State of the Art: A Rugged Camera, Despite Design Flaws

Log in to manage your products and services from The New York Times and the International New York Times.

Don't have an account yet?
Create an account »

Subscribed through iTunes and need an NYTimes.com account?
Learn more »

State of the Art: Review: Apple’s New Mac Pro Computer

Atop my desk sits a shiny (and I do mean shiny) new Mac Pro. It’s Apple’s top-of-the-line new desktop computer, aimed at, as the name implies, the creative professionals who have always relied on Macs for video, graphics, music and photo manipulation. It makes everything around it look vaguely slower. It also makes me want to increase my homeowner’s insurance, in case of a break-in. The Mac Pro is daring, extravagant and elite -- or maybe it’s just for the elite.

The design is obviously an indulgence. The Mac Pro is a charcoal gray cylinder that stands about 10 inches high and reflects back a distorted, slightly menacing view of the world. The outer layer of the tube is removable, displaying the Pro’s innards in a pleasing industrial array. A cutout at the top of the cylinder creates a lip that acts as a handle, and a visual effect sadly reminiscent of either a trash can or an ashtray.

Its affect is deeply futuristic: It looks like a device that might project a hologram, or generate its own singularity. Its blenderlike size makes it suitable for sitting atop a desk, particularly a lucite desk in an ultramodern sparse loft, or on black aluminum in an ultra-stylish ad agency, graphic design shop or documentary film studio.

Side note: Apple told me it considers the Mac Pro to be a “portable” desktop; many pro video and graphics editors prefer to travel with their editing rigs. As it happens, I got to test that claim: I picked up my review unit in New York and, later that afternoon, flew to San Francisco with it. Let’s just say that an 11 pound cylinder, handle or no, isn’t the most wieldy of travel companions.

The Mac Pro is extremely, ridiculously fast and powerful. The specifications are nearly mythical. The model Apple loaned me has an eight-core Intel processor; you can max out at 12. It has 64 gigabytes of extremely fast memory (most computers have four, eight, or maybe 16); two AMD graphics cards that purchased separately, cost $800 each; and a luxurious and fast one terabyte solid-state hard drive. As configured, and without a monitor or even a keyboard and mouse, which are not included, the Mac Pro sitting on my desk rings in at $8,099. Shipping is free.

Once it’s running, the Mac Pro is virtually silent, and only a ports panel that illuminates when you move the machine offers any sign of life.

Nevertheless, the power is evident. The Pro took just over an hour to convert 32 gigabytes of high-definition video into another video format -- a job that took over three hours on my quad-core Mac Mini. And although the task noticeably heated up the Mac Pro, its fan stayed quiet, and it didn’t seem perturbed. It’s clearly capable of much more than a mere multimedia professional can throw at it. But I had more in store.

The target market of professionals for the new Mac Pro has felt neglected in recent years. The last time they got a new Mac Pro desktop was 2010, with a minor speed bump in 2012. That year, Apple quietly killed the 17-inch MacBook Pro laptop, a favorite of creative pros who wanted an truly portable editing rig.

Meanwhile, Apple’s most recent edition of its Final Cut video editing software, Final Cut Pro X, disappointed many with missing features and a prettier, but dumber interface. Subsequent updates answered these sorts of complaints, and the software was just updated to support the new Mac Pro and, most important, ultra high-definition video manipulation.

Apple clearly hopes the new Mac Pro will both appease its creative base and lay claim to so-called 4K video editing just as it’s poised to become more mainstream. This video resolution has twice the vertical and horizontal resolution of high-definition video, for much more detailed picture quality. It’s the new darling of movie studios, graphic designers and ad agencies, and 4K (and even 5K, 6K and 8K) cameras are increasingly available to prosumers and even consumers. The land grab is on.

The Mac Pro offers, in theory, the graphics and processor power to make editing and rendering 4K video feasible -- although Apple doesn’t yet make a monitor capable of displaying 4K. It offers the Mac Pro on its own site alongside a Sharp monitor that costs $3,595.

