ChatGPT and Gemini are some of the most popular chatbots you can use today and each is very capable in their own ways. ChatGPT has been around longer and it is still the most popular option, but Google has slowly been catching up slowly since Gemini was released. 

Both chatbots excel at working with text and deep research, but there may be some times you want to use one over the other. We consider ChatGPT to be the most versatile chatbot around, where Google generally provides more value, especially when you go for its paid subscription plan. 

When it comes to multimodality — where a chatbot can understand more than just text, but audio images and video — there’s a clear winner, especially when it comes to image recognition. Below are a series of tests to see just how well each chatbot understands the world around you.

(Disclosure: Ziff Davis, CNET’s parent company, in 2025 filed a lawsuit against OpenAI, alleging it infringed Ziff Davis copyrights in training and operating its AI systems.)

ChatGPT vs. Gemini features

Both chatbots are incredibly popular but ChatGPT still has a larger user base thanks to its first-move advantage. That said, Gemini is essentially preinstalled on all Android phones, so it may only take time before Google’s option becomes the predominant chatbot. 

Both chatbots can essentially do the same things on the surface, but when it comes to creating images, we’d tip the hat to Gemini, thanks to its almost-too-good Nano Banana image generator. ChatGPT is no slouch, but it’s hard to stand up to what Google has on offer here.

The free versions of both chatbots are very capable, but it’s when you actually start paying for the premium versions that you’ll see the differences between the two. While we still say that Claude is the best overall chatbot, it’s a close race between ChatGPT and Gemini. 

If you opt to pay for Gemini, you’ll essentially get a lot more than access to its most advanced models, especially when you compare what you get with ChatGPT. Google’s AI plans offer additional cloud storage to use across your Google account, starting at 400GB for its cheapest plan. If you choose the standard, $20 a month plan, you’ll get even more: expanded access to AI models, more storage, Google Spark and even a YouTube Premium Lite plan that will show you fewer ads. If you’re firmly in the Google ecosystem, there’s almost too much value not to go with Gemini’s premium plan. 

ChatGPT’s premium plans provide you with higher usage access and better models. For its comparable $20 plan, this means access to its latest GPT-6.

Test 1: Scribbled notes

For an easy starter test, I quickly scribbled in the notes app on my Boox Note Air 5C with the pen. It looked like a mess, which is what I was going for. I copied the words from a random page from The Hound of the Baskervilles by Arthur Conan Doyle: 

“’A moderate walk along this moor-path brings us to Merripit House,’ said he. ‘Perhaps you will spare an hour that I may have the pleasure of introducing you to my sister.’ My first thought was that I should be by Sir Henry’s side. But then I remembered the pile of papers and bills–” (I ran out of room to complete the sentence, so I left it at that.)

ChatGPT

ChatGPT missed this one. The first line, “a moderate walk along this moor-poor path brings us to Merripit House,” was almost completely wrong, with the chatbot transcribing it as, “A moment will always this moment — [Henry’s?] to Merritt House.” 

Its analysis said the handwriting contained notes about a memory involving Henry, Sir Henry and the writer’s sister. It also pointed out that some of the words were hard to determine, so it marked words with uncertain words in brackets.

Gemini

Gemini nailed it. It translated my sloppy text word for word, identified the source and even offered specific handwriting characteristics from the image, like “open loop formations on the letters like y, g, and f.” 

The fact that Gemini was able to correctly identify the source may also have affected the accuracy of the translation. Nonetheless, compared to ChatGPT, it’s a night-and-day difference.

Test 2: Chess

To get an idea of how both chatbots interpret an ongoing chess match, I snapped a photo from a game on the Esports World Cup YouTube channel and asked both Gemini and ChatGPT what the next best move was for black.

Gemini

While I’m not a chess expert by any means, Gemini’s answer was long and elaborate. 

Its final answer was Bxf4.

ChatGPT

ChatGPT’s approach to responding was initially different. It was showing its thinking process, and one of the lines said it “installed chess libraries and searched for a local Stockfish engine,” which is an open-source chess engine used to calculate moves. However, it took over 4 minutes to get to the response. 

Its final answer was c5 to d4. 

It did offer a secondary best move: Bxf4, the same as Google’s suggestion. 

I reached out to the US Chess Federation to humor me and get some insight about what they thought of the test, but did not receive a reply.

To look for another party’s interpretation of each chatbot’s response, I decided to ask… Claude. I uploaded the same image and included the original prompt as well as both responses from Gemini and ChatGPT. Claude’s conclusion, without going into detail, was that Gemini read the board incorrectly and ChatGPT was the more appropriate answer.

Test 3: Sick plant

The third test was of a photo of a Venus flytrap I own. I asked the chatbots to identify what type of Venus flytrap it is (it’s a towering giant) and why one of the traps was turning black. I knew this would be a particularly tricky one, given that most Venus flytraps look similar. 

Gemini

Gemini didn’t identify the correct name of the flytrap, but I didn’t really expect it to. As far as the blackening trap, it listed a variety of ways why it could be happening, including the correct one: The trap attempted to consume an insect that was too large. 

ChatGPT

ChatGPT gave a similar, but more detailed reply. It said it wasn’t confident in assigning a particular cultivar for the specific trap itself, but it did give more information about how the one trap could be blackening, as well as a section of “what I’d do” that provided some helpful tips. 

Overall, both chatbots provided decent answers, but ChatGPT’s more detailed response won this round.

