Alphabet’s revenues are still growing, but just barely

It’s no secret that the huge tech companies are still making money hand over fist, but there’s also a noticeable slowdown going on. Google’s parent company Alphabet is not immune — the company just reported its earnings results for Q4 of 2022, and just barely grew revenue year over year. The $76 billion the company pulled in during the quarter is up only one percent from Q4 of 2021. 

Google’s ad business is the backbone of the company, and revenue slipped there by about 3.5 percent compared to a year ago. But eight percent growth in the “other” category (which includes products like Google and Nest hardware and revenue from the Play Store) and 32 percent yearly growth in in Google Cloud made up for those ad losses. Overall profits, meanwhile, dropped significantly: Quarterly net income of $13.6 billion is down 34 percent year-over-year.

Of course, the backdrop for all this is that Google announced a few weeks ago that it is laying off about 12,000 employees; that makes up about six percent of the company’s overall workforce. At the time those layoffs were announced, we didn’t yet know what Google’s financials for last quarter looked like, but now we can see that things are slowing down. 

That’s all relatively speaking, though. Net income of $60 billion for 2022 as a whole was down significantly compared to the $76 billion in profit Alphabet made in 2021 — but it’s still far ahead of the $40 billion the company pulled in for 2020. It looks like the big numbers Alphabet posted in 2021 weren’t exactly sustainable, and obviously we don’t yet know what 2023 will bring. But we’ll be tuning into the company’s call with investors, which starts at 4:30PM ET, to see what additional details CEO Sundar Pichai can share about the state of Alphabet in the year to come.

The best Chromebooks you can buy in 2023

Choosing the best Chromebook for your needs and your budget can be hard to do given the multitude of models on the market today. The combination of years worth of software updates and laptop manufacturers making more powerful and better-built laptops means there are a ton of good Chrome OS machines that work well as everyday drivers. But there are some special factors to Chromebooks that you should keep in mind before choosing one. We’ll help you figure out what is the best Chromebook for you, from the Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5i to the Acer Chromebook Spin 714 and in between.

What is Chrome OS, and why would I use it over Windows?

That’s probably the number one question about Chromebooks. There are plenty of inexpensive Windows laptops on the market, so why bother with Chrome OS? Glad you asked. For me, the simple and clean nature of Chrome OS is a big selling point. If you didn’t know, it’s based on Google’s Chrome browser, which means most of the programs you can run are web based. There’s no bloatware or unwanted apps to uninstall like you often get on Windows laptops, it boots up in seconds, and you can completely reset to factory settings almost as quickly.

Of course, the simplicity is also a major drawback for some users. Not being able to install native software can be a dealbreaker if you’re, say, a video editor or software developer. But there are also plenty of people who do the vast majority of their work in a browser. Unless I need to edit photos for a review, I can do my entire job on a Chromebook.

Google has also added support for Android apps on Chromebooks, which greatly expands the amount of software available. The quality varies widely, but it means you can do more with a Chromebook beyond just web-based apps. For example, you can install the Netflix app and save videos for offline watching; other Android apps like Microsoft Office and Adobe Lightroom are surprisingly capable. Between Android apps and a general improvement in web apps, Chromebooks are more than just a browser.

What do Chromebooks do well?

Three Chromebook laptops stacked on top of each other, fanning out a bit, on top of a desk protector on a wooden table.
Nathan Ingraham / Engadget

Put simply, anything web based. Browsing, streaming music and video and using various social media sites are among the most common things people do on Chromebooks. As you might expect, they also work well with Google services like Photos, Docs, Gmail, Drive, Keep and so on. Yes, any computer that can run Chrome can do that too, but the lightweight nature of Google Chrome OS makes it a responsive and stable platform.

As I mentioned before, Chrome OS can run Android apps, so if you’re an Android user you’ll find some nice ties between the platforms. You can get most of the same apps that are on your phone on a Chromebook and keep info in sync between them. You can also use some Android phones as a security key for your Chromebook or instantly tether your laptop to use mobile data.

Google continues to tout security as a major differentiator for Chromebooks, and I think it’s definitely a factor worth considering. The first line of defense is auto-updates. Chrome OS updates download quickly in the background and a fast reboot is all it takes to install the latest version. Google says that each webpage and app on a Chromebook runs in its own sandbox, as well, so any security threats are contained to that individual app. Finally, Chrome OS has a self-check called Verified Boot that runs every time a device starts up. Beyond all this, the simple fact that you generally can’t install traditional apps on a Chromebook means there are a lot fewer ways for bad actors to access the system.

As for when to avoid them, the answer is simple: If you rely heavily on a specific native application for Windows or a Mac, chances are you won’t find the exact same option on a Chromebook. That’s most true in fields like photo and video editing, but it can also be the case in law or finance. Plenty of businesses run on Google’s G suite software, but more still have specific requirements that a Chromebook might not match. If you’re an iPhone user, you’ll also miss out on the way the iPhone easily integrates with an iPad or Mac. For me, the big downside is not being able to access iMessage on a Chromebook.

Finally, gaming is mostly a non-starter, as there are no native Chrome OS games of note. You can install Android games from the Google Play Store, but that’s not what most people are thinking of when they want to game on a laptop. That said, Google’s game-streaming service Stadia has changed that long-standing problem. The service isn’t perfect, but it remains the only way to play recent, high-profile games on a Chromebook. It’s not as good as running local games on a Windows computer, but the lag issues that can crop up reflect mostly on Stadia itself and not Chrome OS.

There’s also a potential change on the horizon in that regard, as Valve and Google are working to bring the massive Steam catalog to Chromebooks. Right now, Steam is only available as an early alpha on a handful of devices with higher specs, but it works a lot better than I expected. Of course, you’re still not going to run the most demanding games on basic laptops, but the Steam catalog is so vast that there are plenty of titles that worked on the Chromebook I tested it with. Maybe by next year, Steam will be supported on more devices.

What are the most important specs for a Chromebook?

Acer Chromebook Spin 713
Nathan Ingraham / Engadget

Chrome OS is lightweight and usually runs well on fairly modest hardware, so the most important thing to look for might not be processor power or storage space. That said, I’d still recommend you get a Chromebook with a relatively recent Intel processor, ideally an eighth-generation or newer M3 or i3. Most non-Intel Chromebooks I’ve tried haven’t had terribly good performance, but that’s starting to change. Lenovo’s Chromebook Duet 2-in-1 from 2021 runs surprisingly well on its MediaTek processor.

As for RAM, 8GB should be the target, unless you’re looking for a budget model and know that your needs are fairly modest. Storage space is another place where you don’t need to spend too much; 64GB should be fine for almost anyone. If you plan on storing a lot of files locally or loading up your Chromebook with Linux or Android apps, get 128GB. But for what it’s worth, I’ve never felt like I might run out of storage when using Chrome OS.

Things like the keyboard and display quality are arguably more important than sheer specs. The good news is that you can find less expensive Chromebooks that still have pretty good screens and keyboards that you won’t mind typing on all day. Many cheap Chromebooks still come with tiny, low-resolution displays, but at this point there’s no reason to settle for anything less than 1080p. (If you’re looking for an extremely portable, 11-inch Chromebook, though, you’ll probably end up with a lesser screen.) Obviously, keyboard quality is a bit more subjective, but there are plenty of affordable options that offer strong typing experiences.

Google has an Auto Update policy for Chromebooks, and while that’s not a spec, per se, it’s worth checking before you buy. Basically, Chromebooks get regular software updates automatically for about six years from their release date (though that can vary from device to device). This support page lists the Auto Update expiration date for virtually every Chromebook ever, but a good rule of thumb is to buy the newest machine you can to maximize your support.

How much should I spend?

Chromebooks started out notoriously cheap, with list prices often coming in under $300. But as they’ve gone more mainstream, they’ve transitioned from being essentially modern netbooks to the kind of laptop you’ll want to use all day. As such, prices have increased a bit over the last few years. At this point, you should expect to spend at least $400 if you want a solid daily driver. There are still many budget options out there that may be suitable as couch machines or secondary devices, but Chromebooks that can be an all-day, every-day laptop will cost a bit more.