I invited a friend who does freelance graphic design and video editing to come over with some 4K and 5K video he had shot. We imported the footage into Final Cut Pro X to test Apple’s claims of editing in real time, without long delays in rendering and processing video.

State of the Art: Silver Screen and LEDs Join at Last

And now, finally, projectors.

Projectors are amazing these days — the ones in corporate boardrooms, the ones in home theaters and the ones that fulfill both functions. But most still have a regular old light bulb inside. A very, very bright one that gets very, very hot and costs very, very much to replace — maybe $300 or $400. And that’s after about 2,000 hours of use.

If you could replace that hot, expensive bulb with LED lights, you’d use half as much power, so you’d be polluting less. Because it would need less cooling, your projector could be much smaller and lighter.

Above all, you’d never have to replace the bulb. The LED projectors in this roundup are rated at 20,000 hours or more — at least 10 times the life of a regular bulb. That’s long enough for you to watch a different movie every night for 27 years, or the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy twice.

I tried out seven LED projectors priced at $1,000 or less. Each comes with carrying case and remote control. Each offers every conceivable input — VGA so you can plug in your laptop, HDMI for Blu-ray players and game consoles, USB and memory-card slots (so you can project PowerPoint files and slide shows and movies without even needing a computer). All produce a 1,280-by-800-pixel image. A few, with the purchase of a Wi-Fi adapter, can display videos and slides wirelessly from a phone, tablet or laptop.

These LED projectors tend to fall into two categories, mobile projectors and business projectors.

Mobile projectors are tiny, tiny boxes; the smallest could be mistaken for a brownie. Then again, the power-cord brick is nearly a third the size of the projector.

These models are cheap and plastic. There’s no height adjustment. The speaker inside is usually 2 watts, mono — awful for watching a movie. You’ll want to connect a real speaker.

The image from these mobile models is nothing like the huge, bright, even, crisp picture that a $1,200 traditional projector gives you. But for their size and cost, these projectors display a surprisingly big, bright image. In a dark room, the image is still bright enough when it’s maybe eight feet wide; with the lights on, you’d probably want to go no larger than five feet wide. (Of course, an actual movie screen — as opposed to a wall — works wonders.)

The mobile models manage 300 or 500 lumens, which are the units of projectors’ light output. That seems pretty feeble compared with the 2,000 lumens of traditional projectors, but our eyes perceive brightness logarithmically. Doubling the lumens doesn’t double the brightness. A 500-lumen projector isn’t half as bright as a 1,000-lumen model; it looks brighter.

And that concludes the science lesson. Here’s what stands out among the mobile LED projectors:

DELL M115 ($520) At about four inches square and 13 ounces, this 450-lumen model is the smallest and lightest projector in the roundup. You could cover it up with a hamburger.

And yet this tiny, black plastic Dell is among the best mobile projectors. The picture is bright and the colors are true, especially in the dark. The buttons on the projector light up when you touch them, which is useful, but their labels are dark gray on black, and therefore pretty much impossible to read. The slot accommodates only Micro SD cards, not standard ones. And a remote is $25 extra (booooo!).

But you can transfer one gigabyte of PowerPoint, Word, Excel, PDF, picture, music and movie files into the projector, turning it into a self-contained, ready-to-use presentation device that fits in your pocket.

AAXA SHOWTIME 3D ($450) This 450-lumen projector offers cheap black plastic, inscrutable no-words menu system, no card slot, orangey skin tones and bursts of blotch in fast scene changes. Not impressed.

DealBook: The Changing State of Smartphone Competition in China

State of the Art: The Moto X From Google, iPhone’s Latest Challenger

The one truly huge, magnificent, radical idea of the iPhone, back when it was introduced in 2007, was to get rid of buttons. Make the whole phone a black rectangular touch screen.

By now, every company and its brother has done that. Everybody’s added voice recognition, GPS and navigation. Everybody’s sharpened up the screens to the point where you need a microscope to tell the difference.