Test 4: Movie art

This was a fun one: I took a photo of three pieces of art that depicted the mouths of the Sanderson sisters from the movie Hocus Pocus. The hand-painted pieces are from an artist and not official movie merchandise. 

ChatGPT

ChatGPT was unable to identify the movie, though it was able to accurately describe the image I uploaded: “Three diamond-shaped paintings that look like custom artwork.” It asked for additional details, like the year the film was made, to identify it. 

Gemini

Gemini was easily able to identify what I showed it. “This artwork features the iconic smiles of the Sanderson Sisters from Disney’s Hocus Pocus (1993).”

From there, it went into detail about what character was in what position and the actresses who played the characters.

Gemini seems to be the winner

While I preferred ChatGPT’s response for the Venus flytrap test, Gemini’s consistency and ability to correctly identify sources in both the notes and the movie art tests makes me favor it overall. Since I couldn’t get a real answer from an expert about the chess test, I’ll leave that one out of the final tally. 

Either way, if you’re looking for the best AI chatbot that can most accurately “see” and describe the world around you, Gemini takes the cake — for the most part.

Blake has over a decade of experience writing for the web, with a focus on mobile phones, where he covered the smartphone boom of the 2010s and the broader tech scene. When he’s not in front of a keyboard, you’ll most likely find him playing video games or watching horror movies.

See full bio

As you spend more time in the kitchen, it becomes clear that having the right tools can have an outsized impact on your recipe success rate. Some gadgets out there aren’t worth the space they take up in a drawer, but many are essential without an obvious substitute or workaround. A high-quality knife collection, forgiving wooden cutting boards and a smattering of good pans fall squarely in this category.

Other, less obvious kitchen tools that chefs and home cooks deem essential exist. As a culinary school grad-turned kitchen tech writer, I have several. One, in particular, I can never count on finding in rental kitchens and Airbnbs, so I always take one along.

I used to travel to summer beach rentals with all manner of basic tools: tongs, a whisk, a rubber spatula, you name it, plus a fleet of knives, a good bottle of olive oil and bagged-up samples of my entire spice rack.

After a couple of years, I realized that most rentals, at least on the East Coast, were well-equipped, and I was happier not having to schlep the contents of my kitchen to feel empowered to make dinner. I might stash a chef’s knife, just in case, but more often than not, even that would stay tucked in my bag. 

There is one tool, however, whose utility is so singular that it can’t be substituted; in my experience, it’s the key between a good dinner and a great dinner (and dessert), and, surprisingly, you can’t expect to find it in other kitchens.

My Microplane, myself

Yes, it’s a Microplane. If you’re now puzzling over how a handheld zester of all things is that important a tool, well, some of you have never enjoyed scraped-together key lime pie for breakfast at the beach, and it shows.

But seriously. No other tool does what a Microplane does to the same degree. Using a paring knife to gingerly cut the rind off citrus fruits without taking the pith with it, then mincing it up? I’ve done it. Hard pass.

Don’t start with me about some cheap grocery store zester that’s both ergonomically overcomplicated and entirely ineffective. A box grater you would typically use for cheese or carrots, with that one plane dedicated to zesting? Have you tried it lately? (Actually, has anyone ever? It just looks like a recipe for pulpy zest and bloody knuckles.)

Why the zester is an essential kitchen tool

Maybe your skepticism isn’t about the tool’s quality, but about why any kind of zester is so critical. So I challenge you: the next time you make salad dressing or pasta, enchiladas, pad thai, or anything that calls for citrus juice, add a hit of zest and see what it does to the outcome. Citrus zest adds several times the flavor, minus the sharp acidity. In a word, it adds vibrancy to whatever you’re doing, without the pucker. It’s a wow factor with the simplest execution. Not to mention: key lime pie for breakfast.

And the economics are inarguable. Even in today’s economy, a lemon or lime can only set you back so far, but it contributes so much. And the Microplane itself? Is all of about $18.

Here I am waxing all poetic about citrus, but let’s also talk about two other cooking champions whose processing is made infinitely easier by a Microplane. Garlic and ginger — also cheap yet dynamic ingredients. A garlic press is a fine thing, but if yours is as difficult to clean after use as most I’ve owned have been, ditch it. The microplane can do that work for you, and basically rinses clean afterward.

Or, if you’ve been buying pre-shredded Parm or another hard cheese, here’s another taste-test challenge for you. It’s so quick to grab a hunk and shave directly into or onto whatever you’re making or eating, with the added bonus of leaving out the extra starches that act as anti-clumping agents in pre-shredded stuff. I could also make a point here about freshly grated nutmeg, but that would be extra. Suffice to say, I never make béchamel without it.

Microplanes of a different color

If you’re convinced, I am partial to the Microplane brand here, whose handles are especially comfortable and which includes a protective sleeve for storage. Incidentally, you can also get a Microplane in over a dozen colors, and they are made in the US, if buying locally is a compelling argument.

If you’re already a Microplane evangelist and have made it this far, here’s an invitation to maybe upgrade yours. They don’t last forever, as the blades will dull over time. I recently switched out my 15-year-old model, and it has brought new life to my kitchen.

Pamela Vachon/CNET

For argument’s sake, I also checked out one of Amazon’s best-selling and least expensive models, the MasterChef version, which retails for only $10. It’s a little more generous in width, and its protective cover is admittedly a little easier to maneuver. Functionally, it works just like the Microplane, but is made in China for those keeping score.

