and do so). If you’re using the naviagtion feature or hot spot, they will pause when you get a call and resume after you hang up. On the other hand, you will be abe to send and receive texts and browse existing content on your device when on a call.

We think that’s a big deal, especially when you consider that Apple has made such functionality–you can talk on the phone and get directions to Starbucks!–a centerpiece of some of its ad campaigns. You can use voice and data at the same time if you’re connected to Wi-Fi, but that remains the only work-around. There is, however, one benefit to this arrangement. We’ll discuss it in the last section.

The good news is that the CDMA Development Group has announced that simultaneous voice and data will become commercially available in the first half of this year. Yet, just because the new technology is out there, it doesn’t mean that Verizon will start using it right away. As of now, no CDMA carrier, Verizon included, has said that it will adopt simultaneous voice and data. And even if Verizon does pick up the technology change, its iPhone 4 won’t be able to support it without the necessary hardware changes.

Also, we’re not pleased that Verizon’s iPhone will not support GSM networks. You’ll be able to use it in the United States, Canada, Mexico, and around 40 other countries outside North America, but world travelers will have extremely limited roaming capability. Bad move, Apple and Verizon.

Lastly, the Verizon iPhone 4 will not support Verizon’s 4G LTE network. That’s disappointing, but hardly surprising. As we’ve said before, Apple is not a company to jump on a bleeding-edge technology. Verizon’s 4G network has yet to be used by cell phone customers (only laptop users are on it now), and Apple will make sure it can deliver the polished user experience that it always seeks. Though nothing is confirmed yet, we expect a 4G model on both Verizon and ATT within the next 12 months. Sure, you’ll have to upgrade to a new version, but Apple is a master at that game.

Performance
A popular joke about the ATT iPhone is that it’s great device, as long as you don’t have to make calls. Honestly, we never fully subscribed to that view, but there’s no denying that for some iPhone users, particularly those in dense urban areas, ATT has delivered a less than stellar iPhone experience. And as the problems continued, the belief that Verizon could deliver a better performance became so ingrained, that many consumers saw no other possible outcome. Yet, like so many other things in tech, the reality is more complex.

Voice calls and antenna
We divided our voice call tests into three parts. First, we made calls on the dual-band (CDMA 800/1900) Verizon iPhone without picking up ATT’s device. On our end, the audio was clear with little distortion or interference. The volume was loud, as well, and the noise cancellation feature continued to do a good job of screening out background noise. When we called a friend waiting at the airport, we could hear her clearly, even as announcements blared in the background over the PA system.

We then hung up and placed a call on the ATT iPhone (to keep the test fair we called from an area where we know both carriers offer good coverage). During the call, we noticed few differences in clarity apart from a small amount of buzz that usually accompanies GSM networks. The volume was equally loud, as well, and the noise cancellation feature did the same job.

On their end, callers had mixed reports. A few people said we sounded no different, but one friend said the Verizon handset delivered tinnier audio quality on his end. The change wasn’t significant, he said, but he noticed immediately. All of the people we called could hear us adequately, even if we were calling from alongside a busy street. Speakerphone and Bluetooth headset calls were about the same as on the ATT handset, and we had no issues when using an automated calling system. Check out this blog post to see how the ATT and Verizon iPhone 4 voice samples compare.

Apple iPhone 4 (Verizon) call quality sample
Listen now:

For our last voice test, we took the phone to four locations in San Francisco that can be troublesome for both carriers. We went to an onramp of the Bay Bridge during the afternoon rush, a ground-level pedestrian tunnel under a street, the elevator in CNET’s offices, an underground transit station, and an interior stairway in a residential apartment building. In each place we made a call to the same phone number at the same time. This post explains the test in more detail.

On the whole, the Verizon handset outperformed ATT’s device. It connected first in the pedestrian tunnel and apartment building hallway and showed more bars on the home screen. ATT connected first in the transit station, but it was unable to connect at all on the bridge onramp. And even worse, it couldn’t get a signal in the elevator. Dropped calls were not a problem on either phone during our testing period. Unlike on ATT, Verizon’s network doesn’t let you drop off 3G. That’s a not a bad thing, but we we’re not happy that you can’t use the Field Test feature to check signal strength.