So now what? How do you distinguish your phone from the more than 4,000 other touch-screen phones? (That’s not a joke. There have actually been 3,997 different Android phone models so far. And six iPhones and a motley assortment of Windows and touch-screen BlackBerry phones. Heaven help the landfills.)

With much fanfare, Google proudly presents its answer: the Moto X.

This phone ($200 with contract, 5.1 x 2.6 x 0.4 inches) is the first that Motorola has produced since Google bought it a year ago for $12.5 billion.

By looking at it, you’d never guess that this is the Android phone that Motorola hopes will change everything. Its curved back is plasticky, not classy metal (like the HTC One) or glass (like the iPhone 5). Its comfortably 4.7-inch screen looks great, but it isn’t as big or sharp as the Samsung Galaxy S4 and the HTC One. The phone is plenty fast, but its processor isn’t the latest and greatest.

But the Moto X does offer five features that no phone has offered before.

Feature 1: You can design your own color scheme. You’re offered a choice of 18 colors for the back panel, black or white for the front, and seven colors for the accents (the buttons and ring around the camera lens). The color choices are excellent; the odds of you and your frenemy showing up at a party with an identical Moto X phone are one in 252.

Later this year, you’ll even be able to order a back panel made of real wood — in bamboo, teak, ebony or rosewood. Motorola’s testing shows these beautiful panels to be just as tough as plastic (although more susceptible to termites, I’m guessing).

While you’re online, you can also order color-matched cases and earbuds, specify the wallpaper you want or request an engraved message for the back. For now, only AT&T offers the color choices. Verizon, Sprint and T-Mobile will offer only black or white until later this year.

You get your customized phone within four days, courtesy of Feature 2: it’s assembled right here in these United States. The components are still made in Asia, but they’re put together in Texas — you can lose less sleep worrying about underpaid Chinese workers.

Feature 3 is the most useful: touchless mode. As with Siri on the iPhone, you can command the phone to dial a number, send a text, open an app, set your alarm, look up a fact on the Web, and so on.

But unlike Siri, you don’t hold down a button to speak. The phone is always listening, even when it’s in your car’s cup holder.

It works remarkably well, as long as you precede your command with the salutation, “O.K., Google Now.” Without ever taking your eyes off the road, you can say, “O.K., Google Now. Give me directions to the Empire State Building.” Or, “O.K., Google Now. Remind me at 8 p.m. to give the dog his pill.” Or, “O.K., Google Now. Make an appointment for Thursday at noon with Bob.”

This truly inspired idea is a leap forward in both safety and convenience. It owes its success to a special chip that does nothing but listen all day long. It does, however, come with fine print.

For example, you have to train the phone to recognize your voice. In a silent room, you have to say “O.K., Google Now” exactly the same way three times.

If you’ve password-protected your phone, this feature loses much of its power. It won’t execute most commands until you first pick it up and unlock it. So much for touchless.

And Android’s voice commands are still no match for Siri. The phone recognizes the basics, like “Wake me at 7:30 a.m,” “Open Angry Birds,” “What’s Google’s stock price?” and “Check the forecast for Memphis on Friday.”

State of the Art: Chromecast, Simply and Cheaply, Flings Web Video to TVs

Take the story of the iTunes store. The instant somebody offered the chance to buy songs individually, the world changed forever. Hello, music à la carte. Goodbye, Tower Records.

Now it’s cable TV’s turn.

We are engaged in a great civil movement, testing whether that business, or any business so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. The number of people who cut the cord, or cancel the satellite, in favor of getting all their TV from the Internet is still small — maybe 1 percent of us a year. But the online alternatives to cable TV are growing. And once it becomes simple and easy to get Internet video from our laptops and phones to the actual television, well, the term “TV drama” will have a whole new meaning.

Actually, that has just happened. Google’s new Chromecast gizmo is the smallest, cheapest, simplest way yet to add Internet to your TV. It looks like a portly flash drive or maybe a fat keychain — and it costs $35. That’s not a typo.