Pamela Vachon

Contributor

Pamela is a freelance food and travel writer based in Astoria, Queens. While she writes about most things edible and potable (and accessories dedicated to those topics,) her real areas of expertise are cheese, chocolate, cooking and wine. She’s a culinary school grad, certified sommelier, former bartender and fine dining captain with 10 years in the industry. When not sitting at the keys, she leads in-home cheese classes, wine tastings and cocktail demonstrations.

See full bio

Apple might be late to the foldable party, but the iPhone Duo still brings plenty of fresh ideas to the table. 

From its passport-style design to its matte folding screen and clever software, it feels more polished than many first-generation foldables. And if history has taught us anything, Android manufacturers won’t be shy about borrowing Apple’s best ideas either. 

In fact, I’d bet these iPhone Duo features will appear on rival foldables sooner rather than later.

Passport-style form factor

Apple might not’ve been the first manufacturer to produce a passport-style foldable – but let’s be honest, it started the trend. 

Advertisement

Sure, Samsung got there a month early with its similarly shaped Galaxy Z Fold 8, and the almost comically identical Xiaomi 18 Fold launched in China two days before Apple unveiled the iPhone Duo. But Apple’s foldable plans have been, much to then-CEO Tim Cook’s chagrin, pretty widely known for a few years now. 

Advertisement

Specs, renders and the like had been doing the rounds in the tech sphere for a good while ahead of the big reveal, giving the competition a good idea of what Apple was planning and to essentially try and beat it to the punch. 

So, yes, we’ll probably see more Android foldables with a similar form factor in 2027 – Motorola has already teased one, rumours suggest Oppo is working on one, and I’d bet good money that Honor will do one too – though I’m not particularly mad about it. 

As I found with the Z Fold 8, the passport form factor feels right, with both apps and videos playing nicely on both the inner and outer screens, certainly more so than the boxy alternatives we’ve seen until now. I imagine it’ll pretty much be the de facto design going forward, even if manufacturers (ahem, Samsung) insist that the boxy aspect ratio still has its place. 

Advertisement

Matte foldable screens

The iPhone Duo’s matte foldable screen makes so much sense that, honestly, I’m surprised we’ve not seen it on the Android side of things so far. 

The matte finish on the iPhone Duo looks to essentially address two of the biggest issues with foldable screens at the moment. The first is just how damn reflective they are; due to their foldable nature, the screens are plastic instead of glass, and reflections are apparent, especially in brighter environments. The matte finish looks to do away with the worst of these reflections, which immediately makes it look more pleasing to the eye than any Android foldable.

Advertisement

The second, and just as important, is that it helps hide the effect of the crease that runs centrally down book-style foldable screens – maybe not when brand new and nearly invisible, but over time as the panels are constantly folded and unfolded.

If there’s any feature on this list that’ll definitely make it to Android foldables in 2027, it’s this one.  

Advertisement

The (dreaded) return of under-display cameras

Under-display cameras – also known as UDCs – aren’t a new thing in the Android world. They’re quite the opposite, actually, making an appearance on multiple devices from the likes of Samsung, RedMagic and ZTE from 2020 until 2024, before quietly going the way of the Dodo in favour of regular pin-hole cameras.

Why? Because, simply put, they weren’t very good – for the most part, anyway. Samsung famously used UDC tech on earlier models of its Galaxy Z Fold, but the area housing the camera was always noticeable, so it kinda defeated the purpose. It also meant the camera itself took a massive hit to overall quality, because it’s literally trying to look past a layer of pixels. 

Advertisement

That’s not to say that they were all terrible; I distinctly remember the ZTE Axon 40 Ultra nailing the UDC tech compared to most of the competition. The camera quality still wasn’t the best, but at least you couldn’t see a weirdly off-looking patch of screen where the camera was hiding. 

With Apple trying – and by early impressions online, failing – to hide its camera beneath the Duo’s foldable inner screen, it’s possible that we’ll once again see a resurgence of UDCs on Android foldables to try and match the all-screen look. Let’s just hope they’re closer in quality to ZTE’s than Samsung’s, at least. 

Standby mode and iOS-like UI tweaks

Apple is famous for how it marries its software and hardware, and it’s no different with the iPhone Duo. It offers software features we’ve not yet seen on Android foldables – though, again, I imagine that won’t be the case for much longer.

Advertisement

That’s particularly true when the phone is in its tented form. Elements like Apple’s Standby mode, which uses the Duo’s outer screen when in a tented form factor to display the time, notifications, weather and the like, makes a lot of sense here, as does using the inner display as a light when your morning alarm goes off. 

Advertisement

Then there are more fundamental tweaks to the UI to better suit the foldable form factor, like Apple moving the dock from the bottom – where it has lived since the inception of the first iPhone – to the right-hand side for better reachability, and the combined battery, Wi-Fi and cellular signal icon that saves precious space on the screen. 

Again, these seem like no-brainers when you really think about it, and it’s surprising that we hadn’t seen anything like it in the years of Android foldables that came before. 

Well, for now, anyway – I swear, I can hear Honor’s MagicOS software team salivating from here. 

Am I surprised about any of this? Not really. Apple tends to set trends in the smartphone world, especially when it comes to the design side of things, and it’ll be no different now that the iPhone Duo is here.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Someone recently had to sit me down, hold my hands, and tell me something no pet owner ever wants to hear: my apartment smelled like wet dog. Horrifying. 

With all the nonstop fur and dander that seem to appear everywhere no matter what, the intervention was probably necessary. So when Levoit launched its Vital Pet Pro Air Purifier, I was curious to see whether it could actually make a noticeable difference. 

