Skin-On Interfaces is a sensitive human skin-like input method that has been used as a phone case that communicates with your smartphone.
The technology is being proposed as a “new paradigm in which interactive devices have their own artificial skin, thus enabling new forms of input gestures for end-users.” It was developed by Marc Teyssier, Gilles Bailly, Catherine Pelachaud, Eric Lecolinet, Andrew Conn and Anne Roudaut, and was researched by Bristol Interaction Group, in Bristol, UK.
Silicon has been used to mimic the deformative nature of human skin when twisted, pinched and touched. Essentially, Skin-On Interfaces reproduce a skin sensing layer that can track natural gestures, which understands “multitouch touch, pressure and complex gestures such as strokes, stretching or grabbing.” It proposes a new way to interact with our impersonal technology, instead asking to be touched to communicate with our devices.
Human-like interactions are translated into controlling our device, meaning that if the artificial skin is twisted, a smartphone’s volume could be turned up. Other interactions include tickling the skin, which would send a laughing emoji via text, or pinching the skin to develop an angry avatar on your laptop. Using a built-in grid of sensors, the multisensory factors are endless and can be translated into a number of functions that your device understands.
Check out the Skin-On Interfaces design in the gallery above and watch it in action below. You can find out more about the production process on Marc Teyssier’s website.
As you might guess, I have more to say about the Pixel 4 even though the review and video are both voluminous. After John Gruber pointed out on Twitter that I forgot to mention that Google didn’t put USB-C headphones or an adapter in the Pixel 4 box in the review, I realized that I had a whole series of thoughts about it that have been rumbling around in my head all weekend. (I have also updated the review.)
In the spirit of this newsletter, which has a tradition of taking a small thing and showing how it is instructive in understanding a big thing, I’m going to dwell on headphones for a bit.
Ahead of the event where Google formally announced the Pixel 4, I once again asked the perennial question: is Google serious about hardware? The quality of the phone itself is only part of the answer. The other part is Google showing a real commitment to selling more of them.
Command Line is The Verge’s daily newsletter about computers, gadgets, and software. You should subscribe! I’m eager to hear your feedback. Please feel free to email me at dieter@theverge.com if you have thoughts. -Dieter
By subscribing, you are agreeing to receive a daily newsletter from The Verge that highlights top stories of the day, as well as occasional messages from sponsors and / or partners of The Verge.
There are lots of ways to show that commitment. The most obvious — and the one I’ve been focused on — is that it needs to put a real marketing budget behind the Pixel 4, especially now that it’s available on all four major carriers.
Beyond that, though, Google has one very important job: make it easy for iPhone users to switch. It is a very, very difficult thing to convince anybody to . Whether you think it’s because of iMessage lock-in, OS preference, brand loyalty, or all of the above — iPhone users tend to stay on their platform.
More than any other Pixel before it, the Pixel 4 seems almost custom-designed to appeal to iPhone users. It has the same face unlock system (minus, you know, the closed-eye problem). It comes much closer to matching iOS’ animation smoothness thanks to its 90Hz screen. Android 10 liberally “borrowed” the core gesture navigation mechanic from iOS. Hell, because it shares the square camera bump, the thing looks like an iPhone.
But I don’t think Google is going to make a big push to convince iPhone owners to switch — it may not even push as hard as it did last year with its “Phone X” ad campaign. Because if Google wanted to convince iPhone owners to switch, it would take a small hit on the Pixel’s profit margin (even if it’s negative to begin with) to make it easier to do so.
If Google was really serious about getting iPhone users to switch, it would have included USB-C headphones and an adapter in the box.
It strikes me as a silly corner to cut, because iPhone owners are less likely than Android owners to already have a USB-C dongle or USB-C headphones. When I asked Google why, here’s what a spokesperson told me over email:
Most of our customers already use their personal audio accessories and, for those people, the extra in-box audio accessories end up going to waste. We’re also offering a $100 launch promo credit for purchases on Google Store so customers can get accessories they want.
(That promo credit ends on October 26th, by the way.)
Google is probably right that most people buying the Pixel 4 already have Bluetooth headphones, but that’s not exactly the point. A backup pair of wired headphones is still essential, I think, and it’s practically punitive for Google not to include them.