There are also plenty of premium Chromebooks that approach or even exceed $1,000, but I don’t recommend spending that much. Generally, that’ll get you a better design with more premium materials, as well as more powerful internals and extra storage space. Of course, you also sometimes pay for the brand name. But, the specs I outlined earlier are usually enough.

Right now, there actually aren’t too many Chromebooks that cost that much. The Google Pixelbook Go comes in $999 and $1,399 configurations, but the more affordable $650 and $850 options will be just as good for nearly everyone. Samsung released the $1,000 Galaxy Chromebook in 2020; this luxury device does almost everything right but has terrible battery life. Samsung quickly learned from that mistake and is now offering the Galaxy Chromebook 2 with more modest specs, but vastly better battery life at a more affordable price . For the most part, you don’t need to spend more than $850 to get a premium Chromebook that’ll last you years.

Best overall: Lenovo IdeaPad Flex 5i

Lenovo has been making some of the best Chromebooks you can buy for several years now and, more recently, it has once again made the best option for most people. The IdeaPad Flex 5i Chromebook is essentially an upgraded version of the model we recommended last year, and there are a few notable improvements. The 13.3-inch, 1080p touchscreen is extremely bright and fairly sharp; I wish it had a taller aspect ratio than 16:9, but this type of screen is very commonplace in Chromebooks. This Lenovo Chromebook runs on a 11th-generation Intel Core i3 processor and includes 8GB of RAM and 128GB of storage; both of those are double what last year’s model offered. Eight hours of battery life is pretty good for a laptop in this price range, and the backlit keyboard is excellent for such an affordable device. The key caps feel a little small under my fingers, but that’s the only real complaint I have.

The Flex 5i is no longer available directly from Lenovo, but you can commonly find it on Amazon for about $400 (as of this writing, it is selling for $409; when I bought it, it was priced at $390). That’s an outstanding value.

Other things in the Flex 5i’s favor include that it has both USB-C and USB-A ports, a microSD card slot and a security lock. At three pounds and 0.66 inches thick, it’s not the lightest or slimmest option out there, but it’s totally reasonable considering the price. Finally, the Flex 5i will receive software and security updates until June of 2029, so you can buy this computer and have it covered for years to come.

Ultimately, the Ideapad Flex 5i hits the sweet spot for a large majority of Chromebook buyers out there, providing a level of quality and performance that’s pretty rare to find at this price point. That said, given this laptop has been out for over a year now, we’re keeping an eye out for a replacement from Lenovo, as well as comparable options other manufacturers release.

One to look out for is Lenovo’s Chromebook 5i, which the company recently released. Right now, it’s only available with an Intel Pentium Gold processor and 4GB of RAM; in my testing, that wasn’t enough power by modern standards. The device froze up far too often, and the IdeaPad Flex 5i with its i3 processor was clearly faster at everything I tried. But Lenovo says it’ll offer the Chromebook 5i with up to an Intel i5 processor, which should make the laptop worth checking out.

Upgrade option: Samsung Galaxy Chromebook 2

Last year, Samsung’s Galaxy Chromebook 2 was one of my recommendations for people looking for a more premium Chromebook. Now that Samsung often sells the device for $550, it’s an excellent all-purpose recommendation if you want something more svelte and stylish than Lenovo’s IdeaPad Flex 5i.

The Galaxy Chromebook 2 is infinitely more stylish than most other Chromebooks, with a bright metallic red finish and sleek design. This Samsung Chromebook 2 fixes some of the serious flaws we identified in the original Galaxy Chromebook. Specifically, the 2020 Galaxy Chromebook had terrible battery life and cost $999; this year’s model can be found for $550 and can last seven hours off the charger. That’s not great, but it’s far better than the lousy four hours the original offered.

Samsung cut a few corners to lower the Galaxy Chromebook 2’s price. Most noticeable is the 1080p 13.3-inch touchscreen, down from the 4K panel on the older model. The good news is that the display is among the best 1080p laptop screens I’ve seen in a long time, and the lower resolution helps the battery life, too. Along with that excellent screen, the device also has a very comfortable keyboard, though I wish the trackpad was a little bigger. The Galaxy Chromebook 2 is also a bit thicker and heavier than its predecessor, but it’s still reasonably compact. At 13.9mm thick and 2.7 pounds, it’s noticeably smaller than the Lenovo.

The Galaxy Chromebook 2 has a 10th-generation Intel Core i3 processor paired with 8GB of RAM and 128GB of storage, which is plenty. This all adds up to a laptop that isn’t as ambitious as the first Galaxy Chromebook, but one that is much easier to recommend. Instead of pushing to have the best screen in the thinnest and lightest body with a faster processor, Samsung pulled everything back a bit to make a better-priced but still premium Chromebook laptop. Given that the Galaxy Chromebook 2 is well over a year old now, I wouldn’t recommend spending $700 on it – but if you can catch it on sale for $550 (as it is right now), it’s a solid option.

Premium option: Acer Chromebook Spin 714

Acer’s Chromebook Spin 714 is an evolution of the Spin 713 that I recommended last year. Acer made a few tweaks to the formula, but you’re still getting a well-built, powerful laptop that won’t turn any heads with its design but gets the job done well.

I loved the display on the Acer Chromebook Spin 713, and unfortunately the one on the Spin 714 isn’t quite as exciting. It’s a 14-inch, 1900×1200 touchscreen; that works out to a taller 16:10 aspect ratio than you’ll get from the 1080p panels on most other premium Chromebooks. I’m a big fan of taller laptop screens – but the Spin 713 had a 13.5-inch screen that had an even taller 3:2 aspect ratio and a higher resolution. I can’t help but wonder if Acer found that people still prefer a widescreen display. If that’s the case, the Spin 714’s display is a nice middle ground.

Putting aside these comparisons to last year’s model, the Acer Spin 714’s screen is still very nice – it can get uncomfortably bright if that’s your thing, and the bezels are thin. It’s not nearly as pixel-dense as the Spin 713, but it’s still plenty sharp. Between the extra vertical height and the slightly larger screen size, the Spin 714’s display is a pleasure to use.

As for the rest of the hardware, the 12th-generation Intel Core i5 processor is more than enough power for most everyday tasks, and the keyboard and trackpad are solid, if not the best I’ve used before. The same can be said for battery life: I got about seven hours using the Spin 714 in my normal daily routine – not exceptional, but in line with what I’ve seen on other Chromebooks with an i5 processor. Rounding out the hardware is 8GB of RAM and a generous 256GB of storage space. From a support perspective, Google will offer software and security updates until June of 2030.

Another bonus is that its hardware meets Google’s recommended specs to run Steam, though the alpha build is still limited to seven devices. So while it’s not officially supported yet, Steam will hopefully work on this laptop once Google and Valve start rolling it out more widely.

Just as the name suggests, the Spin 714 has a 360-degree hinge which lets you use the laptop in tablet mode. I’m not particularly a fan of this – I don’t know who wants to use a 3-plus pound tablet, but Acer did include a built-in stylus for handwriting notes or drawing in apps like the built-in Chrome Canvas.

The Spin 714 configuration I tested costs $730 – that’s a lot of money for even a high-end Chromebook. But it’s not an unreasonable price for a computer with these specs and built quality. For most people, the Lenovo will be enough. But, if you’re a serious multitasker, want a better display and keyboard, or just want a computer that’ll last as long as possible, the Acer Spin 714 is easy to recommend.

HBO’s ‘The Last of Us’ successfully trades hordes of monsters for emotional depth

I’ve been captivated by The Last of Us since I first played it shortly after it was released for the PS3 way back in 2013. Its ruined, dangerous but somehow beautiful post-pandemic world was compellingly rendered by developer Naughty Dog, and the tense combat driven by stealth and a need to conserve your resources felt more brutal and realistic than the Uncharted series the developer was known for.