Designed specifically for pet-friendly households, the $189.99 machine takes a more targeted approach than a conventional air purifier, combining a three-stage filtration system with features designed around one of the biggest problems pet owners face: fur everywhere. (And the occasional “wet dog” smell.) 

The three-stage filtration system consists of a washable pre-filter, a main filter, and an activated carbon filter. The pre-filter catches larger debris such as pet hair, while the main filter targets smaller particles and dander. The carbon filter is designed to tackle odors, with 140 grams of activated carbon packed into it.

Another one of the purifier’s key design features is its U-shaped air inlet, which Levoit says is designed to capture airborne pet hair and particles while improving airflow and helping prevent the filter from becoming clogged.

After testing the purifier for a little over a week, I found it impressively effective at collecting fur and trapping the kind of debris that would normally end up floating around the apartment or settling onto furniture.

When it comes to tackling pet odors, Levoit says that the Vital Pet Pro can remove up to 70% of odors within an hour. I can’t really do a specific test to verify that claim, but the difference was easy enough to notice. After the purifier had been running, the room smelled considerably fresher.

I also appreciated the automatic cleaning technology, which removes accumulated hair and debris from the pre-filter and collects it in a removable tray. It’s a very practical feature, especially if the alternative is constantly pulling apart the purifier to clean out a layer of fur.

Additionally, the companion app offers different modes designed to make the purifier more hands-off. Auto Plus Mode monitors changes in air quality and adjusts the purifier’s performance in real time.

Pet Mode is designed specifically around the way pet-related particles can build up throughout the day. It alternates between running the fan at its highest speed for 15 minutes to capture particulates in the pre-filter and then switching to a lower speed for 60 minutes to maintain air quality while reducing noise and energy use.

Also, rather than displaying a numerical air-quality reading, the Vital Pet Pro uses a simple color system. Red indicates bad air quality, orange means moderate, green means good, and cyan means very good. I actually preferred this since you can quickly glance at the purifier and immediately get a sense of whether the air is improving without having to interpret a number.

I’ll also point out that the Vital Pet Pro is a little larger than I expected, so make sure you have enough floor space before bringing one home.

Noise is another consideration. At its highest setting, the fan is definitely audible. Once the purifier settles into a lower setting, however, it’s quiet enough to leave running overnight without disrupting my sleep. For light sleepers, Sleep Mode makes the purifier run even more quietly.

The air purifier is available to purchase from Levoit’s website, Amazon, Chewy, and other retailers.

Watch the Men’s Elite Road Race at the Road World Championships 2026 as Flanders flyer Remco Evenepoel goes for a second gold medal in seven days at the championships in Montreal – a prospect made far more realistic by the absence of one Tadej Pogačar.

When Pogi Star took a tumble during stage eight of the Vuelta a Espana and later confirmed that he’d broken his collarbone, the potential list of winners for Sunday’s Elite Road Race was blown wide open. The Slovenian modern great has won the last two of these, and was odds-on to make it a threepeat.

Wish you looked at your phone less? Then you’ve probably heard of Brick, a $59 device that claims to help you block distractions. You tap your phone against the Brick when you want to avoid distractions—the bundled software stops you from opening whichever apps you’ve decided you need to stop doomscrolling.

The idea is to add a physical barrier between you and apps like Instagram—if you want to scroll, you need to physically get up, find the Brick, and tap it. It’s a good idea, and implemented in a way that makes it easy to get started. But what if you don’t want to buy a chunk of plastic?

Good news: the Brick is basically just an NFC chip, not that different from the one in your credit card or passport. You can buy a blank NFC chip for a dollar. Even better, free applications can use these chips to block distractions, exactly like the Brick. Or, if you prefer, these apps also support QR codes, meaning all you need is a printer. Here are two free distraction-blocking apps—complete with physical barriers—for iPhone or Android.

Best for iPhones: Foqos

Photograph: Justin Pot

The oddly named Foqos is a free, open source app for iOS by Canadian developer Ali Waseem. Many open source apps lack polish, but not this one—it’s easy to configure the necessary permissions, set up a profile, and start blocking distractions.

While creating a new profile, you first choose which physical object you want to use to start and stop your blocking sessions. The two most popular options are NFC tags (there’s a handy link to buy some in the app) or a QR code. But you can also block using a daily schedule, if you prefer, or by scanning any barcode. The barcode option is nice because you don’t need to buy or print anything—scan the code on your favorite book, beverage, or anything else you keep around the house.

Foqos can block you from managing apps while a profile is running. This means you can’t just delete Foqos to get around a block you set up, which is exactly what someone fighting against their own urges needs. You can allow a limited number of breaks, if you want.

I’ve been using this to break my Reddit habit and can report that it works. I keep a printed QR code inside a cabinet, far from the couch where I tend to scroll. It creates just enough friction that I can finish reading a book instead. The application has an excellent privacy policy—no data leaves your device.

Best for Android: Switchly

Photograph: Justin Pot

Foqos is sadly iOS-exclusive, and I couldn’t find an Android equivalent that’s quite as polished. But Switchly, by Vienna-based developer Saltyy, stands out as one of the more feature-complete apps I tested. You will need to spend some time fiddling to get it set up, granted, but once you do, you’ll find it every bit as flexible as Foqos.

I upgraded my Mac to macOS Golden Gate 27.0, keen to see what Apple AI could deliver and, in particular, the promise of the more powerful Siri AI, available as a standalone app.

