ArduinoMania

Threads was missing a lot of features users would expect from a service similar to Twitter's (now X's) when it launched. Over the past few months, however, it has been been rolling out more and more new features to give users a more robust experience, including polls, an easy way to post GIFs and the ability to quote posts on the web. Still, since it doesn't have an API, third-party developers can't conjure features specific to their services that would make the social network a more integral part of people's everyday lives. An example of that is local transportation agencies being able to automatically post service alerts when a train is delayed. According to Instagram chief Adam Mosseri, though, Threads is working on an API for developers — he just has concerns about how it's going to be used. 

As first reported by TechCrunch, Mosseri responded to a conversation on the platform about having a TweetDeck-like experience for Threads. In a response to a user saying that Threads has no API yet, the executive said: "We're working on it." He added that he's concerned that the API's launch could mean "a lot more publisher content and not much more creator content," but he's aware that it "seems like something [the company needs] to get done."

Mosseri previously said that Threads won't amplify news, which may have been disappointing to hear for publishers and readers looking to leave X. Instead, he said, Threads wants to "empower creators in general." More recently, in an AMA he posted on the platform, Mosseri said that that his team's long-term aspiration is for Threads to become "the de facto platform for public conversations online," which means being both culturally relevant and big in terms of user size. He said he believes Threads has a chance of surpassing X, but he knows that his service has a long way to go. For now, he keeps his team focused on making people's experience better week by week. 

Mark Zuckerberg recently announced that Threads has "just under" 100 million monthly active users. Like Mosseri, he is optimistic about its future and said that there's a "good chance" it could reach 1 billion users over the next couple of years.

The iRobot Roomba Combo j7+ is the top 2-in-1 pick in our guide to the best robot vacuums, as it adds a retractable mop for cleaning hard floors onto a powerful robovac for carpets and other surfaces. It's expensive at its usual list price of $1,000, but right now you can get it for $699 at Wellbots. Just use the code ENGROOMBA300 at checkout. While that's still far from cheap, it does mark the largest discount we've tracked.

The Roomba Combo j7+ is undoubtedly a luxury purchase, but we found its vacuuming and mopping capabilities to mostly work as advertised. As a robot vacuum, it offers strong suction power, accurate home mapping and intelligent obstacle avoidance, including a strong knack for avoiding pet waste. In its "vacuum and mop" mode, it's smart enough to know when it's rolling over hard floors instead of carpet, then only mop the former. The battery generally lasts between 90 to 180 minutes depending on how often you mop, and the whole thing works with Alexa and the Google Assistant. This model also comes with a (noisy) self-emptying base station, which the vacuum automatically retreats to when it's done cleaning.

It's not perfect: You'll have to refill the water tank fairly often, there's no mop-only mode and the mopping functionality isn't as efficient as just using a Swiffer. iRobot's Home app remains easy to use, but all robovacs require the occasional maintenance and intervention. Still, a device like this makes cleaning more hands-off than it'd be otherwise, so the Combo j7+ could be worth it if your home has a mix of carpet, hardwood, laminate and other surfaces. For more details, check out Engadget Senior Editor Daniel Cooper's write-up of his experience with the device. Just note that, like many robot vacuums with obstacle avoidance, the j7+ comes with a built-in camera. That may raise privacy concerns for some, particularly with Amazon in the process of acquiring iRobot.

A couple of less expensive Roomba 2-in-1s are also on sale. The Roomba Combo j5+ is down to $499 with the same ENGROOMBA300 code, while the standard Roomba Combo j5 is available for $349 with the code ENGROOMBA250. Those are $300 and $250 discounts, respectively, and both represent all-time lows. The Combo j5+ is a newer midrange alternative to the Combo j7+: It has most of the same features, but it lacks the j7+'s retractable mop arm and ability to automatically avoid carpets while mopping. Instead, you have to swap in a vacuum-only bin (or just move your rugs) when you want to clean a carpeted room. You also have to empty its vacuum/mop combo bin manually. The standard j5 is essentially the same device but doesn't come with a self-emptying base station.