So what does it do? If you have a Wi-Fi wireless network in your home, the Chromecast can perform two useful stunts.

Stunt 1: It lets you watch videos from YouTube, Netflix and Google Play (Google’s movie and TV store for Android gadgets) on your big screen. You use your phone or tablet (Apple or Android) as a remote control.

Stunt 2: The Chromecast displays Web sites on your TV — by broadcasting from Google’s Chrome browser on your Mac or PC. More on this in a moment.

Google’s promotional videos depict a fantasy of effortlessness: a hand slides the Chromecast into an HDMI jack on the back of a big-screen TV, clicking like a key into a lock. And then suddenly everything good on the Internet seems to be watchable on that TV, to the ecstasy of many young, attractive, multiethnic couch potatoes.

The videos leave out the fact that the Chromecast requires power. You can plug it into a power outlet or a USB jack on the TV itself, but either way, the result isn’t as clutter-free as the ads make it seem. Still — $35, remember?

Then you download a setup program, introduce it to your Wi-Fi network, name your Chromecast and so on. The whole setup process takes about five minutes; a child could do it. (Adults may need slightly longer.)

To perform Stunt 1, you open the YouTube, Netflix or Google Play app on your phone or tablet. Find a video to play. A special icon appears at the edge of the touch screen, resembling a rectangle with Wi-Fi signal waves in the corner. To begin watching that video on the TV, tap that icon and choose your Chromecast’s name.

Your phone is not actually transmitting anything. The Chromecast gets the video from the Internet directly; you use your phone or tablet only to find the movie and control its playback. You can even adjust the volume using the physical volume keys on the side.

The good news: this arrangement means you can do other things on your phone or tablet during playback, like working in another app or even turning the thing off.

The bad news is that the phone/tablet is the only remote control you’ve got. So if you want to pause, rewind or mute the video, you first have to find your phone/tablet, wake it up, enter the password if required, and finally reopen the app that’s doing the playing. It’s not especially graceful.

On Android gadgets, at least the Pause button appears right on the lock screen. You don’t have to unlock the device and reopen the app.

Otherwise, all of this is effortless and excellent. Even if you can already get Netflix and YouTube on your TV because they’re built into the TV, Xbox, TiVo or Blu-ray player, you may prefer the Chromecast; it’s just much easier to search for videos, thanks to the on-screen keyboard and voice dictation. You can also cue up several videos to play in sequence. That’s especially handy for YouTube videos, which are not exactly, you know, epic in length.

State of the Art: Software as a Monthly Rental

Yes, it’s still the program that just about every photographer and designer on earth uses to retouch or even reimagine photos. It’s still the only program whose name is a verb.

But now, Photoshop is also the biggest-name software that you can’t actually buy. You can only rent it, for a month or a year at a time. If you ever stop paying, you keep your files but lose the ability to edit them.

You have to pay $30 a month, or $240 a year, for the privilege of using the latest Photoshop version, called Photoshop CC. Or, if you want to use the full Adobe suite (Illustrator, InDesign, Premiere and so on), you’ll pay $600 a year.

The price list is stunningly complex. The fees may be higher or lower depending on how many programs you rent, whether you already own an existing version and which one, whether you commit to a full year or prefer to rent one month at a time. There are also discounted first-year teaser rates, student/teacher rates and a 30-day free trial.

But you get the point: the dawn of Software as a Subscription is now upon us.

Microsoft is conducting a similar experiment with the latest version of Office. An Office 365 subscription is $100 a year. But there’s a big difference: renting Office is optional. You can still buy it outright if you prefer.

It should be obvious why Adobe is enthusiastic about rental software. First, it’s big money.

Not everybody will pay more than before under the new plan. If you use three or more Adobe programs and you upgrade to the latest versions every year, you’ll save money by renting.