I’ve lambasted Siri in the past for not being up to it, failing to deal with even the most simple of requests, but Siri AI (available as an opt-in beta) suddenly starts to make a lot of sense and it’s a lot more powerful than you could expect, although with a few little issues.

Better email management

The default Siri app is terrible at dealing with emails. I asked it to list any important emails, but it only suggested an email from 2011 with the word ‘important’ in the subject line. Hardly what I wanted.

With ChatGPT connected to my Exchange account, I get much better results. Asking the same question flagged some important emails that I’d missed, including a recent invoice that I needed to pay.

However, after upgrading to Siri AI on beta, things got a lot better. This gets a dedicated chat-window app, not dissimilar to the ChatGPT one for macOS, where you can start different conversations. But Siri is also baked into Spotlight search.

I tried again and asked about important emails, and this time got some relevant results from across all of my email accounts. And, the advantage that Siri AI has is that it provides links to the emails in the Apple Mail account, so I can open them; ChatGPT can list the emails but provides no way to open them, so you have to open your email app and find the email.

Siri AI is also capable of doing bulk tasks. I asked it to find any newsletter/marketing emails and then mark them as read. That quickly whittles away my emails and makes it easier to do with what’s left.

Intelligence needs to be available at the point you need it

Siri AI is clearly very capable, but I think it needs to be available when and where you need it. For example, my old school is hosting a Macmillan Coffee Morning on September 25 from 10:30am to 11:15am.

If I open the email, the Mail app highlights dates and times, so clicking on them makes it easy to make a calendar event. However, because of how the email was written, the event date is in a separate sentence from the time. 

Because of this, the two items are highlighted separately, giving me the choice of creating a calendar event for the right time but wrong date, or the right date but wrong time.

The Summarise feature automatically puts the information together, but doesn’t make it a link to create the event.

But, asking Siri AI when the coffee morning is brought up the correct information, and I then asked for a Calendar entry, which was created correctly. That’s clever, but this option should be made available through the email app, at the point where I need it.

Automations need work

Siri AI says that it can create Automations in the home, but this proved to be unreliable. I asked Siri AI to create an automation that turns the lights off in the office when the smart lock locks. It said it had done it, and provided a link to the Home app, which didn’t work.

No combination of typing would allow me to get the Automation working, and I ended up with an error message telling me that my Nuki smart lock is not supported for automations.

Siri AI is also terrible at dealing with multiple commands at once. I asked it to turn on the lights and unlock my Yale Linus smart lock. The lights came on, but the lock did not unlock. I told Siri I’d asked for two things, and that prompted it to unlock the door.

Clearly, Siri AI understands the question, but it needs some improvement before it can act on multiple-step requests as well as Alexa+ can.

Siri AI can’t always open apps

I’ve got a spreadsheet that I use to manage household expenses, with one sheet per year. I could get Siri AI to find the right file with a simple search command, but it told me that it couldn’t open the file as there’s no application associated with it, even though there is and it’s Excel. I asked it to open the file with Excel, but Siri AI can’t. Nor could it open the Finder window in the correct Folder, only giving me the file path.

General requests are better, but there’s a slight lack of polish

Siri AI is much more capable of general tasks. For example, I asked it to look at a floorplan of a house and then tell me what I needed to know for a Fire Risk Assessment for a holiday let. Siri can find the correct information online, work out what’s in the floorplan and then highlight some areas that need to be looked at, with the AI suggesting that a proper Fire Risk Assessor is employed.

The result isn’t quite as detailed as with ChatGPT’s paid-for version, but Siri AI certainly gets the basics right.

Asking Siri AI to come up with a list of fire safety rules for guests using the kitchen, Siri AI comes up with the goods, but in a plain format. And Siri AI can’t export them to a PDF or Word Document. Pay for ChatGPT, and you can make the same requests and get a nicely formatted Word doc complete with handy icons.

Siri AI is showing signs of promise

Siri AI is still a big step up from dumb old Siri, and its integration with Mac apps and services should give it an advantage. Certainly, it’s email management features look like they can save me a lot of time and help pare my email inbox down to just important messages. It still needs some work with the Home app and in its ability to open files in the right applications, but we’re in a beta phase, and the signs look promising. 

As part of the consolidation, several Xbox studios will be consolidated under Call of Duty maker Activision.

Microsoft’s gaming division Xbox has announced plans to layoff 268 employees, as the organisation enters a period of consolidation. 

The company intends to bring several of its studios under the banner of Activision, the publisher behind games such as Call of Duty, Crash Bandicoot and Spyro the Dragon. Studios Rare and Age of Empires-maker World’s Edge will be overseen by Activision. 

Activision was purchased by Microsoft in 2023 for $69bn and will also lead the development of the next Halo game, according to Matt Booty, Xbox’s chief content officer. The layoffs are expected to impact employees at Halo Studios, which will continue to support the Halo community and games in-market.

Bethesda, which is responsible for popular game series Fallout and Elder Scrolls, will expand to include studio Obsidian Entertainment, which will continue to work on its current projects – which includes survival game Grounded and a new Fallout title.

Video game developer King, which makes Candy Crush, will now absorb Microsoft Casual Games, while Playground and Turn 10 will merge as one studio to focus on the Forza and Fable franchises. 

In a statement regarding the layoffs, Booty said: “We are eliminating 268 roles across Halo Studios, other first-party studios and the XGS management and central functions layer. The actions completed since July, inclusive of the studio divestitures, bring us roughly three-quarters of the way through previously announced restructuring. 