What are the chances that retail employees will warn potential switchers that they also need to get headphones? And then how will potential switchers feel when they open the box and discover that there are no headphones in the box — unlike every other phone? As a first time experience of the Pixel 4, the one-two punch of losing iMessage and not having an easy way to listen to music seems ...not ideal.
I’m not against the idea of not including accessories due to waste. In fact, I look forward to the day when we no longer expect to get AC adapters in the box because everything is powered by USB-C and we all have plenty of them. But in 2019, not including headphones in the box feels like a cut corner.
The feeling that Google is cutting corners is a problem that goes beyond just headphones. Look at any part of the Android web this week and you’ll find that a significant portion of the community has already soured on the Pixel 4. There’s a worry that the small storage and skimpy battery on the Pixel 4 doesn’t compare well to competition like the OnePlus 7T.
It’s not just Android fans who will be looking at the spec-to-price ratio, either. An iPhone 11 with 128 GB of storage and much longer battery life can be had for $749.
I think I understand why Google priced the Pixel 4 the way it did. It’s the first Pixel with face unlock, a 90Hz screen, and a radar chip. None of that is free. Plus, it’s totally fair for a company to charge a premium for a product that includes a premium camera and better software experience.
Those are all reasons why I didn’t ding the Pixel too hard for its price. (I’m also aware that Google has discounted every previous flagship Pixel on a regular basis and expect the same to happen with the Pixel 4.) So I’m not arguing that Google should be lowering the price on the Pixel because it doesn’t have headphones in the box.
Instead, I’m suggesting that omitting the headphones from the box is a tacit admission that Google doesn’t really think it’s going to get iPhone owners to switch. It’s targeting other Android users instead, users who’ve probably been using USB-C with their phones for some time.
I think that’s a missed opportunity. I don’t know that the Pixel 4 would have been able to get a lot of iPhone switchers this year — especially since Apple caught up on camera quality with the iPhone 11 and 11 Pro. But I do know that Google is going to have to try to get them sometime.
I’m probably thinking too hard what it means for Google to have left out the headphones from the Pixel 4 box. But the more I consider it, the more I believe that when it came to the decision about whether or not to include them, Google wasn’t thinking hard enough.
What an ingenious idea! So much of tech progress is defined by speeds and feeds: faster processors and more RAM and whatnot. I love these moments when progress comes from sheer ingenuity. There’s obviously a lot of tech to be developed, but the core idea of this new kind of spacesuit is great:
These suits are still your standard air-pressurized suits, which Newman describes as engineering marvels, but still really hard to move in. That’s why she has been researching a new type of spacesuit altogether, one that provides the necessary atmospheric pressure not with air, but by pressing down on the person’s skin. With the right materials and patterns, the suit would adhere to the wearer’s body, compressing the skin and allowing the person to function normally.
Dan Seifert reviewed the Surface Laptop 15-inch. It is ...a 15-inch Surface Laptop, which means it’s big not not a powerhouse. If you just want a Surface with a big screen that doesn’t have the wingdings of the Surface Book, this is your jam.
Cameron Faulkner reviews the new Nest Mini. My advice: don’t buy it at full price. If past is precedent then this thing will be discounted left and right. You’ll trip over it walking into electronics stores. They’ll be used as packing material for Google hardware shipments. Google likes to drop the price on these things, is what I’m saying.
The ultrasonic sensor on the speaker is neat, but I’m waiting for Google to put a Motion Sense radar chip in these. It would work fine through fabric and be more useful that it is on a phone. I’m sort of confused why that didn’t happen on Nest products this year — maybe they wanted to but decided it wasn’t accurate enough and bailed and went to an ultrasonic sensor. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Running a full bitcoin node on a phone comes with its limitations. HTC recommends that you connect the phone to Wi-Fi and plug it into a power source while it’s running the full node, and you’ll also need to buy an SD card with a capacity of 400GB or more if you want the phone to be able to hold a full copy of the Bitcoin ledger. The Exodus 1S will also not be able to operate as a mining node.
A lot of hubbub was caused by the discovery that the Pixel 3's wireless charging was limited to 5W on third-party pads. Even though the device was clearly able to fill up at 10W with the Pixel Stand, other brands of chargers weren't able to supply that much power unless they were accepted into the Made by Google program. The Pixel 4 eschews this ridiculous restriction and can charge wirelessly at up to 11W, even on third-party Qi pads.