Follow @EngadgetDeals on Twitter and subscribe to the Engadget Deals newsletter for the latest tech deals and buying advice.

Vice president Prabhakar Raghavan testified Friday that Google paid $26.3 billion in 2021 for the purpose of maintaining default search engine status and acquiring traffic, Bloomberg reports. It's likely the lion’s share of that sum went to Apple, which it has showered with exorbitant sums for many years in order to remain the default search option on iPhone, iPad and Mac.

Raghavan, who was testifying as part of the DOJ's ongoing antitrust suit against the company, said Google’s search advertising made $146.4 billion in revenue in 2021, which puts the $26 billion it paid for default status in perspective. The executive clarified that default status was the most costly part of what it pays to acquire traffic.

Raghavan didn’t mention how much of the $26.3 billion went to Apple. But CNBC reports that an estimate from private wealth management firm Bernstein ballparked that Google could pay Apple up to $19 billion this year for the default privilege.

A slide shown in court revealed that, in 2014, Google brought in $47 billion in search revenue while paying $7.1 billion for default status. Raghavan testified that Google’s overall default search engine payments nearly quadrupled from 2014 to 2021, while its search advertising revenue (roughly) tripled.

Google objected to making the figures public, arguing it would hurt its ability to negotiate future contracts. Judge Amit Mehta, overseeing the case, disagreed.

Barbarian is one of the more memorable horror movies of the last few years. It tells a tale of a young woman who finds that someone is already staying at her rental home. She has little choice but to stay there since nearby hotels are all booked up. That alone is a nightmare scenario but the film goes into some truly wild directions from there. On the surface, it seems like an odd choice to turn into a video game, but that's exactly what's happening.

New Regency Pictures and Friday the 13th: The Game and Evil Dead: The Game developer Diversion3 Entertainment have teamed up to bring Barbarian to PC and consoles. Despite the multiplayer format of the studio's previous projects, this will be a single-player, narrative-focused title which will "expand on the settings, characters and creatures of Barbarian." There's no release timeframe as yet.

“We’re very excited to work with the team at New Regency to expand on the settings, characters and creatures of Barbarian,” Tim Hesse, an executive producer at Diversion3 Entertainment, told Variety in a statement. “The film did a magnificent job of not only scaring audiences with its unexpected and horrifying twists and turns, but also in establishing strong characters thrown into terrifying situations. We look forward to exploring these themes further in the game.”

A straight adaptation of the film's story probably wouldn't work as a game. But there's certainly potential for it to work as a tension-filled survival horror title given (mild spoilers) how much of the Barbarian takes place in terrifying underground tunnels.

For the uninitiated, here's the trailer for Barbarian. Happy Halloween.

When Netflix first unveiled its streaming video service in 2007, it felt like a miracle. Netflix's DVD customers in the US, who were paying between $5.99 to $17.99 a month, instantly had access to 1,000 movies over a web browser. No more waiting for DVDs in the mail, no ads like TV – just hit a button and watch. Instantly! Now that seems like ages ago. Netflix's most premium 4K streaming plan now costs $23 a month, while its standard subscription without ads costs $15.49 a month. (There is a standard plan with ads for $6.99 a month, but that doesn't support offline downloads and also doesn't include some content.)

Netflix has also been cracking down on account sharing recently, which is great for its overall earnings and subscriber count, but bad for anyone trying to save a buck. You'll have to pay an extra $7.99 a month to add more member slots to the standard and premium plans.

And it’s not just Netflix. Over the past year, just about every major streaming service has raised its prices considerably. Apple TV+ is doubling its original price to $10 a month ($99 annually). Disney+ saw a hefty increase as well to $14 a month for its ad-free premium tier. For those who subscribe to multiple services, it's easy to think we're back in the bad old days of cable TV, where we ended up spending gobs of money for hundreds of channels.