Of course, we had to see if the Verizon iPhone suffered from any of the attenuation problems that plagued the iPhone 4 last summer. Though Apple and Apple fans may deny there was a problem, we certainly experienced real issues when we touched the infamous gap on the handset’s left side. Luckily, the Verizon iPhone didn’t appear to suffer the same fate. We didn’t experience audio cut-outs and we didn’t see the bars drop when we put the phone in the death grip.

Data
Though ATT’s HSPA 3G network technically is faster than Verizon’s EV-DO technology, our tests produced varying results. To start, we compared load times for three Web sites–Airliners.net, NYTimes.com, and the full CNET site–on the ATT and Verizon handsets. We tried from the same location at three times of day: late afternoon, early morning, and just before midnight.

In most instances, Verizon’s 3G (EV-DO) network delivered faster speeds. The difference varied widely–sometimes it was short as 3 seconds, but it could go longer than a minute–and the ATT phone was more likely to have its connection time out. The ATT phone won on a few occasions, but only by 9 seconds at the most. Time of day also played a role, with the ATT handset being significantly slower in the late afternoon.

Recorded times to load Web sites (in seconds)

For our next test we traveled to four additional trouble spots in San Francisco: the parking garage in the basement of CNET’s building, Treasure Island, the Financial District during lunch hour, and the neighborhood just below Twin Peaks. In each location, we compared the number of bars on the display, used Root Metrics’ CoverageMap (find it in the iTunes App Store) app to test upload and download speeds, uploaded a photo to Facebook, and accessed the Web page Giantbomb.com. The point was to combine real measurements with real-world use.

Here again, Verizon won most of the time, but the results were all over the map. When we tested data speeds using the Root app, Big Red’s data speeds were significantly higher than ATT’s. For instance, Verizon’s offered download speeds of 61Kbps at the Financial District location, whereas ATT’s offered download speeds of 116Kbps. The gap in other locations wasn’t quite as wide, but the Verizon handset always won and it finished the data test first.

In the other tests, however, the differences weren’t as sharp. The Verizon phone was quicker to access the Web page and upload the Facebook photo most of the time, but not always by a lot. On some occasions there was no difference, and in two tests (once on Treasure Island and once on Twin Peaks) the ATT handset won. We cover the testing process in more detail in this accompanying blog post and video, so be sure to check it out.

Better, but not by much
Yes, the Verizon iPhone offered a better experience in our initial tests. And we suspect that in the first months after its release it will do the same for you. But as we said before, it’s important to step back and remember a few things. Though we tried to make our tests as fair as possible, there was one aspect that we couldn’t correct. We were, after all, using the Verizon iPhone during a period when just a handful of such handsets were in the wild. Sure, other Verizon smartphones were using the network, too, but our ATT phone was competing with thousands of other Apple devices in the immediate area.

That’s why the Verizon iPhone’s real test will continue to play out over time. As the carrier adds millions of data-hungry users (some estimates say that Verizon could add up to 13 million new customers in two years) we could begin to see more even performance results. As we approach February 10, Verizon definitely has a couple of things going for it. Its reputation for offering a strong network is well-deserved, it’s been able to use Android handsets to gauge date use, and there’s no question that it’s learned from ATT’s travails with capacity. Also, because of the two CDMA pipes, voice quality on the Verizon iPhone is less likely to be compromised by data use.

Verizon very well could be ready for the data onslaught, but we still caution you to keep those expectations in check. If you’ve torn you hair out at ATT, we certainly empathize, but don’t look at Big Red’s phone as a magic device. You’re still using an imperfect cellular network and your experience can vary by several factors, including location and interference. Your experience should be better, but then again it may not.

Battery life
The Verizon iPhone 4 promises the same battery life as the ATT phone. That’s 7 hours of 3G talk time, 40 hours of audio playback, 10 hours of video playback, 6 hours of 3G browsing, 10 hours of Wi-Fi browsing, and 300 hours of standby. In our initial talk time test, we came away with 6 hours and 56 minutes. We’ll continue testing the battery over the next few days and will report the results.

According to FCC radiation tests, the iPhone 4 has a digital SAR of 1.18 watts per kilogram.