The Pixel 3's listing at the Wireless Power Consortium says it supports up to 5W, whereas the Pixel 4 can go up to 11W. We verified this on our end and were able to pull 8.4W on a third-party Qi charging pad that supports 9W. 9to5Google's Justin Duino got up to 10.8W in a separate test.
Left: 8.4W in our test on a 9W pad, measured with the Inware app. Right: Justin Duino's test.
This confirms that the Pixel 4 family has finally let go of that silly restriction regarding third-party chargers. So you no longer need the Pixel Stand or Google-approved hardware to fast-charge your phone wirelessly.
With both the Polestar 2 and Volvo XC40 set to launch sometime in 2020, there's still sometime before the first slate of Android Automotive cars make their way to consumers. Thankfully, Google is making it easier for developers to create apps for the infotainment system to ensure a smooth experience for early adopters. The company says it's rolling out a new version of the Android Automotive emulator that includes the Google Play Store.
That means they can test everything about an app, including downloading and installing it, without having to wait for a car actually running Android Automotive. With its close ties to Android Auto, Google adds that it's "simple" to port over any existing experiences to Android Automotive, with the company showing off examples from Amazon and Audioburst (seen below). All of this is good news if you plan to hop on Android Automotive early, since Google is taking the right steps to ensure the system has a compelling third-party ecosystem at launch. The lower barrier of entry may mean you'll also see apps from more than just the big names like Spotify.
Some third-party Android Automotive apps
Google
The company also has its eyes on the future. In May, Google said that it eventually plans to allow third-party developers to create more than just media apps. The company hasn't said when that will happen, but at some point, dev shops will be able to port their navigation and communication platforms over as well.
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.
Something weird has happened over the past year: I’ve kind of fallen in love with the Surface Pro. After debating its “lapability,” its lack of USB-C ports, and its staid design, I’ve used the Surface Pro 6 on and off as a regular laptop for nearly 12 months now. I’ve been trying to think of why I’ve picked the Surface Pro over the many other laptops I’ve also been testing, and it comes down to a unique mix of hardware. It’s small and light enough to slip into a variety of bags when I travel, and I can transform it into different modes so I can work on trains, planes, and everywhere else. These are all things Surface Pro owners have known for years, it just took me a little longer to discover them myself.
So when I picked up the Surface Pro 7 last week for this review, it felt very familiar. I called the Surface Pro 6 a familiar bet last year, and this time around the Pro 7 is an equally familiar bet. You could now place four year’s worth of Surface Pro devices next to each other, and they’d all look identical. This is yet another minor refresh for the Surface Pro line, and the design I really want on this hardware (slimmer display bezels, rounded edges, and built-in LTE) is coming next month with the Qualcomm-powered Surface Pro X.
Thankfully, Microsoft has finally added USB-C this time around and the performance and general usability has improved as you’d expect with the latest generation processors and hardware. I just wish the Surface Pro 7 looked like a Surface Pro X with an Intel chip inside.
The new Surface Pro 7 starts at $749 this year, which is $150 less than last year’s base model. Microsoft dropped the Intel Core i3 model last year, and bumped the RAM up to a reasonable 8GB. Sadly, this year we’re back to the Core i3 base model with 4GB of RAM and 128GB of storage. I’ve been testing a Core i5 model with 8GB of RAM and 256GB of storage ($1,199), and it’s hard to recommend a Core i3 model with just 4GB of RAM. For most people, the $899 Core i5 with 8GB of RAM and 128GB of storage should be sufficient, providing you’re mostly using cloud storage options. You’ll need to step up to the $1,199 model I’ve been testing for a black variant — the base versions are only available in silver.
Display: 12.3-inch, 2736 x 1824 (267 PPI) touchscreen, 3:2 aspect ratio
Dimensions: 292 mm x 201 mm x 8.5 mm
Weight: 1.7lbs (i3 and i5) 1.74lbs (i7)
Processor: Intel Core i3, i5, or i7
RAM: Up 16GB LPDDR4x (non-upgradable)
Storage: Up to 1TB SSD
Wireless: Wi-Fi 6: 802.11ax compatible, Bluetooth® 5.0. No LTE option.
