Hands on with Facebook Camera for iPhone

 Hands on with Facebook Camera for iPhone

Facebook on Thursday launched Camera, a new standalone iPhone app for browsing your friends’ photos and sharing new ones of your own. Were Instagram owned by anyone else, it might be sweating bullets right now.

When Camera launches, it shows a thin strip of photos from your iPhone’s camera roll, along with a button to start taking new pictures. Beneath that is the Friends tab, a vertically scrolling, Instagram-esque list of photos your Facebook friends have taken. One of the clever things about Camera is that it includes not just those photos your friends take within the app, but any photos that they share on Facebook itself. Not all of those photos will fit well in the square-cropped versions that Camera presents, but you can tap on any photo to see it uncropped.

A second tab called Me lists photos of you. I think. My Me tab includes photos I took and photos in which I’ve been tagged, but it doesn’t include every such photo; it notably didn’t include photos I’d taken moments earlier with the Camera app itself.

When it’s time to snap a photo within the app, you get the standard Camera controls, though they’re restyled a bit. Once you snap a photo you’d like to share, you can tap into it to crop it, apply a filter, and/or share it on Facebook. (You can do the same with photos from your Camera Roll.) Camera automatically detects faces in photos, and prompts you to tag them if you’d like.

Applying those filters feels very familiar if you’ve ever used Instagram. Though they don’t sport the same names as Instagram’s filters, Facebook Camera’s filters offer the same basic saturation- and contrast-tweaking options. You can post one or more pictures to Facebook at a time.

This is a 1.0 release and as such is a bit quirky: I found that sometimes filters didn’t apply properly when I tapped on them, and that sometimes the filter preview icons—which are meant to show the intended effect on your current photo—would sometimes erroneously switch to showing a different photo of mine instead. Other times, I’d go back to the app’s home screen and see my photos, even though the Friends tab was seemingly selected; tapping back and forth between the tabs corrected that issue.

So, Facebook Camera will inevitably draw comparisons to Instagram like the few I’ve already listed. But to me, the apps don’t seem especially competitive. For Facebook devotees, Camera is probably the better app; it integrates more tightly with the service, and shares photos from all of your preexisting Facebook friends. But members of the Instagram community who prefer it there, with those filters and added options like tilt-shift, needn’t envy their Facebook Camera-using friends.

Google Seals the Deal on $12.5B Motorola Acquisition

Google Seals the Deal on $12.5B Motorola Acquisition

 

Google has officially closed its acquisition of Motorola Mobility for $12.5 billion, putting the search giant in charge of a major Smartphone, tablet and set-top box maker.

“Motorola is a great American tech company that has driven the mobile revolution, with a track record of over 80 years of innovation, including the creation of the first cellphone,” Google CEO Larry Page said in a statement. “... And as a company who made a big, early bet on Android, Motorola has become an incredibly valuable partner to Google.”

By buying Motorola, Google gets to beef up its patent portfolio, as rivals Apple and Microsoft try to drag down Android device makers with lawsuits. Motorola has its own ongoing patent lawsuits against Microsoft and Apple, which may help Google get more favorable settlements for Android device makers.

But for consumers, the possibility of more pure Google devices is far more interesting. “Google and Motorola Mobility together will accelerate innovation and choice in mobile computing,” Google says of the acquisition. “Consumers will get better phones at lower prices.”

Google says it will still allow early access to Android for other hardware makers, and will even work with them on future Nexus devices. Android will also remain open. Still, Motorola could play a bigger role in Google's push toward unlocked-contract free phones and tablets.

Google plans to sell a batch of Nexus devices directly to consumers this fall, the Wall Street Journal reported last week. Motorola, meanwhile, hasn't announced any new high-end phones or tablets in months. It seems likely that Motorola is behind some of those upcoming Nexus devices.

Motorola Mobility also creates set-top box hardware for television providers, so Google could use its new acquisition to push Google TV. Page didn't say anything about TV in his blog post, but there are rumors that Google is working on home entertainment devices, including a streaming audio device, possibly using Motorola's resources.

Sanjay Jha, who served as Motorola Mobility's CEO since the company spun off from Motorola in 2008, has stepped down. He has been replaced by Dennis Woodside, a former senior vice president of Google Americas, who led Motorola's integration with the search giant.

Samsung Galaxy S III Available June 1 from Amazon for $800

Samsung Galaxy S III Available June 1 from Amazon for $800

Consumers who want to be among the first in the U.S. to own Samsung’s Galaxy S III smartphone on June 1 will pay a steep price. Amazon is now taking U.S. pre-orders for the flagship Android device and bitter iPhone rival for $800 unlocked, but the price tag is not the only thing you should be weary of.

Samsung and U.S. wireless carriers are yet to announce their versions of the Galaxy S III, which usually vary from one another both internally and externally. So what you will be getting for $800 is the 16GB SIM-free international version of the S III (blue or white), also known as GT-i9300, with a huge 4.8-inch display, 1GB of RAM, an 8-megapixel camera, and Android 4.0 with a lot of Samsung software goodies.