Previous page

Features you don’t get
Unfortunately, Verizon’s iPhone lacks two very important features present on ATTT’s device. Because CDMA essentially separates voice and data into two “pipes” (GSM uses only one), you won’t be able to stay on a call and use the Web browser, Google Maps, or any app that requires a data connection (you’ll receive a notification if you try and do so). If you’re using the naviagtion feature or hot spot, they will pause when you get a call and resume after you hang up. On the other hand, you will be abe to send and receive texts and browse existing content on your device when on a call.

We think that’s a big deal, especially when you consider that Apple has made such functionality–you can talk on the phone and get directions to Starbucks!–a centerpiece of some of its ad campaigns. You can use voice and data at the same time if you’re connected to Wi-Fi, but that remains the only work-around. There is, however, one benefit to this arrangement. We’ll discuss it in the last section.

The good news is that the CDMA Development Group has announced that simultaneous voice and data will become commercially available in the first half of this year. Yet, just because the new technology is out there, it doesn’t mean that Verizon will start using it right away. As of now, no CDMA carrier, Verizon included, has said that it will adopt simultaneous voice and data. And even if Verizon does pick up the technology change, its iPhone 4 won’t be able to support it without the necessary hardware changes.

Also, we’re not pleased that Verizon’s iPhone will not support GSM networks. You’ll be able to use it in the United States, Canada, Mexico, and around 40 other countries outside North America, but world travelers will have extremely limited roaming capability. Bad move, Apple and Verizon.

Lastly, the Verizon iPhone 4 will not support Verizon’s 4G LTE network. That’s disappointing, but hardly surprising. As we’ve said before, Apple is not a company to jump on a bleeding-edge technology. Verizon’s 4G network has yet to be used by cell phone customers (only laptop users are on it now), and Apple will make sure it can deliver the polished user experience that it always seeks. Though nothing is confirmed yet, we expect a 4G model on both Verizon and ATT within the next 12 months. Sure, you’ll have to upgrade to a new version, but Apple is a master at that game.

Performance
A popular joke about the ATT iPhone is that it’s great device, as long as you don’t have to make calls. Honestly, we never fully subscribed to that view, but there’s no denying that for some iPhone users, particularly those in dense urban areas, ATT has delivered a less than stellar iPhone experience. And as the problems continued, the belief that Verizon could deliver a better performance became so ingrained, that many consumers saw no other possible outcome. Yet, like so many other things in tech, the reality is more complex.

Voice calls and antenna
We divided our voice call tests into three parts. First, we made calls on the dual-band (CDMA 800/1900) Verizon iPhone without picking up ATT’s device. On our end, the audio was clear with little distortion or interference. The volume was loud, as well, and the noise cancellation feature continued to do a good job of screening out background noise. When we called a friend waiting at the airport, we could hear her clearly, even as announcements blared in the background over the PA system.

We then hung up and placed a call on the ATT iPhone (to keep the test fair we called from an area where we know both carriers offer good coverage). During the call, we noticed few differences in clarity apart from a small amount of buzz that usually accompanies GSM networks. The volume was equally loud, as well, and the noise cancellation feature did the same job.

On their end, callers had mixed reports. A few people said we sounded no different, but one friend said the Verizon handset delivered tinnier audio quality on his end. The change wasn’t significant, he said, but he noticed immediately. All of the people we called could hear us adequately, even if we were calling from alongside a busy street. Speakerphone and Bluetooth headset calls were about the same as on the ATT handset, and we had no issues when using an automated calling system. Check out this blog post to see how the ATT and Verizon iPhone 4 voice samples compare.

Apple iPhone 4 (Verizon) call quality sample
Listen now:

For our last voice test, we took the phone to four locations in San Francisco that can be troublesome for both carriers. We went to an onramp of the Bay Bridge during the afternoon rush, a ground-level pedestrian tunnel under a street, the elevator in CNET’s offices, an underground transit station, and an interior stairway in a residential apartment building. In each place we made a call to the same phone number at the same time. This post explains the test in more detail.

On the whole, the Verizon handset outperformed ATT’s device. It connected first in the pedestrian tunnel and apartment building hallway and showed more bars on the home screen. ATT connected first in the transit station, but it was unable to connect at all on the bridge onramp. And even worse, it couldn’t get a signal in the elevator. Dropped calls were not a problem on either phone during our testing period. Unlike on ATT, Verizon’s network doesn’t let you drop off 3G. That’s a not a bad thing, but we we’re not happy that you can’t use the Field Test feature to check signal strength.