“I am deeply grateful for what our colleagues have built, and I know how difficult today will be for those leaving and the teams around them. Second, we are reorganising our studios. The goal is to strengthen our franchises and games by operating fewer business units, aligning groups that already work closely together and focusing our publishing expertise.”

Booty added: “Our focus should be on supporting those affected and treating one another with care and respect. I will spend time with our studios over the next week. At our 6 October town hall, we will come together as an All-Xbox team to reflect on our progress and look ahead to one of the strongest game lineups in our history.”

In July, Microsoft announced that it was laying off 4,800 people, including 3,200 at Xbox, amid plans to cut costs and flatten its organisational structure in response to AI and a changing environment. 

Don’t miss out on the knowledge you need to succeed. Sign up for the Daily Brief, Silicon Republic’s digest of need-to-know sci-tech news.

Wireless earbuds have become remarkably capable, but they still have one fundamental drawback: they are essentially disposable products. Want a new codec, better driver, improved electronics, or fresh battery? You replace the entire thing.

That lack of upgradeability means TWS earbuds are only as good as their weakest component. Drivers, DACs, amplifiers, batteries, microphones, wireless hardware, and software all have to fit inside a tiny enclosure and hit a specific price point. When manufacturers start pinching pennies, sound quality can quickly become secondary to features, connectivity, battery life, and profitability.

That is one reason most TWS earbuds still don’t sound as good as their wired counterparts. Wired IEM manufacturers can devote more of their R&D budget to drivers, tuning, crossover design, materials, and build quality rather than Bluetooth, DSP, DACs, batteries, microphones, and charging systems.

Purists can argue endlessly about lossless audio versus the better Bluetooth codecs, but the codec is only part of the equation. In many TWS models, the drivers and amplification are just as responsible for the limitations in fidelity.

Still, wireless convenience is impossible to deny, and that is coming from someone who once said, “I never saw the wire between my in-ears and DAP as a problem.”

So what do you do if you want wireless convenience without giving up the sound quality of a serious wired IEM? And if you already own high-end CIEMs from Empire Ears or Ultimate Ears, replacing them with disposable TWS earbuds hardly makes sense.

The iFi GO pod Max is designed for exactly those situations. It is not a conventional pair of true wireless earbuds, but a wireless DAC/amplifier system that turns an existing pair of wired IEMs into a high-end Bluetooth system.

At $599, the GO pod Max costs more than many complete wireless earbuds, which makes it a difficult sell for ordinary consumers. For enthusiasts who already own a serious pair of IEMs, however, the proposition makes considerably more sense: remove the cable without giving up most of the performance that made those IEMs worth buying in the first place.

iFi also offers the GO pod Air ($249) for listeners who want similar functionality with more affordable IEMs and understandably don’t want to spend more on the adapters than they did on the earphones.

The GO pod Max moves considerably further upmarket with a machined aluminum case, aptX Lossless support, K2HD processing, UV sterilization, upgraded circuitry, additional ear-loop options, and automatic impedance matching for IEMs ranging from 16 to 300 ohms. It is an ambitious product, and innovation is rarely cheap.

The real question is whether all of that translates into a meaningful sonic improvement over a conventional Bluetooth adapter, or whether the GO pod Max is simply a very expensive way to cut the cord.

Related Reading:

Build and Fit

The GO pod Max consists of two ear-mounted DAC/amp modules connected to the earpieces through replaceable adapters. This allows the system to support MMCX, 2-pin, Pentaconn Ear, Audio-Technica A2DC, and Estron T2/IPX-equipped IEMs. The 2-pin and MMCX adapters are included; the others are available separately from iFi for $29 per pair.

Those adapters also form the ear loops, allowing each DAC/amp module to sit behind the ear while adding another point of support. That is smart design because, at $599, the ability to move the GO pod Max between different IEMs goes a long way toward making the price easier to justify. If listeners had to buy a different version for every connector type, this would be a very different review.

The pods are compact, although not especially small, which is hardly surprising considering the amount of hardware packed inside their aluminum shells. Each weighs 11.82 grams with the earhook attached. For comparison, the polymer-shell GO pod Air weighs 9.7 grams per side, so the difference is unlikely to be significant for most listeners.

The upper portion of the charging case uses the same precision-machined aluminum as the pods, giving the system a more substantial feel than the plastic construction found on most true wireless products. The pods themselves feel solid rather than disposable, although the exposed connectors still deserve some care. These are precision audio components, not something I would toss loose into a gym bag.

The ear loops route the pods over and around the ears much like a conventional IEM cable, helping stabilize the modules and preventing their weight from pulling directly downward.

Comfort, however, depends heavily on the attached IEM. Lighter acrylic models proved quite comfortable, while heavier metal shells can become tiring during longer sessions. I used the LETSHUOER Cadenza 12, an excellent but relatively heavy titanium IEM, for part of my listening tests and could definitely feel the additional weight over time.

Fit ultimately depends on the pod, ear shape, IEM shell design and weight, nozzle angle, and connector orientation. Most well-designed universal and custom IEMs should work without issue, but not every model will be equally well suited to the GO pod Max.

The ear loops themselves are reasonably comfortable over long sessions, even with eyeglasses. Listeners who dislike anything resting over the ear may still prefer conventional true wireless earbuds.