But let's not get dramatic. Subscribing to the streaming services you use the most is still far cheaper than going for a typical cable plan. In my area, Comcast's most popular plan with over 125 channels is listed at $60 a month, but the company hides the additional $27.80 broadcast network fee and $13.40 regional sport licensing fee. My actual monthly cost starts at $101.20, and that doesn't include taxes, equipment rental fees (at least $10 a month) and other additions Comcast may coax you into. (Want 300 hours of Cloud DVR? That's another $20 monthly!)

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average urban consumer spends an eye-watering $575 a month on cable, satellite or live streaming TV service. To be clear, those numbers reflect some customers spending a ton more on sports and other packages compared to others. But still, even the prospect of spending $370 a month on cable (the BLS's consumer average from 2010) feels unfathomable. All of a sudden, Netflix creeping toward $25 doesn't seem so bad — especially since cable customers also have to subscribe to streaming services to see their original shows.

Netflix

While some have argued that streaming price hikes signal the end of the cord-cutting dream, that's far from true. Cable prices were already high a decade ago, and they've risen considerably since then. (Broadcast fees alone were estimated to jump between 8 to 10 percent between 2016 and 2019.) If anything, the case for cord-cutting is even stronger now. With the wealth of content available on streaming services, do you really need to pay hundreds to sit through another HGTV marathon? Especially when you can find some HGTV content on Max, and similar shows on other streamers?

Nobody likes to see their favorite services getting more expensive. You could easily argue that streaming prices hikes fall firmly within Corey Doctorow's concept of internet enshittification, wherein companies provide cheap and useful services to grow their userbase, but inevitably make the experience worse to squeeze out more money and appease their investors. Unless an online service is being run as a non-profit or completely free side project, enshittification seems inevitable.

But it's worth acknowledging why streaming services were so cheap to begin with. Netflix's streaming service was practically an experiment early on — it was rolled into existing subscription plans, and you could only watch up to 18 hours a month. When Netflix launched its standalone streaming subscription in 2010, it was only $7.99 a month — a price that held true until its basic plan jumped a whole dollar in 2019. While the company introduced more expensive standard and premium plans along the way, the entry plan always seemed like a tremendous deal. Who wouldn't want instant access to thousands of movies and TV shows for the price of two coffees?

Like many startups during the 2010s, Netflix continually raised tons of money (around $5 billion) without making enormous profit — or at least, not profit in line with the tens of billions the company has spent on original content over the last decade. Enticing new subscribers and keeping them was far more important to Netflix than actually being a sustainable business. So it wasn't too surprising when other services like HBO Max, Disney+ and Apple TV+ launched with low prices competitive with Netflix.

According to Janko Roettgers, author of the newsletter Lowpass, and a former media and technology reporter at Variety, Netflix had an advantage over the competition because its legacy DVD business could fund its streaming ambitions. Other companies like Disney and Warner Bros. had to decide how streaming fit within their existing TV channels and movie studios.

"Now [Netflix is] making money with streaming across the world, and they're starting to get into gaming," Roettgers noted on the Engadget Podcast this week. "So they're pretty quick at following up. And if you look at some of these legacy media companies, well, they still have linear networks. And those are declining slowly and slowly, and it's taking them a long time to figure out [...] Should we get out of this? How many can we keep running? How many of those do we need to shut down?"

When Netflix announced that it was actually losing subscribers in 2022 — 200,000 in the first quarter, followed by a whopping one million users in the second quarter — it was like a nuclear bomb exploded in the streaming industry. It immediately led to belt tightening across every service: Widespread Layoffs, canceled shows, and more strategies to make money. Netflix's ad-supported tier launched later that year, while its account sharing lockdown began in earnest this May.

Lucasfilm

With interest rates on the rise and investors worried about the economy, raising prices was the inevitable next step for every streaming provider. And unfortunately, that trend won't be reversed anytime soon. At best, we can only hope that the threat of losing users and pressure from competition will keep Netflix and others from reaching the dreaded highs of cable.