But if you use only one or two programs, you’ll pay much more by renting — especially if you were in the habit of upgrading only every other year, for example. Here’s the math: Photoshop CC alone will cost $240 a year. In the old days, buying the annual upgrade cost $200, and you didn’t have to upgrade every year. In three years, you might have spent $200 or $400; now you’ll pay $720.

And Adobe could raise the rental prices at any time. Every year, if it chooses.

Adobe also benefits because a rental plan helps it cut down on software piracy. Despite its name (CC stands for Creative Cloud), the new software versions are not, in fact, stored online. You still download Photoshop, Illustrator and the other programs and run them from your computer. But the downloaded software checks in with the mother ship every 30 days, over the Internet, to make sure the subscription is up to date. If not, you’re locked out.

Finally, Adobe benefits because it’s no longer committed to a difficult, relentless annual release cycle. There will no longer be a big new version of each Adobe program each year. Instead, Adobe says that it will regularly slip in new features as soon as they’re ready. The company hasn’t decided whether it will ever use numbers again (Photoshop CS4, CS5, CS6), but for now, the name is simply Photoshop CC.

So far, the switch to a rental-only plan may sound like a rotten deal for many creative people, especially small operators on a budget. And, indeed, many of them are horrified by the switch. A touching but entirely hopeless petition (j.mp/1aynMtK) has 35,000 signatures so far. (“We want you to restart development for Adobe Creative Suite 7 and all future Creative Suites,” it says. “Do it for the freelancers. For the small businesses. For the average consumer.”)

Adobe, however, points out that rental customers gain vast advantages over the old “you buy it” system. The big one, of course, is that perpetual refinement principle. You’ll always be up to date with software that’s constantly improving.

Adobe also points out that subscribing to Photoshop gets you more than just the right to download the software. The subscription comes with access to Behance, an online portfolio where you can display your Adobe-created documents and read admiring comments from fellow creative types. You also get 20 gigabytes of online storage for files, Dropbox style, so you can work on them wherever you happen to be.

Another perk: As before, you can use your rented programs simultaneously on two computers — but now, one can be a Mac and one can be a Windows machine.

State of the Art: Microsoft Office for the iPhone Is Here. Yawn.

Office for iPhone is big news, but not because the software is earthshaking. No, it’s a big deal primarily because of the politics of the situation — the optics, as public relations people say.

Here is Microsoft — the once-mighty software global overlord, years into its repeated failures to produce a successful smartphone — creating an app that lets you edit Word, Excel and PowerPoint files on the gadget that defeated it, the iPhone. It’s as if somewhere along the line, Microsoft executives started wearing “If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em” T-shirts.

Microsoft, of course, doesn’t see it that way. The company reports tiny but measurable upticks in sales of its own Windows Phone (which actually is a terrific phone). So why, then, did Microsoft create Office Mobile for the iPhone?

Here’s a hint: You can’t buy the Office Mobile app outright. It’s free with your paid subscription to Microsoft’s Office 365 plan, which costs $100 a year. It’s a service that lets you download Word, Excel and PowerPoint to up to five Mac or Windows computers.

Since Office 365 arrived, Microsoft has been busily trying to sweeten the offer. Office 365 membership gets you one hour of free phone calls a month using Skype. It also gives you 20 extra gigabytes of storage on the SkyDrive, an online hard drive for backing up or transferring documents. (Nonsubscribers get 7 gigabytes free.)

And now it gets you this app for iPhone (iPhone 4 and later) and iPod Touch (5 or later). That’s why its impressively clunky full name is Office Mobile for Office 365 Subscribers. (Office Mobile is already available on Windows Phones, and doesn’t require any subscription.)

You can run the app on up to five iPhones. If you ever stop paying for your Office 365 membership, the app stops working. Your documents are safe in that case, however. They’re both on your phone (until you delete the app) and on your free SkyDrive.

