A pair of images posted online late Friday supposedly offer a closer look at a charging case for an unreleased AirPods product rumored to launch in October.
Published to leak depository SlashLeaks, the two images show what appears to be two halves of a squat, partially disassembled AirPods charging case.
The lower portion of the white plastic part includes a top plate with recesses presumably designed to accommodate a next-generation AirPods device. Holes leading down from the top cover into the larger housing are likely meant to hold earphone stems for charging and are similar in size and shape to openings found in current AirPods charging cases.
Apple's usual "Designed in California" and "Assembled in China" markings are displayed below what could be a hinge groove, while a large cutout below the text looks ready to receive a paring button affixed to the top portion of the shell by a piece of tape.
Both top and bottom sections are covered or partially covered in a protective blue covering. No other markings or internal components are visible, suggesting the part — if legitimate — originated at a plastic casing supplier.
According to reports out of Apple's supply chain earlier this month, the company plans to launch a new "AirPods Pro" product by the end of October. Unnamed sources said the earphones will incorporate noise cancelling technology, much like Apple's recently released Beats Solo Pro, and sell for at least $260.
Noted analyst Ming-Chi Kuo was first to deliver word of Apple's AirPods strategy in April, saying the tech giant intends to issue two new models, one at the end of 2019 and another in early 2020. At least one next-generation device is expected to sport a fresh design.
Apple itself might have leaked "AirPods Pro" in recent iOS 13.2 beta release that includes an icon depicting a heretofore unknown AirPods design. The illustration bears an uncanny resemblance to so-called "AirPods 3" images posted to SlashLeaks in September. Interestingly, the charging case in the September photos align with the shell seen in today's images.
Walmart isn’t waiting for Black Friday or Cyber Monday to offer up some big savings. The retailer is already rolling out some of the best deals we’ve seen on the Xbox One S.
What makes these deals better than the run-of-mill markdowns we usually see in the advertisement section of the paper is that they’re on both a new version of the console - the all-new All-Digital Xbox One S - and a bundle with Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, the brand-new reboot of the iconic first-person shooter franchise.
So how much can you save on Microsoft’s mid-range console? In the case of the Xbox One S All-Digital Edition, we’re expecting to see a drop from $249 to $199 (a $50/20% savings) while the Xbox One S Call of Duty: Modern Warfare bundle should be $249 (a $60 savings compared to buying the game and the console separately).
Xbox One S All-Digital Edition $249 $200 at Walmart If you can live without physical media in your life, Walmart has a great deal on the Xbox One S All-Digital Edition that sees a $50 discount on its already marked-down console. The bundle includes three-game download codes (Minecraft, Forza Horizon 3, and Sea of Thieves) and a 1-month Xbox Live Gold subscription for $200! View Deal
Xbox One S + Call of Duty: Modern Warfare bundle $308.99 $249 at Walmart If you're ready to dive into the latest installment of the Call of Duty franchise but don't have any gaming hardware that can handle it, pick up this console bundle that pairs the game with a system for $249. In addition to the new game, you'll get a download code for the Original Modern Warfare Trilogy as well, so it's two for the price of none.View Deal
Apple has confirmed that 17 malware iPhone apps were removed from the App Store after successfully hiding from the company’s app review process.
The apps were all from a single developer but covered a wide range of areas, including a restaurant finder, internet radio, BMI calculator, video compressor, and GPS speedometer …
NordVPN
The apps were discovered by mobile security company Wandera, which said that the apps did what they claimed while secretly committing fraud in the background.
The clicker trojan module discovered in this group of applications is designed to carry out ad fraud-related tasks in the background, such as continuously opening web pages or clicking links without any user interaction.
The objective of most clicker trojans is to generate revenue for the attacker on a pay-per-click basis by inflating website traffic. They can also be used to drain the budget of a competitor by artificially inflating the balance owed to the ad network.
Although no direct harm was done to app users, the activity would be using up mobile data, as well as potentially slowing the phone and accelerating battery drain.
Wandera said the malware iPhone apps evaded Apple’s review process because the malicious code was not found within the app itself, but the apps were instead getting instructions on what to do from a remote server.
The apps communicate with a known command and control (C&C) server to simulate user interactions in order to fraudulently collect ad revenue […]
Command & Control enables bad apps to bypass security checks because it activates a communication channel directly with the attacker that is not within Apple’s view. C&C channels can be used to distribute ads (like the ones used by the iOS Clicker Trojan), commands, and even payloads (such as a corrupt image file, a document or more). Simply put, C&C infrastructure is a ‘backdoor’ into the app that can lead to exploitation if and when a vulnerability is discovered or when the attacker chooses to activate additional code that may be hidden in the original app.