But the relationship between protagonists Joel and Ellie is the true heart of the game. The story of a broken father reluctantly taking responsibility for a child who ends up becoming a surrogate daughter isn’t wildly original, nor is the game’s post-apocalyptic setting. But the development of Joel and Ellie’s relationship is filled with humor, hope, sadness and conflict, and it was brilliantly written by creators Neil Druckmann and Bruce Straley. Performers Troy Baker and Ashley Johnson, along with the entire Naughty Dog team brought it to life, and the game has stuck with me ever since.

It’s the kind of video game that’s been begging for some sort of on-screen adaptation. Now, almost a decade after the game was released, HBO’s The Last of Us series will premiere on January 15th. The first season is led by a deep and talented cast (headlined by Pedro Pascal and Bella Ramsey as Joel and Ellie) and an equally strong creative team, including Druckmann and Craig Mazin (best known for his outstanding Chernobyl mini-series, also on HBO).

Anna Torv and Pedro Pascal in HBO's The Last of Us.
Anna Torv (Tess) and Pedro Pascal (Joel)
Photograph by Liane Hentscher/HBO

I’m happy to report that The Last of Us should satisfy fans of the game, and might even bring in a fresh audience. It deftly walks the line between paying loving tribute to the source material while not feeling overly devoted to it. The structure of the show is essentially identical to the game: Joel and Ellie meet in a Boston quarantine zone some 20 years after a fungal infection destroys the world as we know it. Circumstance shoves the pair together on a cross-country journey that spans the better part of a year, as Joel tries to safely get Ellie to the Fireflies, a revolutionary militia that’s been trying to find a cure for the infection.

If you’ve played the game, you’ll be familiar with the season’s nine-episode arc. But in each act of the story, Mazin has smartly identified where to expand the narrative and what to leave out. The biggest thing missing are many of the huge action set-pieces that come up throughout the game. It’s an unsurprising change, as it wouldn’t feel realistic for Joel and Ellie to survive the number of battles they face in the game; it also wouldn’t make for compelling TV. There’s still plenty of action in the show, but it’s meted out more carefully and generally only when it moves the story forward.

Unsurprisingly, everything about The Last of Us reflects the high-budget, flagship status the show seems to have at HBO. Sets and environments are epic in scale and detail, and the combination of prosthetics and digital enhancements bring the Infected to life in terrifying fashion. Although there seems to be less of an emphasis on encounters with these creatures than in the game, seeing them on screen is distressingly memorable. Details like cinematography and music (composed by Oscar-winner Gustavo Santaolalla, who scored the games), are also masterfully executed; this is a show that oozes quality and attention to detail — much like the game itself.

Nico Parker in HBO's The Last of Us.
Nico Parker as Sarah Miller in HBO’s The Last of Us
Photograph by Shane Harvey/HBO

More interesting is how The Last of Us expands on the world and its inhabitants. We immediately get a more extensive look at the pre-pandemic life that Joel and his daughter Sarah inhabit. The showrunners give us more backstory and a better understanding of the different ways people survive: cooped up in a dreary Boston quarantine zone, fighting the government in a Kansas City lost to a violent militia group, or a peaceful settlement out west. The world feels a lot more nuanced than the one in the game, where almost everyone is an enemy to be overcome. Don’t get me wrong — most of the inhabitants of HBO’s The Last of Us will shoot first and ask questions later – but most encounters are about tension rather than brutal violence.

A lot has been written about the show’s two stars, Bella Ramsey and Pedro Pascal, both of whom have some big shoes to fill. Finding two performers with on-screen chemistry who could successfully embody their respective characters was surely not an easy task. But Pascal and Ramsey’s performances both immediately connected me with the original characters while also feeling vital and essential on their own. Fans of the game should immediately find things to draw them in, while those new to the series should be quickly won over by the pair.

Pedro Pascal in HBO's The Last of Us.
Photograph by Liane Hentscher/HBO

Pascal’s Joel has a lot more emotional depth than Joel the video game character. Part of that is due to scripts that put more focus on his vulnerabilities and insecurities, but Pascal skillfully portrays a broad range of emotions. He’s able to show the cold, violent and skilled survivor side of Joel who’ll do anything to get what he needs while also embodying the broken spirit of a man who’s spent 20 years doing whatever it takes to stay alive. Watching Ellie bring out Joel’s more vulnerable side, and seeing how that conflicts with the hardened survivor, is at the heart of Joel’s character journey, and Pascal simply nails it. Joel is both more vulnerable than ever — and also more terrifying.

Meanwhile, Ramsey charms from their first moment onscreen as Ellie. We’re afforded a little more of Ellie’s backstory in the first episode, and it’s a great introduction to the character that immediately shows her brazen attitude toward anything that gets in her way. Much of the humor and levity comes from Ellie, and Ramsey’s performance captures the innocent resilience that only a 14-year-old could have in the face of abject horror and seemingly inescapable doom. The weight on Ellie’s shoulders grows throughout the series, and Ramsey is always up to the task of taking Ellie to the brink of breakdown before she comes back to the sense of duty she feels to care for the people she’s chosen to let into her life. Ellie’s naivety and sense of wonder gets bruised time and time again throughout the series, but both Ramsey and the scripts never let her lose it entirely.

Bella Ramsey and Anna Torv in The Last of Us.
Bella Ramsey (Ellie) and Anna Torv (Tess) in The Last of Us.
Photograph by Liane Hentscher/HBO

While both Pascal and Ramsey deliver excellent performances in their own right, the magic really happens when the two are playing off each other. Naturally, the characters start out skeptical of one another, with Joel straight-up calling Ellie “cargo” to her face. But Ellie’s fascination with seeing the world beyond the quarantine zone she’s been stuck in slowly breaks Joel down. Pascal does a great job flipping between those two sides of the character, offering up hints of compassion and concern for Ellie as a person, only to retreat into an emotionally distant protector role.

Meanwhile, Ramsey embodies the spirit of Ellie as she opens up to Joel, and seeing this side of Ellie’s character is a delight. Ramsey’s ability to convincingly show Ellie’s goofy and rebellious exterior is masterfully done; it’s the tool Ellie uses most to try and win over Joel, as if she knows he’s going to give in with a smile or laugh sooner or later. Watching Pascal slowly warm to her brings out a host of different ways for the two actors to play off each other. But Ramsey is also just as convincing when demonstrating Ellie’s drive for survival is just as strong as Joel’s. That leads her to some dark places, and Ramsey shows their range as the series progresses and the challenges facing Ellie and Joel mount.

The rest of the cast doesn’t get as much screen time, but they all contribute to some compelling plot lines. The stories of Bill and Frank (played by Nick Offerman and Murray Bartlett) as well as Keivonn Woodard’s interpretation of Sam are two of the finest examples in the series where Mazin and Druckmann deviate a bit from the original text to do something that might not work in a game but is extremely successful in a show. Their episodes are undeniable standouts, and probably the best examples of why The Last of Us is such a successful adaptation.

Photo from the set of HBO's The Last of Us.
Photograph by Liane Hentscher/HBO

The show whiffs a little bit on the pacing, as the back half of the season feels rushed. The pace naturally accelerates throughout the season toward the story’s climax, and the last two episodes are among the shortest in the season. I wish that some of the many dramatic moments near the end had more time to breathe. I don’t think a whole additional episode is necessary, but an extra ten minutes in each of the final episodes might have made things feel less constricted.

Also, it’s worth remembering that The Last of Us was an extremely violent video game, and the show does not shy away from brutality and occasional gore. It’s less overt than I expected, but each episode generally has at least one moment that’s not for the squeamish. That said, much of the human-on-human violence is pared back. With a few exceptions, it’s not too gratuitous or graphic, and a lot is implied. Regardless, I respect that large swaths of people might not be in the mood for a violent and often grim post-pandemic drama after three-plus years dealing with a real-life pandemic.