To use the app, you enter your Office 365 name and password. Once you’ve signed in, you see a list of all the Word, Excel and PowerPoint files that you’ve stashed on your SkyDrive. When you select a document’s name, it rapidly downloads to your phone, and you can work on it without an Internet connection. Next time you’re online, the changes get sent back to the SkyDrive original. You can also use Office Mobile to edit documents that people sent to you as attachments in the iPhone’s Mail app.

But once you tap a document to open it, you quickly discover that this app isn’t anything like the full Microsoft Office — it’s more like the Microsoft Vestibule. It’s extremely stripped down. It offers only the features Microsoft thinks you’ll realistically use on a bus or in the doctor’s office with nothing but your phone in hand.

The miniature Word module, for example, offers comments, outline view, bold/italic/underline/strikethrough styles, font and background colors and highlighting. You type, cut, copy and paste using variations on the iPhone’s standard finger gestures. And when you open a Word document, it jumps to the spot where you were last reading on your computer. Slick.

Notably absent: style sheets (normal, heading 1 and so on). Spelling checker. An undo command. The ability to change the font or insert a graphic. You can make the type bigger or smaller, but you can’t specify a size by number. Layout-intensive documents — lots of boxes, embedded graphics and so on — sometimes don’t come through to the phone fully intact.

The Excel module is by far the most fully featured app. It displays most elements of a spreadsheet, including charts and graphics. You can scroll around with your finger, zoom in or out with two fingers, lock a row or a column so it doesn’t scroll, rotate the phone for a wider view, edit comments, flip into outline view, edit formulas, create graphs, change numbers, sort, find, filter and format text and numbers. If the sheet has multiple pages, you can switch among using bottom edge tabs, exactly as on a computer. There’s an undo command. (Why here, and not in Word?)

Notably absent: you can’t rearrange rows or columns (although you can adjust row heights and column widths), and you can’t insert new ones.

State of the Art: Remember All Those Passwords? No Need

Have these security pundits ever listened to themselves?

That advice is clearly unfollowable. I currently have account names and passwords for 87 Web sites (banks, airlines, blogs, shopping, e-mail, Facebook, Twitter). How is anyone — even a security professional — supposed to memorize 87 long, complex password strings, let alone remember which goes with which Web site?

So most people use the same password over and over again, and live with the guilt.

There are solutions. Most Mac and Windows Web browsers now offer to memorize passwords for you. But that feature doesn’t work on all Web sites, and is generally of little help when you pick up your phone or tablet. At that point, the only person you’ve locked out of all your online accounts is you.

The only decent solution is to install a dedicated password memorization program (like Roboform, KeePass, LastPass, 1Password, and so on). Last week, one of the best was just improved: Dashlane, now at 2.0. It’s attractive, effective, loaded with timesaving features and available for Mac, Windows, iPhone and Android — and it’s free.

Installation is quick. Dashlane works in Safari, Chrome, Internet Explorer and Firefox. It can import existing password “vaults” from rival programs.

Dashlane has two primary features. First, yes, it’s a password memorizer. Every time you type your account name and password into a Web page and press enter, Dashlane pops up, offering to memorize that information and fill it in the next time.

In fact, it also offers to log you in — not just to enter your password, but also to click “log in” for you. In effect, Dashlane has just removed the login blockade entirely. When you go to Facebook, Twitter or Gmail, you just click your bookmark, smile at the briefest flash of the login screen and arrive at the site.

Since Dashlane is now storing and auto-entering your passwords, you’re now free to follow the security experts’ advice. You can make up long, unguessable passwords — a different one for every Web site, since you don’t have to remember any of them. In fact, each time you sign up for a new account, Dashlane offers to make up such a password for you, and then, of course, to memorize it.

Dashlane’s second huge feature is even more amazing. It can also fill in other kinds of Web site forms: your name/address/phone number, and even your credit card information.

When you’re buying something online, and you click into the credit card number box, Dashlane displays pictures of your credit cards: Visa, MasterCard, American Express or whatever — even PayPal.