Like always with the Surface Pro, the keyboard isn’t bundled so you’ll also need to spend at least $129.99 on a Surface Type Cover. Without it you’re just getting a tablet, and it’s definitely not the primary way you’ll use the Surface Pro 7. Microsoft also sells covers with Alcantara fabric for $159.99, and there are a few new color options this year. I’ve been testing the Poppy Red Type Cover, which looks like a fall mix of red and orange. Combined with the Type Cover, the realistic entry price is $878.99 for the Core i3 model. You can also purchase an optional Surface Pen for $99.99. All told, the rig I’ve been testing tallies up to two pennies shy of $1,360.
Much like the Surface Pro 6, the hardware remains very similar on the outside. The big new addition on the Surface Pro 7 is USB-C. It’s been a long time coming, but sadly it doesn’t include Thunderbolt 3 so it’s limited to USB 3.1 speeds (10Gbps). I’m disappointed Microsoft still hasn’t made the switch to Thunderbolt 3, as the dream of using this as a single machine and hooking it up to an external GPU and monitor just isn’t here yet. The USB-C port does let you hook up an external monitor directly, or you can plug into one of the USB-C docks that have flooded the market to get more ports. Naturally, you can also use this to charge the Surface Pro 7 with the same USB-C charger you use on your Android phone, or to attach accessories. Microsoft still includes its regular Surface Connect magnetic charging port, too so all older chargers and accessories will work just fine.
With most of the hardware unchanged from the outside, it’s really the internals of the Surface Pro 7 that have changed once again this year. Microsoft has placed Intel’s 10th Gen processors inside the Pro 7, and you can pick between a Core i3, Core i5, or Core i7 variant. I’ve been using the Surface Pro 6 with an 8th Gen Core i7 over the past year, and I’ve been impressed with its performance. It’s equally impressive here, and the Surface Pro 7 remains silent even during times when I pushed it with some video editing.
I’ve also noticed that instant on seems to finally be working with the Surface Pro 7. I’ve heard promises of being able to stop working and instantly resume hours later in the past but I’ve found that most Surface Pro models simply go into a deep hibernation after just a few hours of not being used. Even the quick resume on the Surface Pro 6 wasn’t always snappy as you’d have to wait for the Windows Hello camera to wake up occasionally. The Surface Pro 7 feels different and far more responsive. Every time I’ve left it for a few hours, it instantly wakes and Windows Hello logs me in before I’ve even got the kickstand fully in position.
Every smart device now requires you to agree to a series of terms and conditions before you can use it — contracts that no one actually reads. It’s impossible for us to read and analyze every single one of these agreements. But we started counting exactly how many times you have to hit “agree” to use devices when we review them since these are agreements most people don’t read and definitely can’t negotiate.
As with other Windows 10 computers, the Surface Pro 7 presents you with multiple things to agree or decline upon setup.
The mandatory policies, which agreement is required to use the laptop are:
Windows 10 License Agreement
A Microsoft account for sign in (this can be bypassed if you don’t connect the computer to the internet during setup)
In addition, there are a slew of optional things to agree to:
Activity History
OneDrive back up
Office 365
Cortana (which allows Microsoft to access your location, location history, contacts, voice input, speech and handwriting patterns, typing history, search history, calendar details, messages, apps and Edge browsing history)
Device Privacy settings: online speech recognition, Find My Device, Inking and Typing, Advertising ID, Location, Diag data, Tailored experiences
Add it all up and you have two mandatory agreements and eleven optional ones.
On the Surface Pro 6 you have to tap the power button to get it to wake up, but on the Pro 7 it just resumes instantly when you fold open the keyboard. This is a great usability improvement, but it also means Microsoft has tweaked the way this device goes into hibernation. On last year’s Surface Pro 6 it would hold in a standby state for six hours, allowing you to instantly resume. With the Surface Pro 7, it will hold in standby for a massive 72 hours.
The most obvious tradeoff for this constant quick resume feature is battery life. I left the Surface Pro 7 with 86 percent battery life at 11AM one day, and resumed using it nine hours later at 8PM to find it had 80 percent battery left. That’s less than one percent per hour, and definitely worth the small drain tradeoff for instant wake. The Surface Pro 7 also has a quick charge feature, allowing you to get to 80 percent battery life in an hour. I found it takes roughly an hour and 40 minutes to get to full charge from nothing at all.
