Kalakshar US

Last year was a major one for Microsoft’s Surface lineup, thanks to the launch of Copilot+ AI PC initiative, as well as surprisingly capable Arm-powered Surface Pro and Surface Laptop models. But aside from the addition of OLED and Qualcomm’s new Snapdragon chips, the overall design for those Surface machines didn’t really evolve much. That changes this year, as Microsoft has announced smaller versions of its Surface family: A 12-inch Surface Pro hybrid tablet and a 13-inch Surface Laptop. To be clear, they won’t be replacing the existing Surface devices, instead they’re more like compact siblings.

While they may sound only a bit smaller than the existing 13-inch Surface Pro and 13.8-inch Surface Laptop, Microsoft managed to cut off plenty of excess weight. The new 12-inch Surface Pro is a half-pound lighter than the 13-inch model, clocking in at 1.5 pounds, and the revised Surface Laptop is 0.3 pounds lighter (2.7 pounds). Notably, the Surface Pro is coming in 0.2 pounds lighter than the Surface Pro X, a device we praised for having “gorgeous” hardware that was betrayed by Windows’ terrible Arm support in 2019.

Both new Surface devices are powered by an eight-core version of the Snapdragon X Plus chip, which includes a 45 TOPS NPU and Adreno GPU, as well as 16GB RAM. As for storage, you can choose from either 256GB of 512GB UFS (Universal Flash Storage) options. Unlike the SSDs in other Surface devices, you won’t be able to upgrade the UFS storage down the line.

That’s not the only downgrade, either: The smaller screens of both devices are a significant step down from their larger siblings. The Surface Pro’s 12-inch LCD sports a 2,196 by 1,464 resolution, which is only slightly better than 1080p, and maxes out at a 90Hz refresh rate. The 13-inch Surface Pro, meanwhile, offers more pixels per inch with a 2,880 by 1,920 resolution, up to 120Hz refresh rate, and an optional OLED upgrade. As for the smaller Surface Laptop, it sports a simple 1080p 60Hz LCD. The 13.8-inch Surface Laptop has a sharper 2,304 by 1,536 LCD that can hit up to 120Hz.

Microsoft has also given up on using the Surface Connect port with these devices, opting instead to rely on USB-C charging alone. The Surface Pro and Surface Laptop both have two USB-C/USB 3.2 ports, which support 45W and 60W fast charging, respectively. There’s no USB power adapter bundled with the Surface Pro, unfortunately, but the Surface Laptop still comes with a 45W charger of its own. Similarly, the Laptop is the only new machine with a USB Type-A connection and a headphone jack.

The 12-inch Surface Pro starts at $800, which is technically $200 less than the retail price of the 13-inch model, but oddly enough that version is currently on sale for $800 as well. As usual, you’ll have to buy the Surface Keyboard separately, which tacks on another $149 to your Surface Pro purchase. Microsoft says it’s reimagined the Surface Keyboard for the 12-inch tablet, so its typing experience may be different this time around.

The 13-inch Surface Laptop starts at $900, but in another curious twist the larger model is also currently on sale for $800 (down from $1,000). Perhaps Microsoft is betting some people will opt for the new hardware simply because it’s more compact. We’ll have to test both machines to see if their spec downgrades are worth the lighter weight.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/computing/laptops/microsoft-unveils-smaller-surfaces-a-12-inch-surface-pro-tablet-and-a-13-inch-surface-laptop-130030983.html?src=rss 

Since arriving in 2020, the Backbone One has helped popularize dedicated mobile game controllers, the kind you might use for streaming services like Xbox Cloud Gaming and NVIDIA GeForce Now, remote play apps, emulators or any smartphone game you’d rather play with buttons and joysticks instead of your fingers. While you can always clip your phone to a PlayStation or Xbox controller paired over Bluetooth, telescopic gamepads like the One tend to be more ergonomic, creating a Nintendo Switch-style shape by clamping around your device at both ends. Backbone is far from the only company making these things now, but the One is still among the most frequently recommended options on the market — Engadget’s own Mat Smith gave it a favorable review back in 2022.