When you click the one you want to use, Dashlane instantly fills in the long card number, your name, the expiration date, even that accursed security code, in the right boxes. Every time you order something online, you save between 30 seconds and five minutes, depending on whether you have your card information memorized or have to go burrow through your wallet.

When you make a purchase, Dashlane even offers to store all the details in a digital receipt that you can call up later, along with a screenshot of the Web site where you shopped. This feature makes online shopping so frictionless, every dot-com retailer on earth ought to be promoting Dashlane as if its profits depended on it.

In fact, Dashlane can fill in all kinds of forms automatically: phone numbers, job titles, tax numbers and so on. If you’ve ever recorded multiple answers — you have two different Twitter accounts, say — two tidy buttons appear beneath the name box, bearing the account names. Click the one you want.

Unlike some rival programs, Dashlane doesn’t require you to associate one set of personal information to each “profile.” If you have three addresses, for example, you’re always offered those three when filling in a form. You don’t have to create three personalities’ worth of personal information.

So far, Dashlane probably seems designed for convenience, and that’s true. Behind the scenes, of course, its ultimate goal is security.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: June 7, 2013

The State of the Art column on Thursday, about the password memorization program Dashlane, misspelled the name of a rival program. It is KeePass, not KeyPass.

State of the Art: 3 Ways Feedly Outdoes the Vanishing Google Reader

On July 1, it will take away Google Reader. To the dismay of millions, that service will go the way of Google Answers, Google Buzz, iGoogle and GOOG-411. Google hasn’t provided much in the way of a satisfying reason for this “spring cleaning,” saying only that “usage has declined.”

This column is intended to help two kinds of people: Those who used Google Reader, and those who never even knew what it is.

Google Reader is what’s called, somewhat geekily, a newsreader, or painfully geekily, an RSS aggregator.

It’s like an online newspaper you assemble yourself from Web pages all over the world. Instead of sitting down at your desk each morning and visiting each of your favorites sites in turn — say, NYtimes.com, Reddit.com and HuffingtonPost.com — you just open reader.google.com. There, you find a tidy list of all the new articles from all of those sources, organized like an e-mail Inbox. You skim the headlines, you read summaries, you click the ones that seem worth reading.

Occasionally, you can read the entire article without leaving the newsreader page; that’s up to whoever published the article. Usually, though, you see the headline of each item and a quick description of the article, or maybe the first few paragraphs and an accompanying picture.

One click takes you to the originating Web site. It’s all much faster and more efficient than wading through the ads, the blinking and the less interesting articles on the originating Web sites themselves.

There was a huge outcry when Google announced the imminent death of Reader — petitions, blogs, the works — but you might not immediately understand why. Google Reader is notoriously ugly. It’s fairly complicated and busy.

It is, however, complete, customizable and convenient. And once you’ve set up your preferred sources of reading material, they show up identically on every computer, tablet and phone. The masses may not have used Reader or even heard of it, but information devotees, news hounds and tech followers loved it.

They needn’t mourn. Google Reader has plenty of rivals and satisfying replacements. In fact, I fully intended to offer capsule reviews of each of them, until I realized that six presidential administrations would pass by the time I finished.

Newsreaders are available for every kind of phone, tablet and computer: Bloglines, NewsBlur, Pulse, Taptu, Reeder, FeedDemon, Spundge, Good Noows, HiveMined, Prismatic, Netvibes, NetNewsWire, ManagingNews and so on. Some are Web pages like Google Reader; others are stand-alone programs or apps. Some e-mail programs can subscribe to these feeds, too, dropping them right into your Inbox.

The one everybody keeps saying is the natural heir to Google Reader, though, is Feedly.com. In fact, Feedly says the ranks of its four million users have swelled to seven million since Google’s Reader death sentence was announced.

It requires a free plug-in for the Firefox, Chrome and Safari browsers. Three factors in particular make it useful.

First, the biggie: Simply logging into Feedly with your Google name and password instantly re-creates your Google Reader setup. All of your news sources, favorites and tags — category names that you can apply to certain articles, for ease in rounding them up later — magically show up in Feedly, ready to use. The synchronization is two-way; until July 1, you can bounce between Reader and Feedly to your heart’s content, and your newsreader worlds will look identical.