Of course, we had to see if the Verizon iPhone suffered from any of the attenuation problems that plagued the iPhone 4 last summer. Though Apple and Apple fans may deny there was a problem, we certainly experienced real issues when we touched the infamous gap on the handset’s left side. Luckily, the Verizon iPhone didn’t appear to suffer the same fate. We didn’t experience audio cut-outs and we didn’t see the bars drop when we put the phone in the death grip.

Data
Though ATT’s HSPA 3G network technically is faster than Verizon’s EV-DO technology, our tests produced varying results. To start, we compared load times for three Web sites–Airliners.net, NYTimes.com, and the full CNET site–on the ATT and Verizon handsets. We tried from the same location at three times of day: late afternoon, early morning, and just before midnight.

In most instances, Verizon’s 3G (EV-DO) network delivered faster speeds. The difference varied widely–sometimes it was short as 3 seconds, but it could go longer than a minute–and the ATT phone was more likely to have its connection time out. The ATT phone won on a few occasions, but only by 9 seconds at the most. Time of day also played a role, with the ATT handset being significantly slower in the late afternoon.

Recorded times to load Web sites (in seconds)

For our next test we traveled to four additional trouble spots in San Francisco: the parking garage in the basement of CNET’s building, Treasure Island, the Financial District during lunch hour, and the neighborhood just below Twin Peaks. In each location, we compared the number of bars on the display, used Root Metrics’ CoverageMap (find it in the iTunes App Store) app to test upload and download speeds, uploaded a photo to Facebook, and accessed the Web page Giantbomb.com. The point was to combine real measurements with real-world use.

Here again, Verizon won most of the time, but the results were all over the map. When we tested data speeds using the Root app, Big Red’s data speeds were significantly higher than ATT’s. For instance, Verizon’s offered download speeds of 61Kbps at the Financial District location, whereas ATT’s offered download speeds of 116Kbps. The gap in other locations wasn’t quite as wide, but the Verizon handset always won and it finished the data test first.

In the other tests, however, the differences weren’t as sharp. The Verizon phone was quicker to access the Web page and upload the Facebook photo most of the time, but not always by a lot. On some occasions there was no difference, and in two tests (once on Treasure Island and once on Twin Peaks) the ATT handset won. We cover the testing process in more detail in this accompanying blog post and video, so be sure to check it out.

Better, but not by much
Yes, the Verizon iPhone offered a better experience in our initial tests. And we suspect that in the first months after its release it will do the same for you. But as we said before, it’s important to step back and remember a few things. Though we tried to make our tests as fair as possible, there was one aspect that we couldn’t correct. We were, after all, using the Verizon iPhone during a period when just a handful of such handsets were in the wild. Sure, other Verizon smartphones were using the network, too, but our ATT phone was competing with thousands of other Apple devices in the immediate area.

That’s why the Verizon iPhone’s real test will continue to play out over time. As the carrier adds millions of data-hungry users (some estimates say that Verizon could add up to 13 million new customers in two years) we could begin to see more even performance results. As we approach February 10, Verizon definitely has a couple of things going for it. Its reputation for offering a strong network is well-deserved, it’s been able to use Android handsets to gauge date use, and there’s no question that it’s learned from ATT’s travails with capacity. Also, because of the two CDMA pipes, voice quality on the Verizon iPhone is less likely to be compromised by data use.

Verizon very well could be ready for the data onslaught, but we still caution you to keep those expectations in check. If you’ve torn you hair out at ATT, we certainly empathize, but don’t look at Big Red’s phone as a magic device. You’re still using an imperfect cellular network and your experience can vary by several factors, including location and interference. Your experience should be better, but then again it may not.

Battery life
The Verizon iPhone 4 promises the same battery life as the ATT phone. That’s 7 hours of 3G talk time, 40 hours of audio playback, 10 hours of video playback, 6 hours of 3G browsing, 10 hours of Wi-Fi browsing, and 300 hours of standby. In our initial talk time test, we came away with 6 hours and 56 minutes. We’ll continue testing the battery over the next few days and will report the results.

According to FCC radiation tests, the iPhone 4 has a digital SAR of 1.18 watts per kilogram.