But don't forget, there's one thing you can do with streaming services that's far more difficult with cable companies: You can cancel and subscribe easily online. You don't need to set aside time and emotional energy to deal with a customer service rep on the phone, or block out a morning for a technician to visit. That potential for churn hangs over every streaming provider. So if their prices get too high, or they're not actually providing enough valuable content to watch, just leave.

Still, it’s worth remembering that access to media is cheaper than ever. You don’t have to worry about spending a ton to rent movies from Blockbuster or your local video store. There aren’t any late fees to worry about. And while I miss the heyday of DVDs, buying just one of those discs could cover a month of service across two streaming services today (sometimes three!).

So sure, it stinks that Netflix is getting more expensive. But, personally, I’d easily take these higher prices over life before the streaming era.

X is adding two new tiers to its subscription offering, previously known as Twitter Blue. The company is adding a new, $16 per month “Premium+ tier” that eliminates ads in users’ following and “for you” timelines, in addition to the blue checkmark and other existing perks for subscribers. X is also adding a new, lower-cost “basic” tier that costs $3 a month.

The new subscription plans come as X’s advertising business has continued to decline, and the company is increasingly reliant on subscription revenue. X has also recently begun testing a program that requires all new users in some countries to pay $1 per year in order to post and reply to tweets.

In addition to removing ads from users’ timeline, X said in a tweet that Premium+ subscribers would get an even bigger algorithmic boost in replies compared with subscribers paying for the cheaper premium level. Of note, it appears that both new tiers are only available via the web, at least for now, which is likely meant to help the company avoid additional fees associated with Apple and Google’s app stores.

The $3 basic tier appears to be a much more limited set of features compared with Premium and Premium+ and, notably, doesn’t include the blue checkmark or revenue-sharing. Instead, it offers extras like tweets editing, longer posts, the ability to download videos. It also offers a “small reply boost” and encrypted direct messages.

Developing...

Apple is holding an event on October 30 at 8PM ET. Yes, that’s in the dead of night during the spookiest of seasons. The company’s calling it a “Scary Fast” event, which certainly either means Apple is getting into horror shorts, or it's going to announce some improved hardware — our bet's on the latter. You can watch Apple's October event on YouTube, on Apple’s official website and on Apple TV devices. Or, you can just keep this page open, as the stream’s embedded below.

What to expect at Apple's October Mac Event

So what’s on the docket for this Halloween-adjacent stream? We already had the big iPhone 15 reveal, so that leaves the company’s desktop and laptop computers. Given the event’s name, it’s highly likely Apple will drop the long-awaited M3 chip. It’s been nearly 17 months since the M2 debuted and, well, Moore’s law and all of that. For reference, it was 19 months between the M1 launch and the M2 debut.

Chips are only as good as the gadgets they power, so there should be a couple of hardware announcements to go along with that “scary fast” M3 chipset. Apple analysts Ming-Chi Kuo and Bloomberg's Mark Gurman both suggest that an M3-powered MacBook Pro will take center stage at the event.

It’s also high-time that Apple released some new iMacs, as it’s been well over two years since 2021’s colorful refresh. Gurman has reported that the event will likely see the introduction of a new 24-inch iMac, also powered by the rumored M3 chip. He notes that current iMacs are in short supply at retail stores and that this typically indicates a forthcoming upgrade.

There could also be some iPad announcements at the event. If the whole stream revolves around M3-powered products, it’s more likely we’ll get a new iPad Pro than a standard entry-level tablet. However, it’s only been a year since the most recent iPad Pro debuted, though 2022’s release was merely a modest upgrade. Of course, other iPad models could get some love, setting them up to launch just in time for the holidays.