Apple says it is improving its app review process to detect this approach.
The same server was also controlling Android apps. In at least one of those cases, weaker security in Android meant that the app was able to do more direct harm.
Android apps communicating with the same server were gathering private information from the user’s device, such as the make and model of the device, the user’s country of residence and various configuration details […]
One example involved users who had been fraudulently subscribed to expensive content services following the installation of an infected app.
The apps were all from AppAspect Technologies.
iOS aims to guard against this by sandboxing. Each app gets its own private environment, so cannot access system data or data from other apps unless using processes specifically permitted and monitored by iOS. However, Wandera cautions that there have been examples of the sandbox failing, giving three examples of this.
Wandera is the same company that warned how a Siri feature could be used for phishing non-technically knowledgeable iPhone users. Apple confirmed the removal of the 17 apps to ZDNet.
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare launches today. It’s out now. Here’s a COD review roundup of what critics have made of Infinity Ward’s most recent effort.
Marketed as a throwback to old school, not-jumping-to-space-and-back Call of Duty games – not that they were all bad, by the way – Modern Warfare has largely been received as a return to form. The campaign has amassed a significant deal of controversial discourse, but for the most part reviewers seem quite happy with how the game feels, and how it looks alongside previous iterations in the series.
Whether you’re a seasoned veteran or a newcomer to shootybangs, this roundup might help you decide whether or not you’re interested in picking up Infinity Ward’s latest ahead of the weekend. Maybe you’ll even like it enough to go for the Modern Warfare PS4 Pro bundle. Also, you don’t actually need 175 GB of space just to download it. That wouldn’t be particularly ideal.
Our review will be up early next week, by the way. Until then, here are some review crumbs to sate your appetite before you get the VG247 content feast you’re starving for.
Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare is out today, October 25, on PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC. If you need some tips, check out our Modern Warfare guide.
Google has been building its own Chromebooks for a while now -- first, there were two iterations of the Chromebook Pixel, and then there was 2017's Pixelbook. All three were great laptops with one glaring flaw: They cost way too much money. We're talking $1,000 or more, at a time when most Chromebooks were $500 or less. Google is back at it this year with the new Pixelbook Go -- but for the first time, the company is no longer aiming for absolute quality regardless of price, just to prove a point.
Instead, Google is trying to build a Chromebook that anyone can use and afford: The Pixelbook Go starts at $649, a full $350 less than the original Pixelbook. It's still a lot of money for a Chromebook. But there are plenty of other manufacturers building premium Chromebooks in that price range now. The Pixelbook Go certainly can hold its own against just about any other Chromebook out there. But unfortunately, in its quest to get the price down, Google also sacrificed a lot of what made the original Pixelbook so intriguing in the first place. The question is whether those trade-offs are worth it.
Google’s most affordable Chromebook yet is a solid all-around laptop. It’s not as eye-catching as the original Pixelbook, and Google cut a few corners to get the price down (most notably the display).. But the Pixelbook Go covers the basics well and should serve most people well.
How would you rate the Pixelbook Go? We want to hear what you think. Post a quick review now to join the conversation! Write a review
Hardware
All of Google's previous Chrome OS devices, had premium hardware and specs, with very few corners cut. With the Pixelbook Go, Google is changing the formula slightly. It's a solid, well-made device that doesn't feel cheap, something we can't say about other Chromebooks. But visually, it's far less interesting than the model it replaces.
The Go is a basic-looking clamshell laptop with a 13.3-inch, 1080p touchscreen and a black paint job, nondescript except for a small 'G' logo in the corner of the lid. It also comes in a light pink shade with a bright coral underside -- a more distinctive combo, though the all-black design is undoubtedly more elegant. (Fans of the black MacBook from the last decade should be pleased.) Regardless of color, the Go is sturdy and well-built but doesn't have any of the distinctive design elements you'll find on the original Pixelbook. It's thicker than that device, though it weighs about the same at 2.3 pounds. I definitely miss the aesthetics of the original, particularly its glass-and-aluminum lid that echoed the design of Google's Pixel phones. The Go has a functional, utilitarian design, which I can appreciate, but I wish it were slightly more exciting.
Nathan Ingraham / Engadget
There is one new, funky design flourish to be found on the Pixelbook Go: its ridged underside. When I first saw pictures of the Go, my brain assumed those ridges were a a different, softer material than the magnesium that makes up the rest of the Go. I was imagining the whole bottom being a grippy plastic like the feet underneath most laptops. But in reality, it's the same hard metal. Google says it designed these ridges to make the laptop easier to grip or pull out of a sleeve, but I can't say this really solves a problem I had with other devices. Still, it's good to see Google show its playful side on this otherwise dull laptop.