Despite those concerns, the end result is the best kind of adaptation, one that’s faithful to the spirit of the origin that also makes smart changes to fit the medium. In that way, it reminds me a bit of Peter Jackson’s The Lord of the Rings film trilogy, another personal favorite. While those movies made numerous deviations and changes, Jackson always framed them as a way to make the story work as well as possible in the film medium.

I feel the same way about The Last of Us. It’s not a one-to-one retelling, and I’m thankful for that – it wouldn’t have made for good TV. Instead, Craig Mazin took his love for Druckmann’s story and converted it to a show that many will enjoy, regardless of whether they’ve played the game. And for those of us who already love The Last of Us, this adaptation stands toe-to-toe with the original. There are tons of stunning moments that bring me directly back to what I love, but each episode also has a number of moments that surprised and delighted me, even though I know the overarching plot inside and out. It’s more than I could have hoped for, and I’m very excited that people who don’t play video games will get a chance to experience Joel and Ellie’s story through this excellent series.

Victrola’s Stream Onyx is a more affordable version of its Sonos-compatible turntable

Last fall, turntable Victrola released the $799 Stream Carbon, a record player that could wirelessly connect to Sonos speakers so you can play records all around your house. As a vinyl nerd who also has a bunch of Sonos speakers, this product felt like it was made for me — and while it’s undeniably nice, it’s also quite expensive. Just a few months later, though, Victrola is making good on its promise to expand its Sonos-compatible lineup with the Stream Onyx. Visually and functionally, it’s very similar to the Stream Carbon, but it costs $599, 25 percent less than the Carbon.

It seems the main difference between the two turntables are the materials used, though Victrola’s spec sheets note that the Stream Onyx is built with a “low-resonance” MDF plinth (or base) combined with metal turntable components. The tonearm here is aluminum, rather than the carbon fiber variety found on the Stream Carbon. The Carbon also has an aluminum headshell for the cartridge, while the Onyx appears to use plastic. 

The all-black design of the Stream Onyx does away with the striking silver front that made the Stream Carbon a distinctive piece of hardware — but if you’re not in it for looks, the Onyx seems like a solid way to get the same streaming experience while saving some cash. The Onyx has the same simple counterweight system for the tonearm that I found extremely easy to set up, and it retains the large and useful volume knob right up front. 

And naturally, this turntable can connect to basically any Sonos speaker (or group of speakers) that has been released in the last decade. I tested the Stream Carbon with my old Play:1 speakers from 2015, as well as some newer models, and everything worked seamlessly — I expect that’ll be the case with the Onyx, as well. If you already have a good set of wired speakers, the Onyx retains the classic RCA output in addition to its wireless capabilities.

Somewhat surprisingly, the Stream Onyx will be available very soon. Victrola says that it’ll be up for pre-order directly, on Amazon or from a number of audio gear retailers for $599 starting on January 7th. The turntable should ship in February. 

How to set up your new Apple Watch

Like many Apple products, the Apple Watch can be extremely simple to start using — but that simplicity hides a surprising level of depth and customization. You may be wondering where to start with setting up a new Apple Watch if you just received one, and it’s true, there’s a lot to do to make sure you’re getting the most out of your new wearable. Let us guide you through that process, from initial setup to optimizing everything it can do.

Setup

Of course, the first thing you’ll want to do is pair your Apple Watch with your iPhone. Even if you have a cellular-capable Apple Watch, an iPhone is required for setting up and managing the device. Fortunately, this process is extremely straightforward — after powering on the Apple Watch, just place it near an unlocked iPhone and you’ll get a prompt to set the device up. During this process, your iPhone will walk you through the initial pairing as well as signing in with your Apple ID, assigning a passcode, setting up things like Siri and Apple Pay, and deciding if you want to transfer your compatible apps. I recommend against transferring all your apps automatically, as the Watch is a lot more useful when you curate it with only what you need.

Apple Watch notifications

A few features you definitely should set up are fall detection, crash detection and emergency SOS. The latter lets you quickly place a call to local emergency services by pressing and holding the side button, while fall detection uses the Watch’s accelerometers and other sensors to, well, detect if you’ve taken a fall. It’ll initiate an emergency SOS call automatically if you’ve taken a spill and it doesn’t sense you moving. Before making that call, the Watch will try its best to get your attention via a notification, a vibration and an audible alarm. Crash detection, which is only available on the new Series 8 and Ultra, works in a similar fashion, except in this case it’s looking for movement that it recognizes as a car accident, with the accelerometer able to detect up to 256 Gs of impact force.

The fun part: tweaking apps and notifications

Apple Watch Series 7
Engadget

Once you have the basics set up, it’s time to make the Apple Watch your own. By default, the Apple Watch mirrors all notifications that go to your phone. But I’ve found the Watch to be much more useful with a bit of curation. In the iPhone Watch app, you can customize notifications for all of Apple’s first-party apps, or turn them off entirely. For example, the Activity app notifications panel lets you choose whether or not you want reminders to stand every hour, or notifications when your friends share activity milestones with you and so forth.

Third-party apps don’t have the same granularity, but you can always turn them off altogether so they won’t ping your Watch. For things that aren’t particularly time-sensitive (say, updates from Google Photos, or Apple News updates), it’s best to just skip them. They’ll still hit your iPhone, and you can always enable them again later.

The iPhone Watch app also lets you pick which specific apps from your iPhone will be installed on the Apple Watch. I think this is more useful than just letting the Watch install every single compatible app. I prefer going through the list and deciding if there’s a benefit to having these apps on my wrist. In the case of apps like Google Maps or Ecobee for controlling my thermostat, it’s a definite yes. But things like Etsy or Bank of America don’t exactly make a ton of sense on a Watch. And if you change your mind, you can remove an app from the Watch app or by long-pressing it in grid view and deleting it – just keep in mind that this will remove the app from your Watch but not from your iPhone.

That said, I have been surprised at what some developers have envisioned for the Apple Watch. Take the notes app Bear, for example. I often use it to make grocery lists, and checklists show up great on the Apple Watch. So if there’s an app on your phone that you consider essential, give it a shot on the Watch.

Watch faces

Another occasionally-overlooked part of the Apple Watch experience are watch faces. Since this is literally what you’ll see every time you raise your wrist, I think it’s worth finding ones that fit your personal style. While there are no third-party faces, the Apple Watch has more than 30 built-in options that are endlessly customizable. We’re talking about a huge variety of colors, different typefaces and watch styles, complications (small slices of info like weather, date, or music controls) and much more. You can have a simple digital time display with nothing else, or an info-dense face with eight different complications or anything in between.

You can set up new faces on the Watch directly — but as with most in-depth features, it’s easier to do this on the iPhone. The Face Gallery shows every available face, along with multiple examples of how they can be customized. You can use those as a jumping off point to make your own creations. Once you’ve curated your favorites, you can simply swipe through them on the Watch itself when you want to mix things up. If you long press on a face, you can edit it directly on your Watch too, which is handy when you want to just change the color quickly to better match your outfit.

Apple Watch faces

If you’re using an Apple Watch Series 5 or later, you can also decide whether you want to activate the always-on display. You can find this option in the settings app, under “Display & Brightness.” If you’re after maximum battery life, turn this off, but most people will probably prefer it on. New watches can still get a full day of use while using the always-on feature, but once your watch ages a bit and battery performance degrades, you might want to learn to live without it. Note that both versions of the Apple Watch SE do not have an always-on display.

Apple Watch Ultra’s “action button”

Side view of the Apple Watch Ultra on a person's wrist, showing the apps gallery on its screen. Facing the camera are the watch's Digital Crown with an orange ring on it, as well as the dock button.
Cherlynn Low / Engadget

The new Apple Watch Ultra is the first with a second button on its side. Unlike the standard button on the right, which lets you pull up recently used apps, access Apple Pay and a handful of other features, the Ultra’s Action Button is a blank slate. You can set it up for a variety of actions, like tracking intervals on a run, setting a compass waypoint for you to navigate back to later, starting a dive or other things that third-party apps could enable. You might be better off using your Watch for a bit before deciding on what it is best suited for, but don’t forget about it.