Previous page

If you played the original Two Worlds, you might not be surprised to learn that its sequel does not represent the role-playing genre at its most refined. What may surprise you, however, is that Two Worlds II’s clumsy features don’t greatly diminish the impact of its big, busy world. Here is an expansive third-person RPG brimming with fearsome monsters to slay, colorful spells to cast, varied quests to perform, and murky swamps to explore. The game lacks the fine points that adorn the greatest role-playing adventures–distinctive characters, a compelling narrative, and beautiful panoramas. But this is an entertaining journey nonetheless, due in no small part to intriguing but accessible systems that allow you to create your own magic spells, concoct potions, and upgrade your favorite weapons and armor. If you’ve been looking to lose yourself in a fantastical kingdom, and don’t mind some clumsy combat, graphical inconsistencies, and nagging interface issues, Two Worlds II is a fine way to escape the rigors of the real world.

6297130Fact: baboons are evil.None

As with its precursor, Two Worlds II takes place in the land of Antaloor, where (once again), your sister is in trouble, and where (once again), the evil wizard Gandohar is up to no good. It’s a suitable framework, but the game fails to build on its foundations. Through a series of good-looking flashback sequences, you eventually learn more about Gandohar, but the personal touch is conspicuously absent. The game devotes little time to giving your sister a personality, making her a simple MacGuffin to help put the story in motion, but nothing more. Nor will you meet many memorable characters. While much of the voice acting isn’t bad, some of it is lifeless (your own character), ridiculous (a drunken local), or stiff (a student in need). The tomes you collect contain some fascinating tales and tidbits, but much of the dialogue sounds forced and unnatural–like something an author would write, but not something an actual person would say.

That isn’t to say that Two Worlds II’s quests won’t draw you in. Sometimes, it’s the bits of humor that keep you interested. A one-armed man threatens you, but as it turns out, it’s a two-handed weapon he hangs on his wall. The dialogue’s little jests may put a grin on your face, but you might actually guffaw if you explore this abode later and discover that the treasure chests within all contain two-handed bludgeons. An encounter with a black knight recalls a memorable scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, while a character involved with the quest is a Sean Connery soundalike (a clear reference to Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade). If the humor doesn’t inspire you, perhaps the chance to drive the outcome of the quest will. In multiple cases, you choose how to proceed. This kind of decision-making isn’t unique to Two Worlds II, and you won’t see the exciting flexibility you may in a game like Fallout: New Vegas or Dragon Age: Origins. Nevertheless, quests involving the element of choice stand out in Two Worlds II because there is not always a clear “bad” or “good” path. A witch accused of crimes against nature; a professor accused by a supposedly innocent student: these characters may or may not be who they appear to be, and
choosing to follow one path may result in unforeseen and occasionally
heartbreaking circumstances.

This shoulder massage went horribly, horribly wrong.

Of course, there’s more to Two Worlds II than its narrative. There’s a whole world to explore, made up of rolling green hills, decrepit universities, and dank dungeons filled with rattling skeletons and hulking beasts. The visuals aren’t best in class, however, and suffer from some noticeable technical flaws. Colors and textures look washed out, and occasional frame rate hitches, screen tearing, and loading times interrupt your travels. You may also run into various visual glitches, like seeing your character warp ahead and then back again. Other quirks are apparent when the camera zooms in to give you a closer look at Antaloor’s inhabitants, who gesticulate stiffly and exhibit little personality as they converse. Nevertheless, the art design aspires to more than simple “generic fantasyland.” The Asian-inspired design that kicks off chapter two (of four) revels in attractive red trimmings and intricately adorned bookcases. Nearby, gnarled branches and grim darkness lend an air of mystery to a society of outsiders. You still set foot in some boring caverns and bland (if sunny) fields, but progressing through the story exposes a number of artistic delights.

When facing your menacing adversaries, you aren’t stuck with just blades, or a bow, or magic spells: you can choose any of these, and easily switch between up to three equipment sets with the press of a button. Regardless of your weapon of choice, combat is appealing, if a bit ragged at times. If you wield a blade, crunchy sound effects give battles some oomph, as do melee moves that knock back nearby enemies. On the other hand, inconsistent collision detection means you don’t always get that delightful sense of impact you might hope for when plunging an axe into an ostrich. Casting a spell results in windy noises (summon a giant spider!) and swirling visual effects (heal yourself!)–though the auto-targeting will have the camera occasionally whipping around in uncomfortable ways. If you enjoy ranged weapons and magic, you might find bows and spells better left to certain occasions, since it’s often difficult to put space between you and that swarm of bees descending on you.