Speaking of battery life, I haven’t seen any major improvements this generation. On average I’d get around 7 to 8 hours of battery life using a mix of apps like Chrome, Word, Discord, Twitter, Spotify, and more. If I watched more web video, or graphically intensive apps / web pages then this could drop to around 6 hours.
That’s practically the same as my experience with last year’s Surface Pro 6. I’ve been using that device regularly, and it’s mostly enough to cover you for a day of work but you’ll always need the charger with you just in case. I’m hoping the Surface Pro X will offer the ability to not have to carry around a charger as much, and here’s hoping that Microsoft improves the main Pro hardware next time around.
I wrote last year that the Surface Pro deserves a bigger refresh, and it still does. I still love this hardware, and being able to squeeze into a tight train seat and work using full desktop apps is still a big selling point for me. But the Surface Pro X has left me feeling more excited, and it makes the Surface Pro 7 feel even more dated. I want to see a Surface Pro 8 with slimmer bezels, a rounded chassis, built-in LTE, and removable SSDs, all with the power and legacy app compatibility that Intel’s processors provide.
The Surface Pro 7 is still best in class, and it’s undoubtedly the 2-in-1 to beat, but there’s more that Microsoft could do here. I do wonder if Microsoft has been waiting on Intel to get its act together on 10nm and beyond, and perhaps opted for the Surface Pro X design with Qualcomm instead. Either way, the usability of the Surface Pro 7 has certainly improved with quick resume and USB-C this year, but things like the clever Surface Slim Pen that slots into the Type Cover on the Surface Pro X just aren’t here. It’s all too familiar.
The Surface Pro X looks like it’s now attempting to set the stage in terms of raw hardware for competitors to catch up to, and we’ll now need to see if the Pro X can even come close to matching the performance of the Surface Pro 7. That’s highly unlikely, which will leave the Surface Pro 7 needing to catch up to the design of the Surface Pro X next year.
For now, the Surface Pro 7 still offers everything you’d expect from a Surface Pro, but in a hardware package that’s in need of a little attention. I love the versatility of the Surface Pro 7 hardware, but the Surface Pro X represents the future of this 2-in-1. I just wish the future was here now.
Vox Media has affiliate partnerships. These do not influence editorial content, though Vox Media may earn commissions for products purchased via affiliate links. For more information, see our ethics policy.
The Pixel 4 is set to go on sale this week, and if you buy one, you’ll be sure to get the Pixel with the best processor, camera, and Assistant features. But just because it’s the latest thing doesn’t mean it’s the greatest—nor that you should run out and drop nearly a thousand bucks on one. The Pixel 4 and 4 XL certainly bring a whole bunch of new tricks to the Pixel’s bag, but are the new parts and paraphernalia worth an upgrade or a switch?
Specs: As always, Google has upgraded nearly every component that matters in the Pixel 4 and Pixel 4 XL. You’ll get a new processor in the Snapdragon 855, 50 percent more RAM (6GB vs 4GB), and a new second telephoto lens for the rear camera, so zoomed shots and portraits will look better. You’ll also get a bigger battery in the Pixel 4 XL (3,700mAh vs 3,430mAh) and a slightly bigger screen in the smaller Pixel 4 (5.7-inch vs 5.5-inch) versus the Pixel 3. The Pixel 4 also features a 90Hz refresh rate for smoother scrolling and swiping.
Features: There are two major new features in the Pixel 4 XL: Motion Sense and Face unlock. Face unlock replaces the rear fingerprint scanner with a Face ID-style 3D camera for secure facial recognition, and Motion Sense lets you control certain actions on your phone (such as snoozing alarms) without touching the screen. You also get the new speedier Google Assistant and a new Recorder app that transcribes everything you record using live AI. You also get a handful of new camera features, most notably Astral mode (for snapping pics of stars), live HDR+, and Dual Exposure for controlling exposure and tone mapping.
Unique color: Oh So Orange
What’s not so great
Specs: Design-wise, the Pixel 4 isn’t a huge improvement over the Pixel 3, but if you hated the Pixel 3 XL’s notch or love square camera bumps, the new look will be an improvement. Still, it pales in comparison to the Galaxy Note 10 and iPhone 11 Pro. There a few other head-scratching deficiencies: the battery has been reduced from 2,915mAh in the Pixel 3 to 2,800mAh in the Pixel 4. You still have the same 64GB and 128GB base storage with no expandable memory slot. And in addition to the lack of a headphone jack, Google isn’t including a pair of USB-C earbuds in the box this time around. The Pixel 4 also doesn’t have the 3’s dual front camera, though the remaining camera retains the ability to take wide-angle selfies.