Fitness tracking

One of the biggest Apple Watch selling points is its fitness-tracking features. Whether or not you actually exercise on a regular basis, the Watch will monitor your steps and activity level, and use that data to track your daily movement via three rings that you’re encouraged to close. The “move” ring is how many active calories you burn in a day, the “exercise” ring tracks activity at or above a brisk walk, and the “stand” ring notes whether or not you get up and move for a minute or two each hour of the day.

When you set up your Apple Watch, it’ll suggest daily goals for each of these, and the Activity app (or the Fitness app on your iPhone) will show how close you are to hitting them. If you’ve never used an Apple Watch before, it’s fine to just go with the defaults — every week, you’ll get a recap of how you did and it’ll even suggest bumping up your Move number if you’re easily surpassing it. The exercise and stand options default to 30 minutes per day and 12 hours per day, respectively, but those too can be adjusted.

For extra motivation, the Fitness app lets you connect with other friends who use an Apple Watch and see how much progress they’re making against their three rings. Naturally, you can use this information to taunt them about their couch-potato habits, but you can also challenge them to informal competitions. You earn points based on the percentage you close each of your rings every day, and the person with the most points after a week wins. It’s pretty casual, but it’s also a fun way to stay motivated.

Apple Watch fitness

If you want to track a specific workout, like a run, walk, or weight-training session you do that in the “workout” app. There, you’ll find the many different types of workouts that the Watch can track. If you already have a favorite way to track exercise on your phone, though, chances are you can find it for the Apple Watch too. Nike Run Club, MapMyRun, Peloton and others all have Watch apps that let you track workouts using the wearable’s sensors. Also, a lot of apps can now connect with the Health app on your iPhone. It’s a database of all your activity and workout data from your Watch, so you might be able to easily sync workout data from there into your service of choice. As with most things Apple Watch, it’ll just take a bit of playing around to see what works best for you.

Other health features

Newer Apple Watches offer a few other health-tracking features, as well. For example, you can rest your thumb on the Apple Watch crown to take an ECG measurement, or have the watch detect your blood oxygen level. Those features don’t really require anything to get started, but ones like sleep tracking, medication reminders and advanced cycle tracking via the temperature sensor on the Apple Watch Series 8 and Ultra require some adjustments to work properly.

You’ll find sleep settings on your iPhone in the Health app. There, you can set a goal for how many hours of sleep you want to get a night and tell your Watch and iPhone what time you want to get up every day. You can also set up different schedules (for the week or weekend) and fine-tune details like what alarm sounds you want and when the sleep focus setting (which reduces distractions like notifications and the always-on display) turns on. Once that’s done, you can view sleep history data on your Watch or phone that shows how much time you spend in REM, core or deep sleep as well as when and how often you wake up.

The medication tracking feature is pretty lightweight, but potentially handy if you want help sticking to your schedule. As with most of these other features, you set up a schedule in the Health app on your iPhone. From there you’ll add the medication name, add a schedule and a visual identifier and also take note of any interactions you want to have on record. Once that’s done, you can log all your medications for the day or an individual one through the Apple Watch app.

Apple Medications app
Apple

If you menstruate, the Apple Watch Series 8 and Ultra can use a temperature sensor along with your reported data on when you have your period to estimate when you may be ovulating. To use this, you’ll need to set up manual cycle tracking in the Health app on your phone first, which lets you log the days you have your period each month (you can do this via an app on the Apple Watch itself, too). Assuming you input this data and wear your Watch when sleeping, you’ll then be able to get a notification on when you may be ovulating.

Given the extremely sensitive nature of this data, Apple has a detailed write-up on how it keeps this private. Long story short, Apple Health information is encrypted and unreadable by default if your phone is locked behind a passcode, Touch ID or Face ID. And if you use iOS 12 or later and have two-factor authentication turned on for your Apple ID, it can be backed up to iCloud while still remaining unreadable by Apple.

However, you may have granted third-party apps access to your health data at some point. If you want to check and rescind those permissions, go to the Health app on your iPhone and tap the “sharing” tab at the bottom. There you’ll see what apps have access to your Health data and what specific pieces of info they can see. For example, Runkeeper can view things like my walking and running distance as well as workouts that I log, but it doesn’t have access to sleep or medication tracking. In this menu, you can delete all data that third-party apps have access to and revoke an app’s permissions to see your health info.

Music

One of my favorite things about the Apple Watch is that it can stream music and podcasts – not just from Apple’s services but others like Spotify and Pandora as well. You’ll need a cellular-capable Watch to stream music without your phone, but the good news is that Apple Music, Spotify and Pandora all allow you to save music directly on the Watch as well. Regardless of whether you spring for the cellular model or not, there’s a way to listen to tunes and leave your phone behind.

If you’re an Apple Music user, you’ll manage downloads through the Watch app on your iPhone. Pop that open and go to the “Music” section and you’ll see a big button to add songs. There’s also a setting that’ll automatically download albums and playlists you’ve listened to recently – turn that on and you’ll always have some music on your wrist.

Apple Watch music

It’s easy to choose specific albums or playlists you want saved, too. Just hit the big plus button and you’ll see your Apple Music library. From there, just navigate to what you want, hit another plus button and it’ll be downloaded to your Watch. Note that music only transfers when your Watch is charging, so you’ll need to take it off your wrist to sync.

If you’re using Spotify, just navigate to an album, playlist or podcast on your phone and tap the three dots icon – you’ll see an option to “download to Apple Watch” there. Then, on your watch, there’s a clearly-marked “downloads” section where you can play content without a connection.

Experiment, experiment, experiment!

The all apps page in grid view on the Apple Watch Series 7.
Cherlynn Low / Engadget

Like many Apple products, the Apple Watch has a lot of functionality and hidden complexity beneath its user-friendly surface. But I’ve found that the Watch hides a lot of features, so it’s worth checking out the built-in Tips app for suggestions on what you can do. Without a guide like that, you’ll probably never realize that clicking the side button twice summons Apple Pay, or that you can display the grid of icons in a list if you prefer. Chances are good you’re not going to irrevocably mess something up, so tap and swipe and scroll and dig into the settings.

The best smart speakers for 2023

When Amazon first introduced Alexa and the Echo speaker years ago, the idea of talking to a digital assistant wasn’t totally novel. Both the iPhone and Android phones had semi-intelligent voice controls — but with the Echo, Amazon took its first step toward making something like Alexa a constant presence in your home. Since then, Apple and Google have followed suit, and now there’s a huge variety of smart speakers available at various price points.

As the market exploded, the downsides of having a smart home device that’s always listening for a wake word have become increasingly apparent. An unintentional voice command can activate it, sending private recordings back to monolithic companies to analyze. And even at the best of times, giving more personal information to Amazon, Apple and Google can be a questionable decision. That said, all these companies have made it easier to manage how your data is used — you can opt out of humans reviewing some of your voice queries, and it’s also less complicated to manage and erase your history with various digital assistants, too.

The good news is that there’s never been a better time to get a smart speaker, particularly if you’re a music fan. For all their benefits, the original Amazon Echo and Google Home devices did not sound good. Sonos, on the other hand, made great sounding WiFi-connected speakers, but they lacked any voice-controlled smarts.

That’s all changed now. Sonos released its own voice assistant in 2022 and also includes both Alexa and Google Assistant support in its latest speakers. Google and Amazon, meanwhile, made massive improvements in sound quality with recent speakers. Even lower-end models like the Echo Dot and Nest Mini sound much better than earlier iterations. With the growing popularity of these speakers, there are now more options than ever. Let’s walk through our choices for the best smart speakers at different price points and for different uses.