Unfortunately for our hero, love is always just out of reach.

That’s especially true in Two Worlds II’s tight, dark dungeons, where many of the game’s most obvious flaws come to light. Narrow caverns are often populated with monsters too large for them. Maneuvering into an effective position can be tricky in these cases, especially when the uncooperative camera makes it impossible to figure out exactly what’s going on. The need to manually unsheathe your weapon–and the delay when switching between weapon sets–can also complicate these sticky moments. Fortunately, some slippery combat situations can be exploited to your advantage. Monsters and humanoids alike suffer from pathfinding and AI difficulties. A beast might get stuck running against a rock, allowing you to pelt it with arrows until it falls over dead. Or if you put enough distance between you and your target, it might not even react at all when your arrow finds its mark. You can see that some thought was given to how certain creatures behave. For example, big cats run towards you to attack, then scamper away at a quick clip to escape your blows. But when the same cat runs halfway up a crevasse and gets stuck, or slides across a rock formation at angles that defy gravity, the immersion is broken.

Next page

Weird news stories, bizarre news, strange but stories. You’ve come to the right place: Bizarre Florida, where weird is the norm. Exploding pythons. Armless, one-legged drivers. Yep. We certainly have unusual news stories. Offbeat news. Strange, interesting stories. Weird, unusual, true news stories. Get the picture? Have a story suggestion?

E-mail Bizarre Florida: bizarre@tampabay.com

   Luther Campbell, of 2 Live Crew fame, wants to be mayor of Miami. In some ways, the rapper and record company owner sounds like a conventional politician (“My last resort will be raising taxes,” he writes in a column in miamianewtimes.com).

   In others, maybe not (“Even though all my stripper friends are gonna be mad at me, I think we can stimulate the economy with a tax on strippers”). That might remind voters of when Campbell hit the public eye in the mid 1980s, as 2 Live Crew took “sexually explicit rap lyrics to a new level of nastiness,” as one critic put it.

   And why is he running? Again, from his column: “I get in my car, ride around Liberty City, and everything looks the same as when I was in the neighborhood growing up. I see the same crimes in the same areas. Officers and residents are still getting killed in the community I grew up in. I go to a city like Atlanta that has sensible affordable housing, and no one is being murdered. I go to Miami International Airport and see the same construction that has been going on for like a hundred years. All of that frustrates the hell out of me. Why aren’t we getting it right in Miami-Dade? Why is our government only serving one set of people? That’s what is pushing me to run.”

Weird news stories, bizarre news, strange but stories. You’ve come to the right place: Bizarre Florida, where weird is the norm. Exploding pythons. Armless, one-legged drivers. Yep. We certainly have unusual news stories. Offbeat news. Strange, interesting stories. Weird, unusual, true news stories. Get the picture? Have a story suggestion?

E-mail Bizarre Florida: bizarre@tampabay.com

Motorola’s latest foray into the in-car Bluetooth speakerphone doesn’t seem much different from its last, at least not on paper. Replacing the still-great-for-its-age Motorokr T505, the Motorola Roadster still pairs via Bluetooth and still features the FM transmission mode that won us over the first time. So what’s new? Aside from a lighter chassis and an updated aesthetic, the Roadster gains compatibility with the MotoSpeak application for Android and BlackBerry devices, which is designed to keep people from texting while driving, or, at the very least, make it safer.

Along the right side of the Roadster, one will find the power switch and the Micro-USB charging point. The Roadster ships with a coiled 12-volt power cable that charges its internal battery. Unplugged, the Roadster has an estimated 20-hour talk time and a standby time of about three weeks. This standby time is greatly extended thanks to a power-saving mode that automatically powers down the Roadster after a period of disuse.

Controls are broken into two groups, separated by the Roadster’s approximately 2-inch loudspeaker, which is covered by a fabric panel. Audio output from this speaker is loud and clear–almost too loud for indoor environments. You won’t want to go playing with this speakerphone at your desk, but in a moving vehicle with road, engine, and wind noise, it’s just loud enough. Also hidden somewhere beneath the fabric panel are the Roadster dual noise-canceling microphones.