There could be some surprises, but we just got new iPhones and watches, and we know the Vision Pro isn’t due until next year, so that doesn’t leave a whole lot of options. At the very least, Apple presenters will likely be forced to wear Halloween costumes, which should be fun. Maybe we’ll see Tim Cook dressed as that blue smurf cat that blew up on TikTok earlier this month.

Apple’s holding another streaming event on October 30 at 8PM ET. Yes, that’s in the dead of night during the spookiest of seasons. The company’s calling it a “Scary Fast” event, which certainly makes it seem like there will be some hardware announcements. You can watch the stream on YouTube, on Apple’s official website and on Apple TV devices. Or, you can just keep this page open, as the stream’s embedded below.

So what’s on the docket for this Halloween-adjacent stream? We already had the big iPhone 15 reveal, so that leaves the company’s desktop and laptop computers. Given the event’s name, it’s highly likely Apple will drop the long-awaited M3 chip. It’s been nearly 17 months since the M2 debuted and, well, Moore’s law and all of that. For reference, it was 19 months between the M1 launch and the M2 debut.

Chips are only as good as the gadgets they power, so there should be a couple of hardware announcements to go along with that “scary fast” M3 chipset. Apple analysts Ming-Chi Kuo and Bloomberg's Mark Gurman both suggest that an M3-powered MacBook Pro will take center stage at the event.

It’s also high-time that Apple released some new iMacs, as it’s been well over two years since 2021’s colorful refresh. Gurman has reported that the event will likely see the introduction of a new 24-inch iMac, also powered by the rumored M3 chip. He notes that current iMacs are in short supply at retail stores and that this typically indicates a forthcoming upgrade.

There could also be some iPad announcements at the event. If the whole stream revolves around M3-powered products, it’s more likely we’ll get a new iPad Pro than a standard entry-level tablet. However, it’s only been a year since the most recent iPad Pro debuted, though 2022’s release was merely a modest upgrade. Of course, other iPad models could get some love, setting them up to launch just in time for the holidays.

There could be some surprises, but we just got new iPhones and watches, and we know the Vision Pro isn’t due until next year, so that doesn’t leave a whole lot of options. At the very least, Apple presenters will likely be forced to wear Halloween costumes, which should be fun. Maybe we’ll see Tim Cook dressed as that blue smurf cat that blew up on TikTok earlier this month.

On Thursday, the US International Trade Commission (ITC) upheld a judge’s earlier ruling that the Apple Watch violated patents from medical technology company Masimo, as reported by Reuters. Although the ITC’s order could theoretically lead to an eventual import ban on Apple Watch models, the iPhone maker still has ample opportunity to avoid that outcome.

The decision stems from a lawsuit Masimo filed in 2021, accusing Apple of infringing on the smaller company’s patents related to light-based blood-oxygen monitoring. Apple introduced the feature in the Apple Watch Series 6, its 2020 flagship smartwatch. Its 2023 models, including the Apple Watch Series 9 and Apple Watch Ultra 2, still include blood-oxygen sensors.

Masimo’s filing focuses on the Apple Watch Series 6, which the iPhone maker discontinued in 2021 following the launch of its successor. It isn’t clear whether or to what degree a hypothetical import ban would affect Apple’s latest versions of its flagship wearable. A federal jury took up Masimo’s allegations earlier this year, ending in a mistrial.

The case now moves to the White House as the Biden administration has 60 days to decide whether to veto the import ban based on policy concerns. Reuters notes that US Presidents have rarely rejected bans historically. If Biden opts not to veto, Apple can appeal the ban to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit after the White House’s review period expires. Other options for the $2.6 trillion company include settling with Masimo or issuing software updates that skirt the patent.

Masimo paints the scenario as a victory for David vs. Goliath. “Today’s ruling by the USITC sends a powerful message that even the world’s largest company is not above the law,” Joe Kiani, Masimo’s CEO, wrote on Thursday. “This important determination is a strong validation of our efforts to hold Apple accountable for unlawfully misappropriating our patented technology,” added Mr. Kiani.