Picking an assistant

The first thing most people should do is decide what voice assistant they want to use. Google Assistant and Amazon’s Alexa are both well-supported options that are continually evolving, with new features added at a steady clip. A few years ago, Alexa worked with more smart home devices, but at this point, basically any smart device worth buying works with both.

It’s mostly a matter of personal preference. If you already use Google Assistant on your Android phone, it makes sense to stick with that. But while Alexa isn’t quite as good at answering general knowledge questions, it syncs just fine with things like calendars from your Google account. And it works with perhaps the widest variety of smart home devices, as well. If you’ve never used Alexa or Google Assistant, you can download their apps to your smart phone and spend some time testing them out before buying a speaker.

If you buy a Sonos device with a microphone, you can also use the company’s own voice assistant, voiced by Giancarlo Esposito. It’s focused purely on music control, so you won’t use it to do things like send messages or ask the weather forecast. But as a music assistant, Sonos Voice Control is generally quite fast and reliable. 

As for Apple, you won’t be surprised to learn its HomePod mini is the only Siri-compatible speaker on the market, now that Apple has discontinued the larger HomePod. Siri has a reputation for not being as smart as Alexa or Google Assistant, but it’s totally capable of handling common voice queries like answering questions, controlling smart home devices, sending messages, making calls and playing music. Technically, Siri and Apple’s HomeKit technology doesn’t work with as many smart home devices as the competition, but it’s not hard to find compatible gear. And since the HomePod mini arrived last fall, Apple has added some handy features like a new Intercom tool. Apple is also starting to support music services besides Apple Music. Currently, Pandora is the only other option, but Apple has confirmed that Amazon Music will eventually work natively on the HomePod mini as well.

Best smart speaker under $50: Amazon Echo Dot

Most people’s entry point into the smart speaker world will not be an expensive device. Amazon’s fourth-generation Echo Dot and Google’s Nest Mini are the most obvious places to start for two important reasons. One, they’re cheap: Both the Nest Mini and Echo Dost cost $50. Two, they’re capable. Despite the low price, these speakers can do virtually the same things as larger and more expensive devices.

The Google Nest Mini was released in late 2019, but Amazon just refreshed the Echo Dot this year. After testing both devices, I think the Echo Dot is the best small smart speaker for most people. Amazon keeps improving the audio quality across its Echo device line, and the Echo Dot is no exception. It produces much louder and clearer audio than I’d expect from a $50 speaker. The Nest Mini doesn’t sound bad, and it’s perfectly fine for listening in the bedroom while getting ready for the day, but the Echo Dot is a better all-purpose music listening device.

From a design perspective, Amazon broke the mold with the latest Echo Dot. Instead of a small puck like the Nest Mini, the new Dot is shaped like a little globe. It’s much bigger than the Nest Mini, but that size gives it room for higher-end audio components. The Dot keeps the handy physical volume buttons and mute switch on top, along with a button to activate Alexa’s voice control. While the Dot doesn’t look as sleek as the Nest Mini, having physical buttons makes it easier to adjust volume and mute the mic. I do wish the Dot had a way to physically pause music; on the Nest Mini, if you tap the middle of the device, the music stops.

Another benefit the Amazon Echo Dot has over the Google Nest Mini is its 3.5mm audio out jack, which means you can plug it into other speakers and instantly upgrade the audio quality. When you do that, you can ask Alexa to stream music, and it’ll output to whatever speaker you have connected. That’ll help you get more mileage out of the Dot in the long run. The Nest Mini answers with a handy wall mount, for people who want to keep their counter or shelf clear. The Echo Dot’s new bulbous form is definitely not suited to this, so if you want a speaker you can really hide, the Nest Mini is probably the better choice.

Overall, the Dot is the best choice for most people, but I wouldn’t hesitate to recommend the Nest Mini, either. I generally prefer using Google Assistant over Alexa, and anyone who feels the same should go ahead and get the Nest Mini. The Dot does sound notably better, so if you plan to listen to audio on a regular basis, that’s probably the way to go. But if you only plan to use it for a quick song or podcast when you’re getting ready in the morning, just pick your favorite assistant and go from there.

Best smart speaker under $100: Amazon Echo

Amazon, Apple and Google all have $100 smart speakers: the fourth-generation Echo, the HomePod mini and the Nest Audio, respectively. All three companies claim superior audio quality, so for lots of people these speakers will be the sweet spot between small speakers like the Echo Dot and Nest Mini and bigger, more expensive models like the Sonos One.

Once again, Amazon punches above its weight. Like the Dot, the new Echo is totally redesigned and the new internals were made with music in mind. It combines a three-inch woofer with two 0.8-inch tweeters — a more advanced setup than either the Nest Audio or HomePod mini. (The Google Nest Audio uses a three-inch woofer but only a single 0.75-inch tweeter, while the Apple HomePod mini makes do with a single “full range” driver and two passive radiators.)

In practice, this means the Echo is noticeably louder than either the Nest Audio or HomePod mini and much better suited to filling a large room than the competition. It also delivers an impressive bass thump and powerful mid-range frequencies. In fact, my main complaint with the speaker is that highs aren’t quite crisp enough. Compare the Echo to a Sonos One and the One sounds much more lively, while the Echo comes off a bit muddy. Then again, the Sonos One costs twice as much as the Echo.

While the Echo may beat the Nest Audio and HomePod mini on volume and bass, Google and Apple’s speakers are not bad options. The HomePod mini is the quietest of the three speakers, but it still sounds balanced across the entire audio spectrum. The bass isn’t too assertive, but there’s more presence than I would have expected given its tiny size (it’s by far the smallest of these three speakers).

And it has a few nice perks if you’re using an iPhone 11 or newer. Thanks to the U1 “ultra-wideband” chip in recent iPhones, the HomePod mini can tell when there’s a phone near it, which makes handing off music from your phone to the speaker (or vice versa) quite simple. Playback controls for the HomePod mini will automatically pop up as well, and your phone’s lock screen will display music suggestions if the speaker isn’t currently playing. Setup is also dead-simple — just bring an iPhone or iPad near the speaker and it’ll automatically start the process.

Google’s Nest Audio is also quite pleasant to listen to. It’s a little louder than the HomePod mini, and has stronger bass, to boot. It doesn’t have the same overall power and presence that the Echo does, but for $100 it’s a well-balanced speaker that should serve most people’s needs.

All three of these speakers support stereo pairing as well, if you want more volume or crave a more immersive experience. For $200, two Echoes will fill a large room with high-quality sound and enough bass to power a party. A pair of HomePod mini or Nest Audio speakers aren’t quite as powerful, but it makes for a great upgrade if you’re a more avid listener. A pair of Nest Audio or HomePod mini speakers sounded great on my desk during the workday. I don’t need overwhelming volume but can appreciate the stereo separation. And two of those speakers together can easily power a larger living space, although the Echo is the better choice if volume is a priority.

Here too, I think that picking the assistant that works best in your house and with your other gadgets is probably the most important factor — but given Alexa’s ubiquity and the new Echo’s superior sound quality, I think it’s the best smart speaker at this price point.

Best midrange smart speaker: Sonos One

If you have more than a passing interest in music, the Echo Dot and Nest Mini aren’t really going to cut it. Spending more money to upgrade to a speaker designed with audio quality in mind is one of the best decisions I’ve made. For years, I didn’t have a proper home music solution, but in the end the modest investment has made my life much more pleasant.

For a long time, my default recommendation was the $219 Sonos One. It hits a sweet spot of size and convenience, and it’s a huge upgrade in sound quality over the Nest Mini or Echo Dot, not to mention the larger Echo and Nest Audio. You can use the Sonos Voice Assistant, Alexa or the Google Assistant with it, and Sonos supports a huge variety of music services. But most importantly, it simply sounds great, especially if you tune the speaker to your room using the Sonos iOS app. It takes just a few minutes and makes the One sound lively, with punchy bass and clear highs.

