If you're the type who believes you can never have too much smartphone storage, you might be happy to hear that Apple may be planning on releasing an iPhone 13 model with up to 1TB of storage, as reported by 9to5Mac.
The claim is based on a new report from the investment firm Wedbush Securities, which notes a supply chain check that suggests the Cupertino company's next-generation iPhone will offer a 1TB storage for the first time.
At present, Apple's iPhone 12 Pro and iPhone 12 Pro Max models offer up 512GB of storage, and both are already quite expensive – we can only imagine how much an iPhone 13 Pro model with 1TB will end up costing.
This isn't the first time that an iPhone 13 with 1TB of storage has been mooted – the YouTube channel Front Page Tech made the same claim back in January.
In terms of iOS devices, Apple has offered a 1TB version of its iPad Pro since 2018, so it's entirely plausible that the company will eventually offer the same amount of storage on the iPhone.
Of course, we won't know for sure until Apple officially announces its new handsets later in the year. Thankfully, it seems that iPhone 13 is still tipped to be launching in September 2021 as normal.
Online genealogy company MyHeritage has a new tool that can help bring your family history to... life. Sort of.
Deep Nostalgia is a new AI-powered tool that can animate still photos of people by adding simple effects like smiles, nods and blinks. It can add movement to any old photograph, and is free to try, as long as you create an account with MyHeritage.
After uploading a photograph of a loved one, it's processed through the AI which adds a set of animations based on facial expressions of MyHeritage employees. The result – available in 10-20 seconds – is presented to you in the form of a very short video clip or gif.
A company called MyHeritage is now offering a new service, Called Deep Nostalgia, that can animate people in old photos creating a short video that looks like it was recorded while they posed and prepped for the portrait [read more: https://t.co/TvjAQdSf9A] pic.twitter.com/5Mn3YLgi6WFebruary 27, 2021
The AI has been licensed from Israeli company D-ID (which stands for 'de-identification') and is currently only capable of animating people's faces. Even multiple faces in a single photograph can be brought to life.
Whether the idea of bringing dead relatives to life is brilliant or creepy is, perhaps for you to decide. Even MyHeritage admits this can be polarizing.
"Some people love the Deep Nostalgia feature and consider it magical," MyHeritage states in the FAQ section on its Deep Nostalgia page, "while others find it creepy and dislike it. Indeed, the results can be controversial and it's hard to stay indifferent to this technology."
Deep Nostalgia went viral on Twitter over the weekend, with people keen on bringing the deceased loved ones to life. Some, however, took it a step further and tried it on photographs of historical statues... with some interesting results.
Here's Alexander the Great pic.twitter.com/djbnzszFM0February 28, 2021
If you'd like to try this out for yourself, head to the Deep Nostalgia website and set up a free account. You can upload up to five photos for free, but any more will require you to get a paid account. If you already have a Complete subscription with MyHeritage, you can use the service at no additional cost and upload unlimited photographs.
If you're worried about privacy, MyHeritage says it doesn't share photos with third parties and, as mentioned on the Deep Nostalgia's homepage, "photos uploaded without completing signup are automatically deleted to protect your privacy".
There’s no denying the monolithic success of Fortnite Battle Royale. Like a phoenix rising from the ashes, the mode once considered ancillary to Save the World – Fortnite’s co-op-centric horde mode that pitted players against waves of zombies – eclipsed it in no time at all.
In the years since, Fortnite has surpassed other battle royale giants like PUBG to become the undisputed leader in terms of player numbers, revenue and in-game events. It's a shame, then, that its crossover events with other franchises feel woefully tacked on.
In the long term, Epic Games' commitment to guest character inclusion in Fortnite usually ends up being a total misrepresentation of whoever’s in the spotlight at the time. Usually, these boil down to a character skin or two and a brief marketing window, nothing that will shake up Fortnite's status quo.
Fortnite admittedly did a fantastic job integrating Marvel and DC characters(Image credit: Epic Games)
Fortnite’s history with crossover content dates back almost three years at this point. Its first big collaboration was with Marvel to promote Avengers: Infinity War. In this event, a player lucky enough to find the iconic Infinity Gauntlet could transform into Thanos, the primary villain of the latter Avengers movies.