In a statement to Reuters, Apple framed the move as putting lives at risk to boost Masimo’s product portfolio. “Masimo has wrongly attempted to use the ITC to keep a potentially lifesaving product from millions of U.S. consumers while making way for their own watch that copies Apple,” an Apple spokesperson said. “While today’s decision has no immediate impact on sales of Apple Watch, we believe it should be reversed, and will continue our efforts to appeal.”

We’re on a sort of vacation in Tanzania at the moment and staying in a modest hotel away from the tourist and government district. It’s a district of small shops selling the same things and guys repairing washing machines out on the sidewalk. The guys repairing washing machines are more than happy to talk. Everybody’s amazingly friendly here, the hotel guy grilled us for an hour about our home state. But I really didn’t expect to end up in a conversation about computer vision.

In search of some yogurt and maybe something cooler to wear, we went on a little walk away from the hotel. With incredible luck we found a robotics shop a few blocks away. Mecktonix is a shop about two meters each way, stuffed full of Arduinos, robots, electronics components, servos, and random computer gear, overseen by [Yohanna “Joe” Harembo]. Nearby is another space with a laser engraver and 3D printer. The tiny space doesn’t stop them from being busy. A constant stream of automotive tech students from the nearby National Institute of Transport shuffle in for advice and parts for class assigned projects.

In between students, Joe demos an autonomous car he’s working on. In classic hacker fashion, he first has to reattach the motor driver board and various sensors, but then he demos the car and its problem –  the video frame rate is very slow. We dive in with him and try to get some profiling using time.monotonic_ns(). He’s never done profiling before, so this is a big eye opener. He’s only processing one video frame every 4.3 seconds, using YOLO on a Pi 3, and yup, that’s the problem.  I suggest he change to gamut detection or a Pi 4.

Gamut Detection

If you’re not familiar with gamut detection, it’s one of the simplest of all computer vision techniques, so it’s easy to implement on slow processors and almost trivial to code. Basically, it’s “look for a color”.  If you want your robot to follow you, wear a lime green T shirt. Now the robot just has to look for lime green. Same for catching a ball or following a line. The algorithm is simple – convert each pixel to HSV, where hue corresponds to the direction around the color wheel,  saturation corresponds to how concentrated the color is, and value how bright. Brightness depends on the lighting, so you can throw value away and just set limits for H and S. Anything within those limits is part of our target. The box formed by those limits is our “gamut”.

There are a couple speedups you can apply as well. First, ask yourself how much resolution you need from the camera. If you only want to track a green T shirt that’s never less than 24 pixels on screen, turn the resolution down by a factor of six each way and look for four-pixel T shirts. You now have 1/36th as much data to process and your algorithm runs 36 times faster. If you can’t control the camera resolution, you can shrink the image or just sample every nth pixel. Second, you can often ask for a YUV or YIQ image from the camera. Discard Y and set your limits in IQ or UV coordinates. It’s about the same as HSV.

Joe’s eating this up – he’s had limited chances to talk with somebody else who is into computer vision. As we write this, he’s still trying with YOLO, but at lower resolution. If it doesn’t work he’ll try gamut detection. And it’s not his only project. Passenger carrying motorcycles called pikipikis are common here. A student has a project to enforce passengers wearing a helmet, and we fiddle with the student’s project.

The Dar es Salaam Scene

There’s other tech happening in Tanzania too. A few blocks away is [Ruta Electronics], a similar sugar cube sized shop developing smart meters. Everything from cases to PCB etching happens in the tiny shop. Downtown there are a few tech startups. There’s a fab lab, mostly oriented towards children. And on a quiet side street off the main drag, there’s a tiny shop with three guys who are hacking like crazy.

For us, we’ve had a chance to make a friend from a different culture and play with a robot car together — what could be better?  When you’re traveling, are you on the lookout for other hackers or hackerspaces? It’s worth the effort and brings our community together in a way that even the internet can’t.