Features: In my testing, Motion Sense worked very well, but it’s limited to switching music tracks, snoozing alarms, dismissing timers, and silencing calls. That’s a pretty small feature set, but there is a ton of potential going forward. Whether the Pixel 4 actually realizes it is another story. Face unlock also works well, though Google warns that someone could use your face to unlock your phone even if your eyes are closed (i.e., you’re sleeping). Granted, a bad actor could also use your finger to unlock your phone when you’re not fully conscious, but facial unlock is supposed to be virtually impenetrable. So this is a pretty big hole—and one that’s not present on the iPhone.
Michael Simon/IDG
What’s coming to older Pixels
Google has announced that “a version of” Night Sight’s new astral photography feature (that lets you snap pictures of stars) will make an appearance on the Pixel 3 and 3a. However, the new Neural Core on the Pixel 4 likely means the feature won’t be as good on older phones. Presumably the new Google Assistant and Recorder app will also be making their way to older Android phones, but Google hasn’t announced their arrival yet.
Buying advice
If you have to have the latest of everything, this is the phone to buy. However, with a very high price tag, few groundbreaking features, and a couple of curious deficiencies, you might also want to consider the discounted Pixel 3—or possibly wait to see what the Pixel 4a brings next year.
Specs: Aside from the slightly slower processor and less RAM, the biggest difference between the Pixel 4 and Pixel 3 (as well as the other Pixels) is a single rear camera lens. You also won’t be getting the Motion Sense or Face unlock features. And while the displays are very similar in size, the Pixel 4’s 90Hz refresh rate makes them feel way faster.
Features: Motion Sense and Face unlock are missing on the 3, as is the new Assistant and Recorder app, at least for the time being. As far as the camera goes, Live HDR+ and Dual Exposure are MIA as well.
What isn’t on newer models
Unlike the Pixel 4, the Pixel 3 has a fingerprint sensor on the back and a dual selfie camera. It also features dual front-firing stereo speakers and a bigger battery in the 3 XL. And you’ll get free unlimited storage of your photos in original quality through January 31, 2022. (The Pixel 4 only offers free storage in high quality unless you pay for extra Google One space.)
Unique color: Not Pink
Buying advice
Unless you have to have Motion Sense, you should consider the Pixel 3, especially if you can get it for the current $300 off sale that Google is offering through its online store. You’re not giving up too much speed, and the extra camera benefits on the Pixel 4 won’t leave you with FOMO. And as time goes by, some of the 4’s unique features, such as the new Google Assistant, are sure to make their way to the Pixel 3.
The Pixel 3a is Google’s budget Pixel phone, so you’re not getting the latest of anything. So forget speed and glass: The Pixel 3a has a mid-range Snapdragon 670 processor, Full HD display, plastic back, and isn’t IP rated for water resistance (though Google says they can withstand splashes). And while the camera on the Pixel 3a is practically identical to the one of the Pixel 3, the 3a is missing the dedicated Pixel Visual Core image signal processor, so some of the finer computational adjustments on Night Sight and other features won’t be available.
What isn’t on newer models
A headphone jack! The Pixel 3a is the only Pixel phone Google sells with a 3.5mm headphone jack. Also the plastic back means the 3a is lighter and a bit more durable than the all-glass Pixel 3 and 4.
Unique color: Purple-ish
Buying advice
The Pixel 3a isn’t just the cheapest way to get into a current Google phone, it’s also a great Android phone in its own right. For $399, you get a nice OLED display, a great camera, and of course the Google promise of three years of Android updates. And it’s one of the few remaining phones to have a headphone jack. Even without the latest specs, it’s still a very, very good phone for $399.
The Pixel 2 doesn’t have wireless charging, which was introduced on the Pixel 3. Both phones also have smaller displays compared to their Pixel 3 and 4 counterparts (5 inches on the Pixel 2 and 6 inches on the Pixel 2 XL). It has slightly lower IP67 water resistance versus IP68 on the 3 and 4, so you can only dunk it in a meter of water rather than 1.5 meters. And it may or may not receive Android 11 next year since Google only guarantees two years of updates.