Along the top edge of the device are three buttons that are used for interacting with hands-free calling. From left to right, there are mute, call answer/end, and voice command buttons. The mute button mutes the microphone but allows you to continue listening, while the answer/end button works as one would expect–tap to answer, tap to end, and hold to redial. The voice command button actually calls up the paired handset’s voice dialer rather than one of the Roadster’s own.

Along the bottom edge are controls for audio output and playback. From left to right, there are buttons for play/pause of A2DP streamed audio, minus, plus, and FM. The FM button is interesting, as pressing it swaps the audio output from the Roadster’s speaker to its FM transmitter. Upon entering FM transmission mode, the Roadster speaks aloud its current frequency–for example, 89.9 FM–to which you can tune your car’s stereo or a nearby FM radio to receive the broadcast audio. The minus and plus buttons normally act as volume down and up, respectively. However, when the FM mode is activated, they become tuning buttons, adjusting the output frequency down and up in 0.2MHz increments with each tap or scanning for open frequencies after being held for a moment.

The Roadster mounts on your car’s sun visor with a wire clip that is removable with some effort. We’ve previously criticized this sort of attachment as feeling flimsy, but we’ve never had one give out on us during normal use. The Roadster held fast during spirited driving, its clamp providing more grip than its 3-ounce chassis required. Still, we’d be careful placing the Roadster in, for example, a backpack with heavy books, as sufficient weight could easily flatten the wire clip.

Next page

Photo gallery:
2011 Scion tC

Toyota may be known for bland, dependable cars, but when it comes to the automaker’s Scion brand, the designers really get to let their hair down. Witness the Scion tC, which in a single generation went from svelte to bulky. Where the original, launched in 2005, had a curved roofline that would have done any European designer proud, the 2011 Scion tC looks like a mini muscle car, with a little bit of Dodge Charger and Nissan GT-R mixed in its lines.

The flat roofline creates mean-looking side windows, narrow rectangles with the unfortunate side effect of hampering access, making bruised foreheads a common scenario. But the new roof design also makes the back seat more comfortable. In the previous tC, rear passengers had to keep their necks slightly off the vertical. And the tC benefits from typical hatchback practicality, with quite a bit of cargo room when the back seats are folded down.

Another new style cue for the 2011 tC is a glass roof, a nice touch making it possible to have a fixed sunroof over the rear seat in addition to the sunroof in front. Hard plastics used throughout the interior offset this upscale touch, although textures on these surfaces partially mitigate the cheap feel.

Aftermarket-friendly

Staying true to Scion’s original mission, iPod integration comes standard in the tC, and the cabin tech is as upgradable as ever. The double-DIN pioneer stereo in the dashboard uses up a little more space than necessary, but this standard equipment can be optioned up, as Scion gives buyers a choice of two different navigation head units. Our advice: go aftermarket for a navigation head unit–it will probably be cheaper and Scion makes installation very easy.

The base Pioneer stereo’s display is impressively bright and distinct, making it easy to read under any lighting conditions. A big, multifunction knob controls volume with dial movement and also operates as a joystick to tune radio stations. The latter movement is tedious and the knob feels like it might snap off at any moment.

The knob lets you browse through a connected iPod’s music library, but its less-than-precise movement can lead to frustrating missteps when selecting music. With each turn of the knob, the music listings take a moment to refresh on the screen, which can be a little distracting. Other audio sources include a single CD slot and the usual radio bands, with an option for satellite radio.

With an array of three speakers molded into each door, plus two more speakers in back, this audio system looks like it should produce some fine sound. Bass comes through with gut-shaking power, but not so strongly as to rattle the door panels. Mids and highs, on the other hand, get crushed by this system, so that it is often difficult to distinguish lyrics in a track. The small tweeters get overwhelmed with the volume up, producing more pain than music.

The Pioneer head unit has three audio settings under the banner of Scion Sound Processing, labeled Hear, Natural, and Feel. Natural is the most balanced setting, while Feel emphasizes bass. The Hear setting was hobbled by the audio system, which could not bring out the highs and mids in any sort of pleasurable fashion.