After releasing several iterations of the One, Backbone is now unveiling its first real follow-up: the Backbone Pro. The new device comes with many of the design upgrades you might expect, from comfier grips and smoother joysticks to larger triggers and quieter face buttons. But it also supports Bluetooth, which means it can unhook from your phone entirely and work with PCs, iPads, smart TVs and the like. Backbone has built a few new features for its companion app as well, including one called “FlowState” that lets you quickly connect to previously paired devices from one menu.

“[The Pro] is meant to be a premium device for anyone who wants to play games on any screen,” Backbone CEO Maneet Khaira said during a briefing in New York City last month. “Our idea was really, we want to make one device for all of gaming.”

After using the Backbone Pro for the past few days, I can squint and see the future Khaira has in mind, and the controller itself clearly feels more premium than its predecessor (which will remain available). But at $170, the device will be prohibitively expensive for some. That’s Xbox Elite territory for a controller still mainly aimed at smartphones. Plus, as with the One, some the gamepad’s perks are locked behind a Backbone+ subscription, which tacks on another $40 per year.

A better Backbone

You really need to buy the Backbone Pro as a multi-device controller for it to make the most sense as a purchase. Used strictly with a phone, however, it’s a definitive upgrade over the Backbone One. This is most obvious in the grips, which are considerably thicker and more grooved than before. They fill out and hug your palms much more naturally as a result, which keeps the design comfier to hold over time. They’re also coated in a soft, lightly textured matte plastic that seems better at fending off sweat.

The concave joysticks are significantly taller and have a grippier “ring” around the top. They don’t use magnetic Hall effect sensors to resist drift long-term, which is annoying at this price, but they’re tight and tangibly smoother. Khaira says the Pro uses the same joystick component as Microsoft’s Xbox Elite controller and Sony’s DualSense Edge; indeed, the sticks don’t feel all that different than the ones on a full-size gamepad. Like other “pro” controllers, you can also remap buttons and fine-tune the joysticks’ and triggers’ dead zones in the Backbone app, then assign those tweaks to different profiles.

The face buttons still aren’t super quiet but feel distinctly less clicky and stiff, with a smoother finish and deeper sense of travel. Along those lines, the triggers are wider and fuller — my large-ish fingers can rest on them without hanging off, which wasn’t the case with the One. The shoulder buttons are longer as well, while the menu buttons are less flush and easier to reach. The D-pad is similarly firm and precise but now has a glossier coating. There’s also a pair of customizable back buttons, which rest right against your ring fingers but haven’t caused any accidental presses in my testing.

The fatter grips make the design taller than the One, but not much wider, and it’s still about 80 grams lighter than a typical Xbox or PlayStation pad at 199g. As before, the Pro comes with adapters that hold different-sized phones steady in place, with or without a case. I’ve experienced no wobbling using an iPhone 15 Plus with Apple’s Clear Case on. There’s still a built-in headphone jack and pass-through charging port, though the actual connector is USB-C only, so the controller won’t work with older Lightning-based iPhones. Since the Pro needs its own battery to play wirelessly, it sips a small amount of power to recharge whenever you top up a connected phone. Overall, Backbone says the Pro can last up to 40 hours; I haven’t been able to perform a full rundown test, but the battery hasn’t given me reason to doubt that estimate in the few days I’ve spent with the device. 

Looking past the phone

You can quickly connect the Backbone Pro to new devices from this menu in Backbone’s app.

Pairing the Backbone Pro with other devices wirelessly is largely straightforward. There’s a dedicated button at the bottom of the controller that puts it into pairing mode, and the app prompts you to connect to all your other screens upon setup. Once you connect to a new device for the first time, the Pro remembers it, and that information is relayed in the app. When you want to play on one of those devices again, you simply tap a menu in the app, select the device and hit “connect.” As long as that device has Bluetooth active, it’ll immediately reconnect. You need to have your phone hooked into the Pro’s USB-C port to swap devices via the app, but I’ve had few hiccups bouncing from screen to screen otherwise.   

You can see how the Pro lines up with the multi-screen vision brands like Xbox are pushing. I can launch a Game Pass stream of Clair Obscur on my phone while my wife has the TV, then move it to the Fire TV Stick when she’s all set. I can start a Balatro session on my PC and carry it to my iPad through Steam Link. I don’t have to change my controller at any point. I don’t have to fiddle with any buttons to pair with the next thing I want to use — I just pop in my phone, select the device and go. I can even pick up right where I left off in a cloud stream, provided I swap devices within a few minutes. The Pro isn’t the only controller that lets you game like this, of course, but its phone-friendly design and fast pairing tech make it especially inviting to this sort of “play anywhere” approach.

Top to bottom: an Xbox Series X/S controller, the Backbone Pro and the Backbone One.

There are a few issues once you look closer, though. One is simply that the Pro lacks the proprietary tech needed to pair with an Xbox, PS5 or Switch. That’s not necessarily Backbone’s fault, but when it pitches the Pro as a controller for “all of gaming,” it has to ignore the main way tons of people actually play games.

Second, for as much as I like the Pro compared to other mobile gamepads, it still can’t help but feel cramped next to more traditional alternatives. The right joystick constantly brushes up against the bottom of my thumb, for instance, because it has to sit right below the face buttons. The triggers may be deeper, but they don’t have the same travel as a standard console pad. The Pro is still comfy, still capital-N Nice, and it’s great if you use your phone for gaming often. But an Xbox or PlayStation controller just has more room to work with.

Third, all of this can get expensive in a hurry. The Pro’s price tag is already steep. To take full advantage of cloud services like Xbox Cloud Gaming or GeForce Now, you have to pay a subscription fee. Same goes for Apple Arcade. You can’t remote play without owning a console or gaming PC. And Backbone restricts some app features to its own membership program, most notably the ability to launch cloud-based games directly from the app. So there are questions of what the market for a device like this actually is: Just how much do hardcore gamers, the people who’d buy a $170 controller, play on their phone? How much do they need a multi-device controller when they likely own an Xbox or PS5 pad already? Who really wants a subscription for a video game controller?

You can organize and start up games from the Backbone app, but the ability to launch games from cloud services like Xbox Cloud Gaming and NVIDIA GeForce Now directly in the app (annoyingly) requires a subscription fee.

That aside, the app still looks clean, and it still lets you organize your games or streaming apps in one central hub. The search function works well, allowing you to filter games by different platforms. When you select a game, it helpfully shows you which platforms you can play it through. 

Backbone is also adding a new built-in emulator with its next update. It can run NES, SNES, Game Boy, Game Boy Advance and Nintendo 64 games today, though the company says it’s testing PlayStation 1 and PlayStation Portable cores as well. Opening a ROM in the app is simple enough, and once you do, it’ll appear in your hub alongside the rest of your library. That said, you need a Backbone+ subscription to use the emulator, and it’s fairly barebones compared to an app like RetroArch, with no way to rewind, adjust resolution or manage multiple save states. I also experienced a few bugs with certain games, with one title not loading entirely. This is still a neat idea, but given that other more featured emulators are available for free, I can’t say it’s worth paying for today.

In an ideal world, the Backbone Pro would be a next-gen version of One rather than a step-up model priced $70 higher. The hardware is better in meaningful ways, and being able to use it across devices is genuinely convenient. But it’s certainly not cheap. There’s a decent chance the price was influenced by the looming effects of President Trump’s tariff policy, but that still leaves the device well above other capable mobile gamepads today. If you’ve got the cash and spend hours gaming across your phone and other screens, the Pro is still well worth a look. It’s one of the best in its niche. It’s just hard to call it a great value.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/gaming/backbone-pro-hands-on-a-pricey-controller-for-more-than-just-your-phone-130034399.html?src=rss 

Roku’s streaming player lineup is a little easier to understand in 2025 than ever — but it’s still a bit confusing. With the release of the Roku Streaming Stick and the Roku Streaming Stick Plus, there are now three streaming sticks and one set-top box in the company’s streaming player family. Express models and ones with the plus symbols are no longer in the mix. The Roku Ultra set-top box is the most expensive at $100. The 2021 Streaming Stick 4K goes for $50, while the Streaming Stick and the Streaming Stick Plus cost $30 and $40, respectively. After reviewing the Streaming Stick Plus and comparing it to other streamers, I think it packs a decent amount of power (and Roku’s convenient interface) into a small dongle.

The Roku Streaming Stick Plus vs the Roku Streaming Stick 4K

Arguably the Streaming Stick Plus’ biggest competition comes from within its family. The Streaming Stick 4K and the Streaming Stick Plus both support 4K image quality, despite the Plus not having the term in its name. The Stick 4K also supports Dolby Vision and has a longer-range Wi-Fi connection. Both connect through the Wi-Fi 5 standard, but the “4K” model has a built-in Wi-Fi extender within its USB power cable.