It was an interesting way for Epic to test the waters on future crossover events. The event was only available for a limited time, and it provided a unique, somewhat refreshing spin on the Fortnite formula in the form of a powerful and player-controlled threat on the map.
Fortnite continued to work with Marvel, offering skins of beloved characters like Iron Man, Captain America and Captain Marvel to name but a few, and these represented perhaps the peak of Fortnite’s crossover potential, as Chapter 2: Season 4 implemented a swathe of map changes alongside unique Marvel-themed items and powers.
It got more interesting when Epic Games went on to throw DC characters into the mix. Aquaman, Batman, The Flash et al are able to join the fray alongside or against Marvel’s best, technically making Fortnite the first official Marvel vs. DC crossover game. There is a problem with that, though, as I’ll get into later.
Things only grew increasingly puzzling from there. Fortnite began to pepper in crossovers and obtainable guest character skins from a plethora of different franchises in the following years. Many felt right at home on Fortnite’s chaotic, ever-changing island map, including Marvel’s own Deadpool, whose manic fourth-wall-breaking charm fit effortlessly into the game’s mayhem.
Others still felt incredibly bizarre. Additions like NFL players, God of War’s Kratos and Street Fighter’s Ryu and Chun-Li all feel remarkably out of place wielding weapons largely based on real-world guns.
V-Buck where it's due
Super Smash Bros. remains the undisputed king of the crossover(Image credit: Nibellion (Twitter))
I have to admit that if I was a child watching all this crossover chaos unfold, I would be beside myself with joy. Fortnite has intentionally marketed itself as a giant interactive toy box with its scattershot approach to crossovers. There’s something undeniably appealing about watching Stranger Things’ Hopper mow down The Joker with a minigun.
"Smash...shows how a developer can elevate a game by handling guest content with care. These games speak to something bigger than the individual characters - they are representing what makes those franchises so special and why people love them to this day."
Yet therein lies the issue – these lovable characters barely do anything that is distinctly associated with them. They act like any other outfit you can obtain in Fortnite, albeit originating from recognizable third-party brands. Some are graced with unique emotes at least, such as Chun-Li’s Lightning Kick and She-Hulk’s transformation. Nevertheless, I can’t see these guest appearances as anything other than a cynical cash grab.
For the sake of comparison, let’s look at another game that heavily features guest characters as paid downloadable content, that being Super Smash Bros. Ultimate. What does Smash do right that Fortnite doesn’t? Well, the key is in how these characters are represented.
Since Super Smash Bros. Brawl on the Wii, the series has had a steady focus on the inclusion of characters outside of Nintendo’s purview. Brawl kicked off the insanity in 2008 with Sonic the Hedgehog and Metal Gear’s Solid Snake.
2018’s Super Smash Bros. Ultimate exploded in terms of guest content. Since that game’s launch, characters like Joker from Persona 5, Steve from Minecraft and Final Fantasy VII’s infamous villain Sephiroth all made playable appearances.
Each of these characters is celebrated in Smash with painstaking attention to detail. Each features moves and abilities recognizable from their games of origin, and they’re always paired with a stage showcasing the game or series they’re from, alongside a suite of music tracks.
Smash, alongside other crossover-happy games like SoulCalibur 6 and Tekken 7 shows how a developer can elevate a game by handling guest content with care. These games speak to something bigger than the individual characters – they are representing what makes those franchises so special and why people love them to this day.
Meanwhile, Fortnite’s approach to guest characters smacks of throwing wads of cash at whatever’s popular at the moment. Given Fortnite’s insane success, Epic certainly has the financial power to do this. Sadly, the game time and again chooses a flavor-of-the-month junk food approach, just because it can.
Quantity over quality
Fortnite is capable of good crossovers, but it needs to try harder(Image credit: Epic)
I want to see Epic do better with its guest inclusions in Fortnite. It has the resources and manpower to be able to do so. I don’t want to play as Master Chief because “oh, hey, that’s Master Chief. I like Master Chief.” I want to play as him because I love Halo as a whole and want to be reminded of what makes that series so good in the first place. If I’m playing as Master Chief, I want movement to feel swift but decidedly heavy. I want to hear those shields pop when I’m low on health, ringing out that iconic warning klaxon.
"Fortnite could really benefit from featuring less crossovers with more content in each one. How cool would it be if Chun-Li could perform her iconic Lightning Kick attack to knock down structures in place of the familiar pickaxe?"