The system carries an IPX5 rating, which means it can tolerate rain and perspiration but is not designed for immersion. That is sufficient for commuting and light exercise, although the attached IEM may have a lower protection rating. In practice, the least water-resistant component determines how adventurous you should get.

The charging case measures 116 x 76 x 48 mm and weighs roughly 185 grams, making it considerably larger and heavier than a typical TWS case. Some of that bulk comes from the aluminum upper shell, larger battery, and built-in UV cleaning system.

More importantly, the case is large enough to store the GO pod Max with the IEMs still attached while charging. That matters because repeated connection and disconnection can eventually wear the connectors on expensive IEMs. Listeners who plan to alternate regularly between two pairs may even want a second set of adapters and leave each pair attached, shifting most of that wear to the module side.

Warranty coverage varies by region, with one year in the U.S. and UK and two years in continental Europe.

Build quality is one of the GO pod Max’s strongest attributes. This does not feel like a generic Bluetooth earhook with an iFi logo added to it. It feels engineered for listeners who want true wireless convenience without treating their expensive IEMs like disposable accessories.

Internals

The GO pod Max uses Qualcomm’s flagship QCC5181 dual-mode Bluetooth SoC, which supports Bluetooth 5.4, Classic Bluetooth, and LE Audio. Snapdragon Sound provides support for up to 24-bit/96kHz playback through aptX Lossless, along with aptX HD and aptX Adaptive. LDAC, LHDC/HWA, AAC, and SBC are also supported, while LE Audio and Auracast provide some future-proofing as adoption becomes more widespread.

That is an unusually comprehensive codec list for a wireless IEM adapter.

iFi places particular emphasis on aptX Lossless, although source support remains an important limitation. Without a compatible device, the GO pod Max will fall back to another supported codec. Fortunately, aptX HD, aptX Adaptive, LDAC, and LHDC can still deliver very good results even if they are not technically lossless.

It is also important not to treat “lossless” as a guarantee of superior sound. The IEM, amplification, recording, DSP, and fit remain at least as important. What aptX Lossless does is remove one of the more obvious compromises associated with using an expensive IEM wirelessly.

Android users have the best opportunity to take advantage of the higher-bandwidth codecs. Apple users will generally be limited to AAC unless they add an external transmitter from Questyle or another manufacturer.

iFi says the GO pod Max uses separate optimized stages for Bluetooth reception, digital-to-analog conversion, and amplification. Many inexpensive wireless modules rely more heavily on highly integrated solutions, while iFi is clearly approaching the GO pod Max as a miniature source component rather than simply another Bluetooth earhook.

Published specifications include THD+N of ≤0.002% from 20Hz to 20kHz, dynamic range of 129 dB(A) at 32 ohms, and a 132 dB(A) signal-to-noise ratio at 300 ohms.

The GO pod Max also automatically selects impedance settings for 16, 32, 64, and 300-ohm loads. In my testing, IEMs that fell between those values used the closest lower setting. That takes some of the guesswork out of gain matching and makes the system far less intimidating for users who have no interest in doing electrical calculations before listening to music.

There are limits. Multi-driver IEMs can exhibit substantial impedance swings across the frequency range, and the interaction between their impedance curves and the amplifier’s output impedance can alter tonal balance. Sensitivity also matters, particularly with less efficient designs that require more voltage or current.

The GO pod Max provides considerably more amplification than a typical true wireless earbud, which gives it more headroom with demanding IEMs and allows it to accommodate a wider range of designs. Users with especially sensitive or electrically complex IEMs should still listen for hiss or changes in tonal balance.

The other significant feature is K2HD processing, a technology developed by JVCKENWOOD and configured for iFi. K2HD is designed to reconstruct harmonic information that may have been lost during digital conversion or lower-resolution processing. iFi says it restores the digital signal path to 96kHz and uses interpolation to create a more natural harmonic structure.

The important word is reconstruct. This is DSP, not the recovery of the original information. Once data has been discarded, an algorithm cannot know exactly what was there in the first place.

The results are therefore recording and listener dependent. Some tracks can benefit from added warmth, harmonic density, or a greater sense of space, while others may sound slightly processed or less direct.

I would treat K2HD as an optional voicing mode rather than an automatic sonic upgrade. Its inclusion is worthwhile, but familiar recordings and the bypass setting remain the best way to decide whether it improves the experience.

UV Sterilization

The charging case includes four UV lights designed to sterilize the attached IEMs between uses.

It is an unusual feature in the wireless audio market, but one that makes practical sense. IEMs sit inside the ear, where their tips can collect oils, moisture, and bacteria during extended use.

The UV system should not be considered a substitute for regularly cleaning the ear tips or maintaining proper hygiene. Its effectiveness will depend on which surfaces are exposed to the light, how long they remain exposed, and how the IEMs are positioned inside the case.

Still, it is a thoughtful addition, particularly for listeners who wear their IEMs for long periods or frequently travel with them.

Touch Controls

Each pod includes touch controls for playback, volume, calls, voice assistants, and other basic functions. They are convenient once learned, although the small control surface requires some precision and accidental activation is still possible when adjusting the IEMs.

A companion app is available for configuration and firmware updates, but don’t expect the usual TWS experience. Instead of EQ presets and lifestyle features, the app focuses on settings such as DAC filter selection, touch-control latency, and firmware management.

It feels much more like the setup menu for a desktop DAC/amp than the companion app for a typical pair of wireless earbuds, which is entirely appropriate for what the GO pod Max is trying to be.