At this point, the Stick 4K is four years older than the Plus, and the new stick benefits from a few technological upgrades. For one, the Plus streamier is smaller thanks to the lack of Wi-Fi extender and power adapter. Roku’s math claims the dongle itself is 35 percent smaller than the competition — but honestly none of these sticks are particularly large. I found that it was indeed smaller than the Amazon Fire TV Stick I tested. But the size reduction doesn’t make a huge difference in everyday use — especially since they hide behind most TVs.

The Roku Streaming Stick 4K (left) with it’s cable, Wi-Fi extender and dongle. The Roku Streaming Stick Plus (right) with it’s cable and dongle.

Another upgrade is a little more significant: better power efficiency. Now you can use your TV’s USB port to power the device instead of a wall adapter. The Plus doesn’t even come with an adapter in the box, making it a more travel-ready package. Older Roku sticks allowed you to do this (and the 4K model can use USB power on some TVs) but this is the first 4K-enabled device that Roku actually recommends using without a power adapter. Since you don’t need an open wall outlet nearby, the dongle will prove more flexible. It certainly would have come in handy during a recent trip in which my hotel room’s TV was about 12 feet from the nearest available plug.

Both Sticks support Apple AirPlay and are compatible with Siri, Alexa and Google Assistant. They come with the same remote, which packs features like voice input and the ability to control the power and volume of your TV. They both showcase the same OS, with Roku’s playful, purple interface, which I particularly like for live and free programming — as I outlined in our streaming devices guide.

Performance

The Streaming Stick Plus is pretty fast for a $40 device. I have a Roku Ultra hooked up to another TV in my house and, when I performed the same actions on both, the Streaming Stick Plus was only a bit slower than the Ultra. For instance, Disney+ took a second or two to start on the Ultra, and just a half second or so longer on the Plus. Yes, there was a time difference, but the Streaming Stick Plus was never frustratingly slow.

I don’t think anyone honestly expects a streaming stick to perform at the same level as most recent smart TVs. My set is relatively new and side-by-side comparisons showed a minor disparity between a dongle and a bigger, built-in CPU. Take the Netflix menu, for example. It’s clear and crisp and vibrant via my TV’s native Netflix app, but the same page was markedly fuzzier and more pixelated when I opened it on the Roku device.

That said, I only noted a slight difference in quality between the two when a show was actually playing. Sweeping shots of the sumptuous-yet-blood-stained White House interiors in The Residence were only the slightest bit grainier on the Roku. True video connoisseurs may note the disparity, but those who are just here to see Detective Cupp unnerve all the suspects won’t likely notice.

Should you get the Roku Streaming Stick Plus?

Something the size of a tube of squashed lipstick can’t rival a good smart TV. But if you have an older screen or a cheaper set with a tedious interface, the Roku Streaming Stick Plus could make TV time more enjoyable. Comparable streaming sticks include Amazon’s Fire TV Stick 4K, which is $10 more at full price (though it’s often on sale). Between the two, I’d go with Roku’s Streaming Stick Plus, as Roku’s interface is far more helpful. This is also the stick I want to take with me on my next trip. I can plug it in at the Airbnb and, instead of logging in to whatever random apps the TV happens to have, I can watch more Doctor Who. I won’t have to worry about where the nearest outlet is and I’ll be spared the effort of typing in my stupidly long Disney+ password.

As for whether you should get this or Roku’s other 4K-enabled streaming stick, I’d go with this one. The Roku Streaming Stick Plus is $10 cheaper and four years newer. The fact that it’s powered by the TV means the dongle and the USB power cable fit out of sight so if you, like me, are opposed to the look of snaking wires everywhere, you’ll be pleased. Of course, if you have a TV that supports Dolby Vision or your Wi-Fi router is really far away from your TV, then you can go with the Streaming Stick 4K — that’s really the only major advantage that model has. Otherwise, the Streaming Stick Plus is a good pick for a cheap but modern streaming player.

This article originally appeared on Engadget at https://www.engadget.com/home/home-theater/roku-streaming-stick-plus-review-powered-by-the-tv-and-perfect-for-travel-130047601.html?src=rss