A 'less is more' approach could work wonders here. Fortnite could really benefit from featuring less crossovers with more content in each one. How cool would it be if Chun-Li could perform her iconic Lightning Kick attack to knock down structures in place of the familiar pickaxe?
How about a Halo themed event period where we can see the iconic ring on the horizon, with Covenant ships frequently flying over the island for an extra layer of fan immersion? To its credit, the actual Halo event did feature a recreation of the classic Blood Gulch map, but it was locked behind Fortnite’s Creative Mode and wasn’t hugely substantial.
If they’d have thrown in event-specific items and weapons like Overshields and Halo’s iconic arsenal, paired with that goosebump-inducing main theme, you’ve got a winner of a collab in my book.
The problem here, of course, is that Fortnite is a very different game compared to the likes of Super Smash Bros. Fortnite operates as a live service – a game that is being constantly updated with new content.
The quick turnover of Fortnite’s Battle Pass system leaves more substantial events with little room in the spotlight. Instead of giving crossover content more room to breathe, Fortnite is trapped in the perpetual live service cycle, ready to swap out content based on whatever the zeitgeist is.
As such, I’ve grown so very tired of Fortnite’s approach to crossover content, even when it’s representing characters and series I actually love. The bitesize nature of these inclusions feel like they come and go in a flash with little fanfare. That’s the exact opposite of what guest characters are supposed to achieve.
While I’ll always remember Super Smash Bros. Ultimate as the game that let me beat up Sephiroth with Terry Bogard in front of a Minecraft village, I’m worried that Fortnite’s legacy will be buried in a veritable heap of forgettable crossovers that the game could have done so much more with.
Fortnite mobile: how to get Fortnite on Android, and why you can't on iPhone
from TechRadar - All the latest technology news https://ift.tt/3r2A87P
While many people will be perfectly happy using Office 365 and Google Workspace products for all their word processing and spreadsheet needs, others will prefer something a little less...proprietary.
There are a couple of significant benefits of opting for an open source alternative to Office; the products are almost always free and often benefit from continual improvement from a large network of committed developers.
We caught up with Italo Vignoli of The Document Foundation, which oversees popular open source productivity software suite LibreOffice, to hear more about the project and where it is headed in the future.
What is The Document Foundation? Does it only support the development of LibreOffice or does it have a wider mandate?
The Document Foundation was announced at the same time of the LibreOffice fork, as the home of the LibreOffice community. All activities are focused on the LibreOffice community, but are not limited to the development of the FOSS office suite.
There are other major projects, such as the participation in the ODF (Open Document Format) Technical Committee for the advancement of the only ISO standard file format for true interoperability, the development of import/export filters for legacy and current proprietary file formats at the Document Liberation Project, the participation in advocacy groups for FOSS in public administrations (in Asia, Europe and Central/South America) and the support of native language communities (LibreOffice is released in 119 different language version, more than any other software worldwide).
Could you explain the reasons that led to suffixing release post v7.1 as "Community"?
The sustainability of FOSS projects doesn't happen by magic, especially if software is widely deployed in enterprise environments such as LibreOffice. We launched the LibreOffice project back in 2010, based on the following sustainability concept: individuals would support back-office and development of features that are not targeted to enterprise deployments with donations; volunteers would contribute their time to develop their own features and to contribute to other activities such as localization, quality assurance, documentation, design and marketing. Enterprises, meanwhile, would support the development of mainstream features through the purchase of LTS versions or the direct engagement of developers from ecosystem partners, who are firmly committed in merging all features in a timely manner on the master branch at The Document Foundation (TDF), for the reciprocal benefit of all individual and enterprise users.
As a result, we would have had a "vanilla" version released by TDF and supported solely by volunteers (who can provide assistance to individual users, according to their own schedule), and an enterprise version with LTS (Long Term Support) from professionals, backed by SLAs (Service Level Agreements).
This has worked for a while, but over time the number of enterprises supporting the project has shrunk, and as a consequence the number of new features has also shrunk. At the moment, we estimate than less than 10% of LibreOffice enterprise users are supporting the project by "giving back" through ecosystem partners, as they deploy the vanilla version from TDF and ask for support to volunteers. As we do want to stay loyal to the FOSS nature of LibreOffice, and avoid a dual licensed open core software (where the enterprise LTS version has more features than the free version, but is released under a proprietary license), we have added the "community" label to encourage enterprises to seriously consider deploying the version optimized for their needs.