Calls & Microphones

Each pod uses dual microphones with Qualcomm cVc noise suppression. Voice quality is suitable for everyday calls and commuting, with the system doing a reasonable job of emphasizing the wearer’s voice while reducing some background noise.

Wind, traffic, and crowded environments can still present problems, and performance will vary somewhat with the attached IEM. Unlike a conventional TWS earbud, the GO pod Max cannot be optimized around one fixed shell and microphone arrangement.

Call quality is competent, but it is clearly a secondary feature rather than a reason to buy the GO pod Max.

Battery Life

Each pod contains a 180mAh battery, while the charging case uses a 1500mAh battery. iFi rates the pods for approximately 7 hours of playback, with up to 35 hours total including the case.

In my testing, those figures proved slightly optimistic. Depending on codec, volume, and processing settings, six hours is a more realistic expectation for the pods. The case provides roughly four additional charges, so the quoted 35-hour total should also be viewed as a best-case number.

That is not class-leading endurance, but the larger amplifier stages and more ambitious circuitry consume more power than a conventional TWS earbud. A 30-minute top-up in the case usually provides a substantial extension in listening time.

Charging from empty takes less than 1.5 hours for the pods and under two hours for the case under optimal conditions. The case supports USB Type-C charging as well as Qi wireless charging, although the latter is noticeably slower.

Listening

The GO pod Max does not have one fixed sound signature in the way a conventional wireless earbud does. The attached IEM remains the dominant factor, which is both its greatest strength and an important qualification.

With a neutral or highly resolving IEM, the GO pod Max can sound clean, dynamic, and spacious. Pair it with something warmer or bass-heavy and most of that character remains intact. The goal is not to impose a new voicing, but to provide a higher-quality wireless signal path and more capable amplification.

Compared with ordinary Bluetooth adapters, the most obvious improvement is likely to be greater control and headroom rather than a dramatic shift in tonal balance. K2HD can add some warmth and harmonic presence, but it will not transform a lean IEM into a bass-heavy one.

Very sensitive IEMs may still expose hiss, which is why users should evaluate the GO pod Max with their own earphones rather than rely solely on specifications.

The amplifier stage has considerably more headroom than the tiny output sections found in many consumer wireless products. That becomes most apparent with dynamic classical recordings, jazz, live performances, and well-recorded acoustic music, where the GO pod Max does a better job of avoiding the flatness or congestion that can creep in with weaker wireless adapters.

With a high-resolution IEM, that matters. The GO pod Max is designed to keep the wireless electronics from becoming the weakest link in the chain.

Everyday Use

The GO pod Max makes the most sense for listeners who have already invested in wired IEMs.

For commuting or office use, it removes the cable without forcing the listener to give up familiar earphones. It is still less convenient than a conventional TWS design because the IEMs have to remain attached to the pods, the case is larger, and connector compatibility requires some attention.

Listeners with several IEMs may also need additional ear-loop adapters, and swapping between them is not as quick as simply reaching for another pair of wireless earbuds.

There is no active noise cancellation because the GO pod Max is not a self-contained ANC earbud. Isolation depends entirely on the attached IEM and ear tips. A well-sealing CIEM can provide excellent passive isolation, while a shallow-fitting design will allow considerably more outside noise through.

The GO pod Max may outperform many ANC earbuds sonically, but it cannot electronically cancel the low-frequency rumble of trains, airplanes, or traffic. That remains one of the compromises of choosing better IEMs over greater convenience.

The Bottom Line

The iFi GO pod Max is an unusual product for a very specific listener: someone who already owns one or more high-end wired IEMs and wants wireless convenience without replacing them with conventional TWS earbuds. As someone who fits that description rather precisely, even I needed some time to fully appreciate what the GO pod Max brings to the party.

At $599, it is undeniably expensive, particularly when excellent wireless earbuds cost considerably less. But those products lock you into their drivers, tuning, amplification, and eventual battery failure. The GO pod Max takes a different approach by allowing listeners to keep using the IEMs they already know and love while upgrading the wireless electronics around them.

I have now used the GO pod Max almost daily for more than six months, which says more about its usefulness than any specification ever could. Very few review samples become part of my regular listening kit. These have, allowing me to use my UE Live with a healthy dose of Primal Scream and other guilty pleasures while spending far too much time in doctors’ offices and imaging labs.

For someone who once insisted, “I never saw the wire between my in-ears and DAP as a problem,” that represents quite a change.

The GO pod Max is not for everyone, nor does it need to be. It is for listeners with serious IEMs who want to cut the cable without replacing the part of their system that matters most. Six months later, I’m no longer wondering whether that convenience is worth having. I’m wondering why it took me so long to admit that the wire actually was a problem.

Pros:

• High-end wireless DAC/amp architecture
• aptX Lossless support
• LDAC, LHDC, aptX Adaptive, aptX HD, AAC, and SBC support
• Automatic impedance matching from 16 to 300 ohms
• Premium construction
• Supports many high-end IEMs
• UV sterilization in the case

Cons:

• Expensive compared with wireless earbuds
• Six and a half hour battery life is only average at best
• Large and relatively heavy charging case
• Compatibility requires attention to connector and ear-loop types
• Touch controls can be triggered accidentally
• Microphone performance is adequate rather than exceptional

Our Ratings:

★★★★★★★★★★ Sound Quality (dependent on the IEM used)

★★★★★★★★★★ Build Quality

★★★★★★★★★★ Connectivity

★★★★★★★★★★ Comfort

★★★★★★★★★★ Value

Where to Buy:

Related Reading: