Category: Technology

After letting us drive a prototype around in the snow earlier this month, BMW has fully unveiled its all-new i3 electric vehicle. It’s a far cry from the original funky hatch launched way back in 2013, offering more of everything including power, range and space. It also looks like you’d hope a 3-series EV would: a sporty sedan, minus the polarizing grille on the gas-powered M3. 

The i3 uses BMW’s Neue Klasse platform and indeed borrows inspiration from the company’s Vision Neue Klasse concept unveiled in 2023. With motors on the front and rear in the 50 xDrive configuration, along with the 800-volt electrical system, it delivers a combined 463 HP and 476 lb-ft of torque, just a touch less than BMW’s G80 M3. 

That will make the BMW quick (the automaker didn’t say how quick yet), but it will also be efficient. BMW estimates that the i3 will go 440 miles on a charge according to EPA guidelines and offer quick energy replenishment as well via DC charging speeds up to 400kW — up to 30 percent faster than its previous Gen5 tech. The battery pack will also be directly integrated into the chassis to reduce weight and increase torsional rigidity, while allowing bidirectional charging so you’ll be able to use it as a battery on wheels to power your home in a blackout. 

Styling-wise, the i3 is much simpler up front with the grille and headlights incorporated as a single unit. A recess down the center of the hood draws your eye to the badge, while giving the EV muscle car allure. The side intakes add to that impression, as do the bulgy fenders, “Le Catellet Blue” metallic paint and optional lighting animations (Relaxed, Excited and Balanced).

On the tech side, the i3 supports BMW’s Digital Key Plus so you can open the doors or trunk with a smartphone or smartwatch. The interior, meanwhile, looks as futuristic as I’ve seen in any recent EV thanks to the 17.9-inch Panoramic Vision display that’s angled toward the driver, along with an optional 3D heads-up display. The system features a self-learning voice assistant with Amazon Alexa+ AI and supports customizable themes, colors and background images. It also includes a wireless charging pad for your smartphone or other devices.

Inside, you can choose between multifunction and M Sport seats trimmed in different themes, including imitation leather in Agave Green, Digital White, Castanea or Black, or an M Design World theme in Black Veganza with M Performtex material. Alternatively, you can go for the BMW Individual scheme with real black Merino leather. For controls, BMW is using a hybrid system with physical buttons for the hazard lights and parking brake and “Shy Tech” buttons on the steering wheel that activate only when required. 

BMW will start i3 production in August 2026 and deliveries later in the fall, with pricing set to be revealed around that time. From what we’ve seen so far it’s going to offer outstanding performance and range, but don’t expect it to be cheap.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/transportation/evs/bmws-i3-is-reborn-as-a-sporty-440-mile-range-ev-sedan-124614369.html?src=rss 

Ever since making the jump to the Nintendo Switch, there’s something that’s bugged me about practically every modern Pokémon game, a feeling that has only intensified after spending countless hours in Pokopia. For titles based in big, open worlds and filled with adorable polygonal characters and lovely music, why is nearly every pokémon still saddled with a call that sounds like a dial-up internet connection? 

As someone who played Pokémon Red and Blue at launch, I’m very aware that the origin of these sounds is tied directly back to those original titles on Game Boy, which was powered by an 8-bit SM83 processor from Sharp. Back then, it was a herculean challenge to fit the entire game into a single 512KB cartridge. So as a way to save space, the voice (or cry as they are more commonly known) of each of the original 151 Pokémon came from just 38 base cries, which then had their pitch or duration modified to create more unique sounds. 

Naturally, this tradition of lo-fi cries continued throughout Pokémon’s run on the Game Boy and Game Boy Advance and onto the Nintendo DS and 3DS. And despite the higher-res graphics we got in subsequent titles, the use of sprite-based icons and other nostalgic touches made those bitcrushed calls sound right at home. However, when the series moved to the Switch and Switch 2 and embraced larger 3D worlds, those cries began to feel disconnected, especially for newer players without years of nostalgia to draw from. 

The first issue is one of identifiability. They all kind of sound the same, especially in earlier titles like Red and Blue or Gold and Silver, where around one hundred new Pokémon are represented by just 30 base cries. Ideally, a monster’s voice would be just as recognizable as its silhouette. Unfortunately, the current lo-fi cries just don’t fit the bill. 

The second problem is that the continued use of the old-school cries feels out of place in the grand scheme of Pokémon. When you watch the Pokémon anime, monsters don’t use the same crunchy screams. Same goes for the movies, including big theatrical releases like Detective Pikachu. At this point, pretty much every new piece of Pokémon media except the games (and the TCG for obvious reasons) features proper voice acting, which sort of brings us to the biggest reasons to ditch the audio clips from the Game Boy era: Pokémon that actually say their name is just super fun and easy to understand. 

Sure, it’s a bit of a gimmick, but it works. Plus, it kind of resonates with the philosophy that many vexillologists hold that says flags should be simple enough for a child to draw. Kids can say “Charmander,” “Greninja” and even “Alomolola.” But there ain’t no way they are pronouncing this. For a game that’s intended to be played by younger audiences, having the reinforcement of hearing a pokémon say its name while also seeing it written out in text isn’t just easier to comprehend, it can also be a learning exercise. Also, just ask yourself, when you think of Squirtle, what do you hear in your head: this or this? 

Now, there are several reasons why Game Freak hasn’t made this leap already. The first is obviously money. Granted, localization costs only make up a fraction of the budget for a Pokémon game, but it’s still a lot of work to translate things for various regions across the world, especially with modern titles available in at least nine different languages. This includes adjusting the names of specific monsters to better suit a specific market. For example, in Japanese, Hitmonchan and Hitmonlee are named Ebiwalar and Sawamular as a tribute to some of the country’s most famous boxers. So when you consider the need to get different voice actors across the world to perform all of these variations, things get expensive. 

Furthermore, there’s an argument that creating a canonical voice for a main character like Victor or Gloria from Sword and Shield takes away from players’ ability to imagine their own. Pokémon is an RPG after all. However, I don’t think that reasoning flies when it comes to each monster’s individual cry, even though many of them have been upgraded or refined in recent years. Same goes for the idea that a Pokémon that says its name sounds less natural than whatever this is. At the end of the day, these monster calls are iconic, and the Pokémon devs know this, because they’ve given proper cries to characters like Pikachu and Eevee in certain situations.

Regardless, for a franchise that’s one of, if not the most valuable media property on the planet, I really hope that one day we can get proper vocal performances in Pokémon games, even if it costs Game Freak and Nintendo a little extra money. To be clear, I don’t hate the old 8-bit cries and I don’t think Game Freak needs to delete them entirely. They can simply be an alternate choice for anyone who prefers them over their actual voices. I just feel like after recently celebrating its 30th birthday, it’s time for Pokémon to move on and celebrate some of the voice acting that helped make the franchise so popular in the first place.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/nintendo/its-time-for-game-freak-to-finally-give-pokemon-some-proper-voice-acting-130000851.html?src=rss 

It’s hard for most people to justify spending $3,299 on a monitor, but creative pros will gladly do so if it makes their jobs easier. Apple’s 27-inch 5K Studio Display XDR is aimed straight at those folks and it costs considerably less than the company’s previous high-end monitor, the 6K Pro Display XDR.

Thanks to the Mini LED IPS panel, the Studio Display XDR has higher brightness and color accuracy than nearly any other monitor on the market. It also has tech that boosts contrast to outperform similar displays. With its unique combination of features, the Studio Display XDR isn’t as overpriced as you might think, and it has high appeal for me as a video editor. I do, however, wish it was bigger.

Design and features

If you’re familiar with Apple’s previous Studio Display, you’ll have a good idea of the Studio Display XDR’s design. The body has a high-quality brushed aluminum finish, with small holes across the top and bottom designed to vent heat from the built-in, nearly silent fan.

It has enough internal hardware to be a standalone computer, as it’s equipped with an A19 Pro processor and 12GB (!) of RAM — more than Apple’s new MacBook Neo laptop. That extra horsepower is required for all of the image processing, dimming algorithms, webcam operation and HDR tone-mapping.

A tilt- and height-adjustable stand was a cool $1,000 option on the more expensive Pro Display XDR, but it’s thankfully included with this new model. The stand’s motion is delightfully smooth, with just a slight amount of pressure required to move it up and down. However, it only offers four inches of height adjustment and no ability to swivel the screen. You can also get this monitor with a VESA mount instead at the same base price, in case you want to mount it on your own stand or a wall.

The Studio Display XDR comes with two high-speed 120Gbps Thunderbolt ports to connect your Mac, storage or another display, along with two 10Gbps USB-C inputs, but there’s no HDMI port in sight. One of the Thunderbolt ports supports 140W charging, which can replenish a 16-inch MacBook Pro at the maximum possible speed. Apple has also thrown in a Thunderbolt 5 cable that is thicker than any USB-C cable I’ve seen. The power cable also looks nice, but is not removable.

Up front, the monitor has surprisingly thick bezels (0.75 inches) that detract from the otherwise sleek design. In comparison, my ASUS ProArt PA32UCX display’s bezels are just a quarter of an inch thin. Built into the top bezel is a 12-megapixel camera with Apple’s Center Stage feature that keeps your face front and center during Zoom calls. Note that if you prefer less glare, you can get nano-texturing on the display for an extra $300.

The Studio Display XDR is designed mainly for use with Macs, and recent ones at that. Mac models with M1, M1 Pro, M1 Max, M1 Ultra, M2 and M3 chips only support this monitor at up to 60Hz — not the maximum 120Hz. Apple doesn’t mention support for Intel Macs or Windows PCs, but I tested the monitor on both and it worked fine at the 60Hz limit.

Image quality

Apple has largely stuck with Mini LED and quantum dot technology for its MacBook Pro laptop screens and monitors because of the higher brightness levels and lack of “burn in” compared to OLED displays. The tradeoff for that is lower contrast, as I explained here. Mini LED displays also show a phenomenon called “blooming” not present in OLED panels, which is caused by light bleed from neighboring pixels.

However, Apple has largely solved those issues on the Studio Display XDR by boosting the number of local dimming zones (individual LED backlights) to 2,304, four times as many as the XDR Display Pro. That allows not only more brightness, but higher contrast and minimal blooming.

This model doesn’t offer 6K like the Pro Display XDR, but its 5K resolution is still higher than most rivals. That’s a big benefit for designers, animators, photographers and others who want the sharpest image possible. The higher 120Hz refresh rate is also easier on the eyes and better for gaming. However, creators used to screens that are 32 inches or larger may be turned off by the Studio Display XDR’s smaller size.

Brightness is where this monitor really shines; XDR stands for “extended dynamic range,” after all. Apple promises a peak level of 1,000 nits in SDR and 2,000 nits in HDR mode. I was able to verify those claims: I measured 1,991 nits on a Calibrite colorimeter in a 25 percent window and 988 nits at full screen — making this the brightest monitor I’ve ever tested. When I watched HDR material on YouTube and Netflix graded for brightness levels over 1,000 nits, I didn’t see any of the highlight clipping that occurs on my 1,400-nit ASUS ProArt display.

What’s more, the Studio Display XDR’s 1,000,000:1 contrast ratio is among the highest of any non-OLED display (though not infinite like OLED displays). On top of that, I saw virtually no blooming with bright light points against black. Finally, this monitor has the best off-axis performance I’ve seen with very little drop in gamma even at fairly sharp viewing angles.

Color accuracy is also a strong point. Apple promises a Delta E of less than one, and my measurements (around 0.8) bore that out. And like the Pro Display XDR, this model has a true 10-bit IPS panel, which means you get one billion colors total. Apple notes that the Studio Display XDR is the first Apple monitor to include both the P3 wide color Adobe RGB primaries, unlocking “deeper greens and cyans than P3 alone,” it said in a white paper. For HDR work, it covers 81 percent of the challenging BT.2020 color gamut, which is excellent though a bit below some OLED monitors.

The Studio Display XDR can handle a variety of work thanks to the huge number of color profiles included with the display, which total 16 in all. Those include HDR profiles, P3 Digital Cinema, Photography, HDR photography, Design and Print and even Medical Imaging. To verify that, I tested it with several apps including Lightroom Classic and DaVinci Resolve, and was astounded by the color accuracy and brightness. Unlike some rivals, most notably ASUS, it doesn’t support Dolby Vision, however.

On top of being an excellent content creation monitor, the Studio Display XDR is solid for entertainment and gaming. I watched scenes from movies and TV shows including Spider-Man No Way Home, Game of Thrones and Tenet, and enjoyed the extra brightness, high color accuracy and contrast ratio that allowed me to see what the heck was going on in the Night King battle in GoT. For gaming I tried Cyberpunk 2077 for Mac, and the 120Hz refresh rate (it also supports Adaptive Sync 47-120Hz refresh rates), along with the brightness and color accuracy, makes it Apple’s best display yet for gaming.

Camera and speakers

Though it has the same name, the 12MP Center Stage webcam is much improved from the previous Studio Display. The resolution may be the same, but the new camera provides a much brighter and sharper image in dim conditions. However, to use the Desk View feature I needed to tilt the screen forward more than I’d like.

The built-in six speaker sound system is surprisingly good too, offering what is easily the best sound I’ve ever heard coming from a monitor. It supports Spatial Audio and Dolby Atmos sound as before, but now offers deeper bass. It still can’t match a dedicated soundbar or separate speakers, of course, but the audio on this display is clear and surprisingly loud.

Wrap-up

As I said at the outset of this review, Apple’s Studio Display XDR is overpriced, but not by a lot. It’s the brightest monitor I’ve measured and has among the highest number of dimming zones for a Mini LED display for maximum contrast. At the same time, it offers superb color accuracy out of the box, supports up to 5K 120Hz resolution and oozes quality. Few monitors in any category and price range, whether Mini LED or OLED, can boast all of that.

There are cheaper options that can do some of those things. If you prefer OLED, the ASUS ProArt PA27 4K model offers 1,000 nits of max brightness and similar color performance, with better contrast and double the refresh rate for $1,299. And if you want a bigger display that’s nearly as bright as the Studio Display XDR, ASUS also makes the $3,199 PA32UCG-K Mini LED 32-inch monitor with 1,600 nits peak brightness, albeit with half the number of dimming zones.

However, if you require the best image quality possible and don’t mind a 27-inch display, Apple’s Studio Display is the best choice. It will never be a mainstream product, but thanks to its versatility and better value than the Pro Display XDR, I think it will be a surprisingly popular option.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/computing/accessories/apple-studio-display-xdr-review-expensive-but-theres-no-monitor-like-it-120018426.html?src=rss