Google surely simplified its design as a way to cut costs, and as such, there are some other notable omissions this time around Unlike the first Pixelbook, it's not a convertible, so tablet mode is out. That also means it doesn't work with the Pixelbook Pen stylus. I can't say I really miss these changes, though -- I've never been a fan of laptops that also try and be tablets, and the Pixelbook Pen wasn't terribly useful either.
More concerning to me is the step backward Google took with the Go's display. Both the Pixelbook and last year's ill-fated Pixel Slate had some of the best screens you could find. I particularly liked the original Pixelbook's taller aspect ratio, and both devices had higher resolutions than the Go's 1080p panel.
That's not to say the Go has a bad screen, but it is fairly pedestrian. 1080p on a 13.3-inch display works out to 166 pixels per inch, a far cry from the 235 ppi on the first Pixelbook and the impressive 293 ppi on the Pixel Slate. Google does offer the Go with a 4K screen, but that option is only available if you get the top-of-the-line model, which costs an eye-popping $1,399. The good news is that the Go has much slimmer bezels than the original Pixelbook, but I still prefer the taller and more pixel-dense display on that laptop to the Go's screen.
While the screen is a bit of a letdown, Google didn't skimp on the keyboard. The original Pixelbook offered a great typing experience, and the Go is nearly as good. It's hard to describe exactly what's different, but the keys don't feel quite as soft when you're typing. That said, there's plenty of travel and they're quiet as well -- if you hate the low-travel MacBook keyboard, you'll love the one on the Go. The trackpad, on the other hand is... just fine. It feels kind of rough under my finger, and scrolling around isn't as smooth as I'd like. It's not bad, and I got used to it, but I've definitely used better touchpads.
In use
While Google cut some corners in the design department, the Pixelbook Go is still among the more powerful Chromebooks out there. The base model pairs an eighth-generation Intel Core m3 processor with 8GB of RAM and 64GB of storage; the one I reviewed steps up to an i5 processor and 128GB of storage. That model costs $849 and has comparable specs to what you'll find in the $999 Pixelbook. I do wish I could have tried the m3 model, because I'm curious to see what kind of performance Google is offering for $650.
Unsurprisingly, Intel's Core i5 and 8GB of RAM is plenty for Chrome OS. The Pixelbook Go handled my normal workload without any notable issues. My routine involves a dozen or so browser tabs, Tweetdeck, Hangouts, Slack, Todoist, Google Keep and Trello all running as Chrome apps, along with the occasional Android app or two. Adobe's Lightroom, Netflix, YouTube Music and a smattering of games all mostly worked well, though music playback presented the occasionally "low memory" hiccup which was frustrating. Notably, this didn't happen when using YouTube Music as a browser tab. This reinforces my belief that Android apps on Chrome aren't worth using if there's a web-based alternative.
Overall, I think most people will be fine with the base configuration; power users may want to step up to the $849 model I tried. Google is also selling a $999 configuration that doubles the RAM to 16GB, while that $1,399 model I mentioned includes a Core i7 processor, 16GB of RAM, 256GB storage and a 4K display. While I'd surely enjoy that high-res screen, I don't think it's worth that kind of money.
The Pixelbook Go also holds up well on the battery side, something that wasn't always true for the original. In our video playback test, the Go ran for just over 13 and a half hours before shutting down. That's more than an hour longer than the 12-hour battery life Google claims with "mixed usage." Unfortunately, I never came close to 12 hours when putting the Go through my normal routine, but it did last more than eight hours, which is a definite improvement over the first Pixelbook.
I will note that my review Pixelbook had a weird issue where the battery life indicator didn't update properly. It showed whatever percentage it was app when it was awoken from sleep and didn't update until it went to sleep again or was plugged in. Google confirmed it was a bug with the current version of Chrome OS that would be updated by the time the device shipped. The company also confirmed that the battery was otherwise performing normally and that this was just a software issue. I'll check this again once the software update arrives and will update this review if the problem persists.
The competition
There are tons of Chromebooks you can compare the Go to, from cheap $200 devices (with specs to match), up to Google's own Pixelbook from 2017 that still sells for $1,000 or more. That said, probably the closest comparison to the Pixelbook Go is the ASUS Chromebook Flip C434, which I reviewed earlier this year. It has an m3 processor, 1080p screen, 4GB of RAM and 64GB of storage, just like the base Pixelbook Go. At $579, it's cheaper than the Go, but also thicker and heavier. It does have a 360-degree hinge, but I never wanted to use the Flip in tablet mode, since it weighs more than three pounds.