However, using the Samsung Galaxy S III GT-i9300 in the U.S. means you will have to accept some compromises. The model does not have 4G LTE connectivity, unlike many Android phones currently sold by carriers. Thus, the GT-i9300 can only connect to AT&T’s HSPA+ network. On T-Mobile the phone would be able to make calls, but won’t be able to connect to high-speed data as the GT-i9300 lacks support for T-Mobile’s 1700MHz band. Needless to say, the phone won’t work on Verizon and Sprint.

What you do get for the $800 price tag with the S III though is the quad-core 1.4 GHz Exynos processor. It’s not known whether the processor will make it to U.S. versions of the phone; there is no 4G LTE version of the processor, so the carrier-customized Galaxy S IIIs are expected to use a dual-core chip instead, like the Snapdragon S4, which has LTE support.

So unless you don’t mind not having 4G LTE connectivity, using AT&T’s network, and you have $800 to shell out, the Galaxy S III should be with you in a couple of weeks. But you would be better off waiting for the U.S. carrier-customized versions of the device, which although they won’t have the same processor, they’ll likely cost you at least $500 less upfront with a contract, and they can blaze at 4G LTE speeds.

Comparing Intel Core i5 vs i7

For many consumers shopping around for a new desktop or laptop PC, one of the biggest considerations is the type of processor, and the two most often in contention are the Intel Core i5 and Core i7. Discounting Core i3 (mainly found in budget systems) and AMD processors (another article entirely), the difference between Intel Core i5 and Core i7 can seem daunting, especially when the prices seem so close together once they're in completed systems. We break down the differences for you.

Price and Marketing

Simply put, Core i5-equipped systems will be less expensive than Core i7-equipped systems. Intel has moved away from the star ratings it used with previous-generation Core processors in favor of a capability-driven marketing message. Essentially, the Core i7 processors have more capabilities than Core i3 and Core i5 CPUs. Core i7 will be better for multi-tasking, multimedia tasks, high end gaming, and scientific work. Core i7 processors are certainly aimed at people who complain that their current system is "too slow." Spot-checking a system like the midrange Dell XPS 8500 desktop, you'll find the Core i5 about $150 less expensive than a similarly equipped Core i7 system.

Core Confusion

For the most part, you'll get faster CPU performance from Core i7 parts than Core i5. The majority of desktop Core i7 CPUs are quad-core processors, while many mobile Core i5 processors are dual-core. This is not always the case, as there are mobile dual-core Core i7 processors, and likewise several desktop quad-core Core i5 processors. Then of course you'll see the rare six-core Core i7, which are usually found with the desktop-only Extreme Edition top-of-the-line models.

The Core nomenclature has been used for several generations of CPUs. Nehalem and Westmere use three-digit model names (i.e. Core i7-920), while Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge CPUs use four-digit model names (Core i7-2600). Thankfully, unless you're shopping the used PC market, you'll find Sandy Bridge processors in closeout systems and budget PCs while you'll find Ivy Bridge processors in most new PCs. The essential takeaway is that to get better performance in each generation, buy a processor with a higher model number (e.g., a Core i7-3770 generally has better performance than a Core i5-3450).

Report: No Deal After Samsung, Apple Patent Talks

Not surprisingly, settlement talks between Apple and Samsung over their patent dispute have reportedly not resulted in any agreement. 

Instead, both sides are back in court arguing over proposed sanctions.

According to a report from The Korea Times, Apple's Tim Cook and Samsung's Choi Gee-Sung failed to agree on a settlement that would have ended the companies' year-long patent fight.

According to court documents, the executives and their legal teams met in a San Francisco courtroom for nine hours on Monday and seven hours on Tuesday. Samsung and Apple have not yet filed documents about what was discussed.

A Samsung spokesman said the company is "unable to provide any details of the meeting." Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Highlighting the lack of an agreement is a Wednesday filing from Samsung that accuses Apple of concealing evidence. Specifically, "Apple withheld 283 relevant deposition transcripts (totaling more than 34,000 pages of testimony) throughout the discovery period, and indeed for six weeks thereafter, preventing Samsung from using these materials during discovery, in expert reports, and in dispositive briefing."

A Dec. 2011 decision required Apple to hand over those documents by Jan. 15, but by March 2012, it had produced just 15 documents, according to Samsung. Apple produced all 283 documents in question by April 12, but Samsung said today that that's too little, too late. Samsung asked the court to ban Apple's experts from using or relying on the information contained within the documents, and to award damages.

In March, Apple accused Samsung of doing the same thing - failing to produce source code for nine functionalities found in its devices.

Patent blogger Florian Mueller speculated today that Samsung was looking for a delay to the case. "Samsung may hope that it will take a while to sort out between the court in California and the ITC as well as other district courts which documents Apple ultimately has to make available to Samsung," he wrote in a Wednesday post. "The California court can solve the whole problem by providing the clarification Apple requests. In that case, there won't be a delay, and probably no sanctions."