Next page

Asustek Computer may still be best known for its low-cost Netbooks, and occasional high-end reaches such as its Republic of Gamers desktop replacements, but the company churns out a fair number of middle-of-the-road systems as well. The Asus U41JF is a solidly built 14-inch notebook that will work fine for nearly any mainstream task, but at the same time is no bargain at $849. Worse, it’s easily outclassed in the design department by its 13-inch cousin, the Asus U36JC, which costs around the same, but is thinner, lighter, and more attractive, and has the same discrete graphics and a better processor.

Neither model has Intel’s new second-gen Core i-series processors (formerly code-named Sandy Bridge), but for mainstream systems such as this, that upgrade may take a while to hit store shelves, especially given Intel’s recent troubles with the new platform.

At prices approaching Apple’s MacBook (and topping Toshiba’s 13-inch R705), unless you’re wedded to the idea of the system’s Nvidia GeForce 425M graphics, there are better-priced or nicer-looking laptops out there. That said, the U41JF has really good battery life, and never really let us down, which may sound like faint praise, but is praise nonetheless.

The biggest immediate problem we had with the Asus U41JF was its overall look. The brushed metal lid and wrist rest are standard enough, and not offensive, but that’s paired with a glossy black keyboard tray (with matte black keyboard) and screen bezel that extend to the four edges of the chassis. This gives the entire device a gaudy two-tone look that we’ve previously criticized on other systems. If you can’t go monochrome, at least keep the colors in the same family.

The body itself is angular and boxy, but not overly thick for a 14-inch system. We’re not aesthetic elitists by any means, but with laptops mostly being constructed from the same core set of components, the visual flair is often what sells one model over another.

The keyboard has the same flat-topped, widely spaced keys as most current laptops, which is a style we sometimes call island or Chiclet keys. The keys are a good size, with large Left Shift and Enter keys, but the Right Shift key gets unfairly shortened. We’re also not a fan of the extra row of buttons some laptop makers are adding to the far right side, which are typically Page Up, Page Down, and other movement keys. They can throw off your touch typing pretty easily, making it hard to hit the Enter and Shift keys if you’re used to them being on the far right side of the keyboard. Additionally, the keyboard flexed under our fingers in the middle while we were typing, which never makes for a good long-term experience.

A generous touch pad is centered under the keyboard, but its basic multitouch gestures are hit or miss (however, the same could be said of most Windows laptops right now). One nice touch is that you can scroll vertically by either swiping one finger along the right edge of the touch pad or by using the Mac-like two-finger method. Under the touch pad, a single rocker bar takes the place of separate left and right mouse buttons. We strongly prefer separate buttons, but Asus seems married to the rocker bar concept across most of its products.

The 14.1-inch display has a native resolution of 1,366×768, which is typical for a midsize laptop. Off-axis viewing was good horizontally, but the image faded quickly when viewed from above or below. The built-in Altec Lansing speakers are decent for a laptop, and at least good enough for personal video viewing.

There’s nothing notable, or missing, from the U41JF’s collection of ports and connections. But for nearly $900, it’s possible to find extras such as a mobile broadband antenna, or even a Blu-ray player if you shop around.

With a 2.53GHz Intel Core i3 processor, this is a good example of a mainstream laptop that will suffice for everyday use, from Web surfing to Photoshop to watching HD videos online. While that Core i3 CPU is usually found in systems that cost a little less, in our benchmark testing the U41JF matched up well against systems with the step-up Intel Core i5 processor. Our takeaway is that you shouldn’t dismiss this model out of hand even if you had a Core i5 on your must-have list of laptop specs.

There’s also some very positive performance to be found in the Nvidia GeForce 475M GPU. It’s controlled by Nvidia’s Optimus switching system, which means the discrete GPU turns itself off and on as needed, and won’t run down your battery when you’re not, for example, playing a video game. Intel’s new Sandy Bridge CPUs, with improved integrated graphics, may make mainstream graphics cards pointless for many casual gamers, but those systems are still some ways off from being widely available.

As an example, we ran Street Fighter IV in the default mode, which automatically turned on the Nvidia graphics. At the native resolution of 1,366×768, the game ran at an excellent 68.4 frames per second. When we manually disabled the GPU, running instead on the integrated Intel HD graphics, the same test ran at only 14.9 frames per second.

Juice box
Asus U41JF A1
Avg watts/hour
Off (60%)
0.51
Sleep (10%)
1.22
Idle (25%)
12.37
Load (5%)
51.1
Raw kWh number
53.22
Annual energy cost
$6.04

Next page