Acer has its own high-end option, the Chromebook 13 CB713. For $800, you get an eighth-generation Core i5 processor, a higher-resolution screen (2,256 x 1,504), 8GB of RAM and 64GB of storage. Like the Chromebook Flip, though, it's larger and heavier than the Go.
And then there's the original Pixelbook, which still starts at $999. That's $150 more than the Go model I tested, but it has the same RAM and storage as well as an i5 processor (it's a seventh-generation chip, though, compared to the eighth-gen one in the Go). The extra cash gets you a thinner, more compact design with a better trackpad and much sharper display. It also supports the Pixelbook Pen and has that nifty 360-degree hinge. There are some definite benefits to the original Pixelbook -- and it has been heavily discounted over the last year, sometimes down to $750. If you can wait, it might be worth seeing if it gets any further price cuts this holiday season.
Wrap-up
Nathan Ingraham / Engadget
The Pixelbook Go is much easier to evaluate than either the first Pixelbook or the Pixel Slate. It's a standard, familiar, almost boring laptop. But instead of figuring out if Chrome OS works on a convertible tablet or if you're willing to spend $1,000 on a premium laptop, the Go is just a straightforward, no-frills device. It's still not cheap, particularly if you step up to the i5 processor I tried. But premium Chromebooks in the $600 to $800 range are becoming more common, and now Google has something that can compete on price as well as quality.
Yes, you can still get a Chromebook for less money than what Google is asking. But if you think a Chromebook can be your main computer and don't mind paying a little extra for a device that's thin, light and well-engineered, the Pixelbook Go will likely meet your needs.
All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission.
TCL gives us a brand new foldable design we've never seen before.
Tyler Lizenby/CNET
I've opened and closed foldable phones hundreds of times by now. But even after reviewing the Galaxy Fold (twice), playing with Huawei's Mate X and bending slim concept designs, nothing has prepared me for TCL's prototype dual-hinged phone, which folds in three parts and opens into a huge, 10-inch tablet.
The most remarkable thing about TCL's phone is that the hinges themselves move in different directions. The DragonHinge fold in, like a book, or like the Galaxy Fold, while the Butterfly Hinge folds the opposite way.
The two hinges create a zigzag shape as you open and close the device, a silhouette in Z. It looks like an accordion. Or a taco holder. And I have to get my greedy hands on it to give it a fold, one panel at a time: Open. Folded over once. Completely folded up into a triple-stacked sandwich so that the exposed panel becomes the TCL phone's "outer" screen. With this design, a single uninterrupted screen does it all.
Now playing:Watch this:
This Galaxy Fold competitor folds in thirds
2:05
As with other foldable phones, the act of folding feels physical and visceral in a way that makes me appreciate the engineering feat of any company attempting to make devices whose screens bend in half.
Foldable phones are the next frontier in phone design, delivering at least double the screen space in a package that's practical enough to tote around. Unfolded, the large screens promise an expansive display for reading, watching videos, gaming and multitasking. Folded up, you can use them on the go. Despite very real fears over screen damage that could send lofty foldable ambitions crashing to the ground, device-makers are scrambling to push out their own new designs -- to bag reputation points as much as to capture buyers' attention.
It's into this mix that TCL is dropping its wild new prototype. Best known for making really good, affordable TVs, TCL is now aligning its phone business under the same brand. The company has already trotted out concept designs and announced its DragonHinge months before this particular dual-hinge effort.
TCL's daring trifold prototype is just the start
TCL's prototype design doesn't have a name, a price or a target window for production. It doesn't even have a working screen. All that will come. For now, I'm mesmerized as I work the hinges with my hands, and imagine what it'd be like to use a triply folding device.
Folding one panel under, for example, could turn a portion of the screen into a digital keyboard while you use another part as the display. When you fully close the phone, you'd be able to use it as a really chunky handset.
Yes, you'll see creases when it's open -- and no, we still don't have bendable glass to better protect the display. That raises questions about the wear and tear on a device with a plastic cover material that's exposed to sharp objects, damage from pressure and the elements, like rain and dust. These are the same issues that plagued the $1,980 Galaxy Fold and spurred Samsung to retrofit its foldable phone to make it sturdier than its first attempt.
Tyler Lizenby/CNET
For now, there's no consensus on what the "best" foldable phone design is, and that's what makes this all so exciting. We're in the Wild West phase where any prototype or concept goes, from the vertically folding Motorola Razr that CNET discovered will come out by the end of 2019, to the square foldable phone that Samsung's rumored to be building.
When and if it becomes a real product, TCL's prototype will face distinct challenges with ensuring sturdy construction, a semiaffordable price and a sales plan to put the biggest foldable phone we've seen yet in front of real buyers. But enough reality for now. I let the teeming questions slide from my mind and give the Butterfly Hinge one more fold.