What isn’t on newer models
The Pixel 2’s aluminum back makes it more durable than the glass on the Pixel 3 and later. You’re also getting front-facing stereo speakers, which Google abandoned on the Pixel 4. And while the Pixel 2 doesn’t have any features that the other Pixels don’t have, as the first phone with the Pixel Visual Core ISP, many of the Pixel 3’s camera features work just as well here.
Unique color: Kinda Blue, Black & White
Buying advice
I wouldn’t recommend paying anything more than $250 for a Pixel 2 (and even that might be too much), but if you’re on an extremely tight budget and really want a Pixel phone, a $200 refurb will be a good option.
The original Pixel is missing water resistance and wireless charging, the XL model has a tiny 5.5-inch display, it has an outdated design, and it probably won’t be receiving any more Android updates since its three-year guarantee is up. It also has a paltry 32GB of base storage, half as much as the Pixel 3a.
What isn’t on newer models
Like the Pixel 3a, the original Pixel has a headphone jack, which is missing on all of the other models. Google originally offered free original quality photo storage in Google Photos for all Pixel users, but it’s not clear if that promotion will still be applicable.
Unique color: Very Silver, Really Blue
Buying advice
I wouldn’t recommend an original Pixel in 2019 unless you can get it free—and even then you might want to consider something newer.
Note: When you purchase something after clicking links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. Read our affiliate link policy for more details.
We’ve known since the spring of last year that Amazon Alexa and Google Home smart speakers can eavesdrop on owners, and even phish them via voice. However, new research shows that new malicious apps with these capabilities continue to be approved by both companies.
The two vulnerabilities, demonstrated in videos below, occur because both companies make their speakers smarter by allowing third-party developers to create apps or “skills” for them. Apple’s HomePod is safe because the company doesn’t allow this type of third-party access…
Both Amazon and Google have deployed countermeasures every time, yet newer ways to exploit smart assistants have continued to surface.
The latest ones were disclosed today, after being identified earlier this year by Luise Frerichs and Fabian Bräunlein, two security researchers at Security Research Labs (SRLabs), who shared their findings with ZDNet last week.
Both the phishing and eavesdropping vectors are exploitable via the backend that Amazon and Google provide to developers of Alexa or Google Home custom apps.
These backends provide access to functions that developers can use to customize the commands to which a smart assistant responds, and the way the assistant replies.
The way third-party apps should work is that the microphones are active for only a short time after the smart speaker asks the user a question. For example, if I tell Alexa to ask my supermarket app to add something to the basket, the app will check my order history for the exact product details, then Alexa will tell me what it found and ask me to confirm that’s what I want. It will then activate the Echo Dot’s microphone for a short time while it waits for me to say yes or no. If I don’t reply within a few seconds, the microphone is switched off again.
However, malicious apps can leave the microphone activated — and recording what it hears — for much longer. It’s achieved by using a special string that creates a lengthy pause after a question or confirmation, the mic remaining on during this time.
The “�. ” string can also be used […] for eavesdropping attacks. However, this time, the character sequence is used after the malicious app has responded to a user’s command.
The character sequence is used to keep the device active and record a user’s conversation, which is recorded in logs, and sent to an attacker’s server for processing.
In that way, smart speakers can eavesdrop on anything said while the mic is still on.
Alternatively, the long pause can be used to make an owner think they are no longer interacting with the app. At that point, a phishing attempt can be made.
The idea is to tell the user that an app has failed, insert the “�. ” to induce a long pause, and then prompt the user with the phishing message after a few minutes, tricking the target into believing the phishing message has nothing to do with the previous app with which they just interacted.
For example, in the videos below, a horoscope app triggers an error, but then remains active, and eventually asks the user for their Amazon/Google password while faking an update message from Amazon/Google itself.
This type of attack would not be possible on HomePod because the only way a third-party app can interact with Siri is via Apple’s own APIs. Apps have no direct access.
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19308787/header_command_line_option_32x.png)
:format(webp)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/65515095/akrales_190930_3688_0251.0.jpg)
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19300614/akrales_190930_3688_0229.jpg)
:format(webp):no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19300619/akrales_190930_3688_0280.jpg)
Christopher Hebert/IDG