But Amazon flipped the script in 2019 with the Echo Studio, a $200 Alexa-powered smart speaker that can stand up against the Sonos One. Yes, it’s larger than nearly every other speaker in this guide, but the bang-for-the-buck factor is extremely high with the Echo Studio. Naturally, it’s a full-fledged member of the Alexa ecosystem, which means you can do multi-room playback with other Echo speakers or set up two Studios in a stereo pair. All of Alexa’s features are on board here, and it has a built-in Zigbee smart home hub, if you happen to need that.

The Echo Studio has a few other unique features for music lovers. If you sign up for Amazon’s hi-def music service, you can play a (very limited) selection of songs in Sony’s 360 Reality Audio format; Amazon refers to this as “3D music.” It may sound great, but the selection is so sparse that we can’t recommend it as a reason to buy into the Echo Studio — but it will be nice as Amazon expands its catalog over time. That said, the Echo Studio’s five-speaker, 360-degree design naturally provides a more 3D effect than a speaker like the Sonos One, which has a more traditional forward-firing design.

The Studio also supports Dolby Atmos, making it a candidate for a home theater setup — but it only works with Amazon’s own Fire TV devices. And using a single speaker for watching movies is odd; it may sound great, but it’s not the immersive experience you’ll get with a dedicated soundbar and surround speakers. A stereo pair plus Amazon’s Echo Sub should sound notably better, but we haven’t been able to get that setup yet.

Given the quality of the Studio, the speaker shines when used with a high-def streaming service, like Amazon Music HD or Tidal’s HiFi tier. The downside is that you’ll pay for those — but if you want to stick with standard Spotify or Apple Music, the Studio still sounds great.

While the Studio is comparable to the Sonos One in terms of pure audio quality, the Sonos ecosystem does have a few advantages over Amazon. Sonos speakers that support voice commands, like the One, work with either Alexa or Google Assistant. So if you prefer Google, Sonos is probably the way to go. And Sonos speakers work with a much broader set of music services. I’ve spent a lot of time recently comparing the One to the Echo Studio, and I go back and forth on which is superior in terms of music quality. They definitely have different profiles, and while I have come to prefer Sonos over Amazon, I know plenty of people (including my colleague Billy Steele) who find the opposite to be true.

If you have a smaller home and aren’t concerned with multi-room playback, the Echo Studio should be your pick. But if you’re interested in building out a multi-room setup over time, Sonos currently provides a greater variety of speakers for that mission. But either way, you’ll end up with a setup that puts something like the Echo Dot or Nest Mini to shame.

Best smart speaker for music lovers: Sonos Five

As nice as the Echo Studio and Sonos One are, there’s only so much you can get out of them. If you crave more bass, clarity and stereo separation, the Sonos Five is one of our favorite pure music speakers. It has all the conveniences of the One (except for one, which we’ll get to) and sounds significantly better than any other Sonos speaker. It also sounds much better than the Echo Studio and anything Google is currently selling.

That said, the Five stretches our definition of a smart speaker here because it doesn’t have a built-in voice assistant. But it’s so good at music playback that it’s worth recommending you pick one up along with an Echo Dot or Nest Mini. Both of those speakers work with Sonos, so you can use voice commands to control the Five just as you would a dedicated Alexa or Google Assistant device. It’s also easier to recommend than it was a year ago, because Sonos refreshed the speaker last spring with a new wireless radio as well as more memory and a faster processor. This means it should stay current and work with future Sonos software updates for years to come.

Since we’re talking “best” here, I’m going to go ahead and recommend that true music junkies splash out on two Five speakers and pair them in stereo. Put simply, it’s the most enjoyable experience I’ve had listening to music in years; I found myself picking up new details while listening to albums I’ve heard over and over again. It’s a wonderful experience and worth saving for if you’re a music lover. Put simply, I didn’t know what I was missing until I tried the Five.

Best portable smart speaker: Sonos Roam

While many people will be happy with a few speakers strategically placed throughout their home, you might want something that works outside as well as inside. Fortunately, you can find speakers that pair voice controls and strong music playback performance with portable, weatherproof form factors. For my money, it’s hard to beat the Sonos Roam for sheer versatility, not to mention audio quality.

When used inside the home, the Roam works like any other Sonos speaker. It fits in with an existing multi-room Sonos setup, or you can get a pair for stereo playback. Like most other Sonos speakers, it works with the Sonos Voice Assistant, Google Assistant or Amazon Alexa, and it supports essentially every major music service available. It sounds very good given its tiny size; it’s quieter and not quite as clear as the Sonos One, but it still packs a surprising bass thump and distinct highs.

Since it was designed with on-the-go usage in mind, the Roam has a battery and Bluetooth so you can take it anywhere and use it far away from your WiFi network. And its diminutive size makes it easy to take it everywhere, both around the house and out and about. It’s also the first Sonos speaker that is fully waterproof, as well as dust- and drop-resistant, so you shouldn’t worry about taking it to the pool or beach.

The Roam gets about 10 hours of battery life, whether you’re on WiFI or Bluetooth. There are other portable speakers that last longer, so if you’re really going to push the battery you might be better served by another option.

Sonos also has another portable option, the Move. Like the Roam, it’s a full-fledged Sonos speaker when on WiFi and works with Bluetooth when you’re away from home. But it’s $400 and much larger than the Roam, and even bigger than the Sonos One. This means it is very loud and has better audio quality than all the other speakers I’ve mentioned, but it’s not something you can toss in a bag and bring with you anywhere. When I reviewed it, I liked having a speaker I could tote around the house with me and out to my porch, but the Roam does that all just as well in a much smaller package. The Move is a good option if you want a high-quality speaker for a living room with the option to occasionally drag it to the backyard.

While this guide is all about smart speakers, we’d be remiss if we didn’t mention all of the solid portable speakers out there that either have limited smart features or none at all. We have an entire guide to the best portable Bluetooth speakers, and some of our favorites that support smart voice commands come from Bose. The $149 SoundLink Flex supports Siri and Google Assistant commands, plus it has an IP67 design that’s roughly the size of a small clutch bag. It pumps out bright, dynamic sound and can pair with other speakers for stereo sound, too.

On the higher end of the spectrum, the $399 Bose Portable Smart speaker supports Alexa and Google Assistant commands, and since it can connect to WiFi, you can ask your preferred assistant to play music from Spotify, Amazon Music and other services. On top of that, it produces well-rounded sound, sports an IPX4 design with a convenient carry handle and will last up to 12 hours on a single charge.

The best digital gifts to send your friends and family

Chances are good you know someone who has subscription fatigue from the many digital services that have become essential in our lives. Or maybe you have a loved one getting a new game console or some other exciting new hardware. In either case, we’ve p…

iPadOS 16.2 includes Freeform collaboration app and Stage Manager on an external display

iPadOS 16 launched a little later this year than its predecessors, and a few key features weren’t quite ready. With iPadOS 16.2, which just arrived this afternoon, I think Apple has caught up with what it planned. There are two major new features on bo…

Hear me out: The modular Framework Chromebook is worth the $1,000 (for some)

In a world where most laptops are entirely sealed, with no real way to tweak the hardware, Framework’s modular devices stand out. The company’s first Windows laptop was a solid computer considering the price – and that’s before you factor in the fact that you could swap ports, easily add more storage or RAM or even upgrade the processor down the line.

It’s been a little over a year since the first Framework laptops launched, and now the company has a new model, the Framework Laptop Chromebook Edition (which I’ll refer to as the Framework Chromebook from here on out). It offers the same benefits as its Windows sibling – namely, solid industrial design and specs coupled with the promise of customization and future expandability. That said, it’s also one of the more expensive Chromebooks available, starting at $999. That’s a lot of money for a Chromebook – but if it can last you five years or more, it might be worth the cost.

Hardware

Visually, the Framework Chromebook has little to distinguish it. That’s not necessarily a bad thing, but it is very utilitarian, with a silver aluminum chassis that resembles so many other devices out there. Still, it’s a pretty compact device, less than two-thirds of an inch thick and weighing under three pounds. A classy reflective Framework logo on the lid is the only thing distinguishing it from an Acer, ASUS and other brands’ laptops.