Of course, a simple label is not enough, so we will develop and engage in communication activities focused on educating enterprises about supporting FOSS projects effectively and responsibly. FOSS has become pervasive, and enterprises should consider that focusing on the zero cost of the software can seriously harm projects they are now relying on as strategic assets of their infrastructure, because it is short-sighted, as you save a lot today by not paying a dime, but you have to spend a lot tomorrow if the project is not able to self sustain, and you have to switch back to a proprietary solution with a huge price tag attached.
For people who aren’t aware, could you give us a 20,000 foot view of the LibreOffice ecosystem, including how you engage with the ecosystem partners?
The LibreOffice ecosystem is large and diverse; there are volunteers, both individuals and native language communities (i.e. individuals organized in groups based on their language, plus their geographical locations if the language is spread over different continents).
There are companies focused on LibreOffice development and other companies focused on building added value around LibreOffice, e.g. by providing services, consultancy and support. There are FOSS organizations such as FSF, FSFE, GNOME and KDE, and large corporations like Google, who are backing the LibreOffice project as they support our philosophy. Organizations are usually represented inside the TDF Advisory Board, which is meeting on a quarterly basis to discuss the progress of activities.
Most of the engagement, though, happens spontaneously on the typical tools of FOSS projects such as mailing lists and various chatrooms on several messengers. This is something which happens only inside open source projects, where meritocracy wins over bureaucracy.
One of the most interesting aspects of the project for many is LibreOffice Online. However, getting the office suite to run inside a web browser isn’t a priority for the project. Why is that, and will the stance change with the WebAssembly port finally approaching production quality?
A cloud solution based on the LibreOffice Technology has been available for several years from Collabora, which are the main code contributors of the Online branch, and is called Collabora Online. The WebAssembly port by allotropia will provide a different approach to getting LibreOffice into the browser. Both are based on the same platform for personal productivity called LibreOffice Technology, which offers unparalleled advantages over the technical puzzle of other office suites, which use a different engine and a different file structure for desktop, mobile and cloud.
The fact that a cloud solution based on LibreOffice is not released by TDF is a detail, and cannot be seen as a lack of interest from the project. Rather the contrary - deploying a cloud office suite is not a trivial task, as you have to associate a secure sign-on solution and a cloud environment for file storage and access rights, and as such needs the resources of a professional service provider. At the moment this product is available from our commercial ecosystem, and this is perfectly in line with the spirit of the project.
What are some of the interesting ongoing developments that you’re particularly looking forward to landing in LibreOffice?
LibreOffice has a large feature set, which is comparable to proprietary solutions and is larger than in many other office suites. In addition, LibreOffice has a stronger focus on interoperability than any other office suite, including Microsoft Office. So, in a time where sharing digital content is more important than specific features, the development focus will be on compatibility with proprietary file formats.
More broadly speaking, what are the priorities for the project in the near future?
In addition to improving the overall quality and interoperability of LibreOffice, the project has priorities which are typical of FOSS projects, such as increasing the number of language versions, and advocating the adoption of the Open Document Format (ODF) and LibreOffice by governments and large organizations.
We put many popular cold-brew coffee makers through their paces to find out which is best. On the list are models from Oxo, Takeya, Filtron, Espro and others.
The Ring Video Doorbell Pro 2 , the rumored successor to Ring's top-of-the-range Video Doorbell Pro, was officially confirmed this week. The mains-powered doorbell is available to pre-order now, and will go on sale on March 31 in the US and the UK, and on April 1 in Australia.
On the surface, Ring’s newest flagship smart doorbell looks just like its predecessor, the Ring Video Doorbell Pro, but Ring has teased several under-the-hood tweaks that, it says, makes it the brand’s most advanced wired video doorbell to date. As you’d expect then, the Ring Video Doorbell Pro 2 is also the company’s most expensive video doorbell, priced at $249.99 / £219 / AU$399.99.
We've picked out some things that we love about the new Ring Video Doorbell Pro 2, as well as a couple of features that we were disappointed not to see in Ring’s top-of-the-range wired doorbell.
Can't wait for the Video Doorbell Pro 2 to arrive? Then check out the best prices for Ring doorbells below
Better resolution
The biggest improvement to arrive on the Ring Video Doorbell Pro 2 is the boost to resolution: video is now recorded at 1526 x 1536 as opposed to the Full HD footage of the Ring Video Doorbell Pro. This puts Ring’s latest wired doorbell on an equal footing with its rival, the Arlo Video Doorbell, and means that video will be more crisp, with details clearly visible.
Head-to-toe view
Another positive change with the new model is that, thanks to a 150-degree square field of view, you can now see the full length of anyone on your doorstep, including any packages on the floor by their feet, enabling you to keep track of your deliveries more easily.
(Image credit: Ring)
Fewer unwanted motion alerts
In a first for Ring, the Ring Video Doorbell Pro 2 includes a radar that can be used to set ‘virtual’ thresholds, so the doorbell only starts recording and pushes out motion alerts if an object or person has crossed that threshold. According to Ring, this should reduce the number of false-positive – a person walking past your property, for example – activity alerts. The radar is also used in the new ‘Birds Eye View’ feature, which provides an aerial map of the exact path the object or person took to provide a better understanding of what triggered the activity alert.
More choice in faceplates
Unlike the Ring Video Doorbell Pro, which was supplied with four shades of faceplate in the box, the Ring Video Doorbell Pro 2 only comes with one, silver-colored unit. However, once the latter has been set up, you’ll be issued a voucher that can be exchanged for another faceplate free of charge. There are 16 colors to choose from including red, green and purple, so you can make your video doorbell look as striking or as discreet as you like.
(Image credit: Ring)
Alexa Greetings
In the US, the Ring Video Doorbell Pro 2 will support the Alexa Greetings feature, which enables Amazon's voice assistant to ‘answer’ the door and take a message if you’re unable to do so yourself. The feature has already been introduced on the Ring Video Doorbell Pro, and is one of three 'Smart Responses’ being rolled out, although not all are available on all models. However, there's no word over whether Alexa Greetings and the other Smart Responses will be made available in regions outside the US.
Lack of full colour night vision
Ring says the new Video Doorbell Pro 2 will come with color night vision. When pressed, the company wouldn’t go into any detail about the feature but did state it would work in a similar way to the existing Ring Video Doorbell Pro. This means it isn’t full-color night vision; instead, it’s colorized night vision, where simulated-color is applied to areas of ambient light in the video. At present, none of the best video doorbells feature full-color night vision, and including the feature would have been a good way for Ring to stand out from the crowd.
Facial recognition
Google’s rival to the Ring Video Doorbell Pro comes with facial recognition. Nest Hello captures every face that approaches the door, allowing you to tag those belonging to your family and friends. The next time they arrive or leave, you’ll receive a notification stating who it is – which can offer great peace of mind, particularly if you have children that are traveling to and from school alone. We love this feature, and considering the Ring Video Doorbell Pro 2 is priced at a similar level as the Nest Hello, we think it would have been a good way to compete with its rival.
Available to members of the company’s early access program, the new Transform option can be sampled via the Microsoft Word web client, under the File > Transform menu.
When selected, the feature will prompt the user to pick out a visual style to apply to the presentation, before generating a preview in PowerPoint and dropping the presentation file into OneDrive.
While the Transform facility is still undergoing early access testing, Microsoft expects the feature to roll out to all users in the near future.
The company did not respond immediately to our request for clarification over whether the feature will be extended to desktop clients as well.
Turn your Word document into a PowerPoint presentation
While the prospect of automating the painstaking presentation building process is an enticing one, the Transform feature is currently limited in a number of respects.
For now, the feature only works with English language documents and, even then, only when using certain web browsers. The now defunct Internet Explorer is not supported, perhaps predictably, but the Transform feature is also incompatible with Apple’s Safari, the second largest browser in the world.
The feature is also limited to text resources only and will leave behind any multimedia content present in the source document.
“We only support text content for the transformation to presentation, other media content is not currently available. You can add your own media to the presentation after you have transformed your Word document,” explained Mohit Anand, who works on PowerPoint at Microsoft.
The company has conceded that the quality of converted presentations may be a little patchy at first, but claims the Transform feature will eventually be able to distinguish effectively between different document sections and migrate over any accompanying images, videos, fonts and more.