A day or two later, I discovered that the Framework Chromebook does have one bit of flair: the black bezel around the screen is magnetic and easily removable. Framework actually provided me with a fun orange option, which I left on. You can also get a silver bezel if you want, but orange is a personal favorite. I’m hoping the company adds a few more colors in the future as well.

Inside that bezel is a 1080p webcam that’s totally fine for video calling. Also of interest is the fact that there are hardware switches for disabling the camera and microphones. This isn’t just a software trick either; the switches actually cut the power to those modules, making it a fairly secure option (though a physical cover over the camera would be pretty impenetrable, too).

Photos of Framework's first modular and repairable Chromebook.
Nathan Ingraham / Engadget

While Framework devices are upgradeable, a few things are more permanent – namely, the display and keyboard. (You can replace both if they break, but there aren’t more advanced versions to upgrade your laptop with at this time. That could change, of course). Fortunately, both are excellent, as you’d hope for in a laptop at this price. The 13.5-inch display has a high resolution of 2,256 x 1,504, which translates to  a taller 3:2 aspect ratio that I wish were more common.

The main downside is that it’s not a touchscreen, something you’ll find on most Chromebooks. That makes installing touch-driven Android apps less appealing, though at this point most of the apps I use (Lightroom, Todoist, Spotify and video apps like Netflix) work fine with a keyboard and mouse. That minor disappointment aside, the screen is great. Text and images are sharp, and its 400-nit max brightness is more than sufficient unless you have sunlight coming through and shining right on the display.

Photos of Framework's first modular and repairable Chromebook.
Nathan Ingraham / Engadget

As you’d expect, Framework swapped out the Windows keyboard layout for one that will feel familiar to Chromebook users, with the “everything” button on the left in place of caps lock and the function row shortcuts like back, refresh and screenshot right where I expected. There’s no Google Assistant key, but you can easily access the Assistant in the ChromeOS search bar if you’re so inclined. The keyboard itself is excellent; the backlit buttons have 1.5mm of travel and are solid and precise. The key caps are a bit small, but it didn’t take me long to adjust. I do wish that Framework included the fingerprint sensor found on its Windows laptop, though. Given that plenty of other Chromebooks support fingerprint unlocking, I’m surprised it isn’t available here.

At $999, the Framework Chromebook isn’t cheap, but the company didn’t spare any expense with the processor. It features Intel’s 12th-generation Core i5-1240P CPU, along with 8GB of RAM and 256GB of storage on the base model. Most Chromebooks with comparable specs are similarly priced, so Framework’s laptop isn’t excessively expensive – but the question, as always, is whether spending that much money on a ChromeOS device is a good idea at all.

Photos of Framework's first modular and repairable Chromebook.

Swappable ports and expansion

Let’s get into what makes the Framework Chromebook unique. Instead of having a set of unchangeable ports, there are four slots for user-selectable Expansion Cards. Framework offers sockets for USB-C, USB-A, HDMI, DisplayPort, Ethernet and microSD. Additionally, you can use those connections for easily-swappable storage; Framework offers 250GB and 1TB modules. All the Expansion Cards are USB-C based; the ports on the laptop itself are just four recessed USB-C openings. This means you could use the storage cards with other computers to easily move files around.

I went with two USB-C ports (one on each side), USB-A and HDMI. Framework helpfully included an LED light on each side of the laptop so you confirm when you’re charging and when the battery is full. Everything functioned as I would have expected: the HDMI port worked just fine with my external monitor, and my old USB-A flash drive showed up with no issues. I also tested out the Ethernet Expansion Card, which was plug-and-play simple (though it’s bigger than the other cards and thus sticks out of the side of the machine).

Photos of Framework's first modular and repairable Chromebook.
Nathan Ingraham / Engadget

I’m of two minds when it comes to these modules. On the one hand, the ability to customize what ports are available on your computer is pretty damn cool. If I used microSD or Ethernet more, for example, I’d love the ability to swap those in, or just load up on USB-C ports if I had a lot of compatible peripherals. But there are also plenty of Chromebooks that have USB-A, HDMI and microSD slots, which makes the Framework’s modular slots a little less compelling to me.

However, the fact that my needs are modest doesn’t change the fact that there are probably lots of people who want more flexibility in their laptop. Being able to drop an Ethernet port in for when you’re doing a lot of downloading and then swap it for USB-A if you’re hooking up older accessories is undeniably useful. It also future-proofs this laptop quite a bit. If you get rid of all your USB-A gadgets, for example, just throw in another UBC-C port or add more storage. There are tons of possibilities here that you just don’t get from a standard laptop.

Photos of Framework's first modular and repairable Chromebook.

These swappable ports are only one facet of the Framework Chromebook’s flexibility. Using the included Torx T5 screwdriver, I was able to loosen the five screws on the underside of the laptop and then lift the keyboard deck right off, exposing the laptop’s innards. It’s all laid out clearly and everything is labeled, and there are QR codes you can scan to go directly to upgrade guides. I didn’t change much under the hood, but Framework provided me with a second 8GB memory chip that I was able to install in about five minutes. I can’t remember the last time I’ve been able to upgrade my laptop’s RAM like this, and with two slots I could shove in up to 64GB of memory. That’s something that will make this Chromebook a useful machine for a long time.

And that’s to say nothing about upgrading the processor. The Framework Chromebook has Intel’s latest-gen chip on board, so there’s no need to change it now. But, Framework has already started offering new “mainboards” for its Windows laptop, which originally shipped with an 11th-generation Intel CPU. It seems likely that in a few years, when Intel has newer chips available, Framework will let you swap them in and give your old laptop a nice performance bump.

Another cool point about the swappable mainboard is the fact that if you decide ChromeOS isn’t for you, you could pick up a Windows-compatible mainboard and move on with your life running Microsoft’s OS. Framework says that the Chromebook has some ChromeOS-specific parts and firmware, which is why you can’t just wipe the device and install Windows. But being able to swap the mainboard and keyboard for Windows-compatible is another example of the customization at the heart of Framework.

Photos of Framework's first modular and repairable Chromebook.
Nathan Ingraham / Engadget

In use

As you’d expect, using the Framework Chromebook was basically identical to any other Chromebook with these specs. It’s a snappy, responsive laptop that can handle basically anything you might want to do in ChromeOS, including those aforementioned Android apps as well as web apps and a ton of Chrome tabs.

Battery life is the main downside here. I only got a little over six hours unplugged doing my normal work routine, and the battery lasted about eight hours and 15 minutes when looping playback of an HD video stored locally on the laptop. Framework did note there’s a battery-draining bug when using the laptop with either the HDMI or DisplayPort expansion cards installed; that should be fixed in a future software update. But even without those cards installed, I still got the same six or so hours of battery life.

Photos of Framework's first modular and repairable Chromebook.
Nathan Ingraham / Engadget

Wrap-up

After my time with this Chromebook, I”m officially a fan of what Framework is doing. The laptop has few compromises compared to most other ChromeOS devices, namely battery life and a rather pedestrian appearance. But don’t mistake the lack of flash for poor design. The Framework Chromebook is extremely repairable for ordinary humans while still keeping a relatively small and light frame. And it also has a great screen and keyboard to go along with its powerful, upgradeable internals.

At $999, it’s one of the more expensive Chromebooks on the market, and you could get a comparable device like the Asus Chromebook Spin 714 for the comparatively low cost of $729. But, that device isn’t repairable or upgradeable at all, while the Framework Chromebook can easily be fixed by most people who buy one – and owners can also add more storage, RAM and hopefully even replace the processor down the line to keep it alive for a lot longer than your average laptop. For some people, especially those who feel like our gadgets shouldn’t be disposable things we replace every few years, that makes the Framework Chromebook worth the premium.