(Behind the scenes, Feedly relies, believe it or not, on Google Reader’s feeds. But the company says it will seamlessly replace Google’s feeds with its own source by July 1.)

Second, Feedly is much nicer-looking than Google Reader. It does a better job with typography — Google does no job at all — the layout is more attractive, and it offers more views of your news.

For example, Feedly can display your feeds exactly the way Google does, in a text-only list; click something in the list to expand and read it right there in the list. But it can also display your articles in much more visual ways. There’s Magazine view (a list of descriptive blurbs, each with a small photo next to it); Cards view (photo and blurb appear on what looks like playing cards filling the screen); and Full Articles view (you don’t have to click to expand anything — each scrolling vertical block shows as much of the article as is available).

State Of the Unions: Miho Walsh and Roy Prieb — State of the Unions

“I was impressed with Miho, because rather than poo-pooing the whole gaming experience when we were first dating, she dove in,” said Mr. Prieb, now 40, a founder of and partner in Saaspire, a technology consultancy in New York. “She dove in, not by creating her own character; she dove in by sitting next to me and playing with me. We both got into it, co-piloting one character around that world.”

Then they stopped, cold turkey.

“It was a bright spring day and we looked out the window and said, ‘Let’s quit,’ ” Mr. Prieb recalled.

But after hearing that the couple would be featured in a Vows article in The New York Times, the manufacturer of World of Warcraft sent them a free limited-time subscription.

“I brought back the character” — a brawny, helmeted warrior named Kwai — “and I resumed playing a little,” Mr. Prieb said.

Humorously but firmly, Ms. Walsh, 40, said, “I was not part of that revival.” And her character, a troll priestess named Kookamanga, remained idle.

She is now the executive director at the Asian Cultural Council in New York, a cultural exchange organization that awards grants to artists, scholars and professionals in the arts and humanities.

Since the wedding five years ago they moved from Ms. Walsh’s thimble-size studio apartment on the Upper East Side to a commodious prewar in Hamilton Heights, which better suits their growing family. There is their 3-year-old son, Ryden; one of her two brothers, Mickey, 33, who is living with them; and Toro, their English bulldog. The couple is expecting their second child in August.

“It was exciting going from the studio Roy and I shared to the life we have now — very full and very fulfilled,” Ms. Walsh said.

But almost immediately upon moving into their new home they were surprised to find at least one major blind spot in their relationship, despite having lived together for a year and a half before marrying.

Mr. Prieb was caught off guard by the fact that he and his wife had different philosophies about what he calls “stuff.”

“Miho has a lot of stuff,” Mr. Prieb said. He said it hadn’t been an issue when they shared her apartment because most of her treasures (including essays from high school, a six-inch-tall nunchuck-wielding hamster doll and enough ceramic teapots and cups to keep Alice in Wonderland happy for years) were in storage. When they moved to the larger space, Mr. Prieb said, “I thought it was a great opportunity to be done with the stuff.”

Big mistake.

When Ms. Walsh asked, “Hey, where is that bag of Halloween costumes” or “that bag of gift ribbons and wrapping paper” — silly things, she acknowledges — her husband answered, “They never made it” to the new apartment, she recalled.

Tears followed.

“I’m somebody who hangs onto things, and keeps things, and part of the beauty of moving into the new space was creating a new home, but Roy thought it was a great time to purge,” Ms. Walsh said. “But the purging happened without my knowledge.”

Mr. Prieb said it was a “wake-up call.”

“It was one of those moments, you think you know somebody, but you don’t, or you don’t really appreciate the meaning of certain things to people,” he said.

They discovered something else that would become important in their marriage: scheduling one-on-one time.

When their son was about 7 weeks old (he was not a good sleeper at first, so his parents had also endured seven weeks of sleeplessness), they found a wedding present: a gift certificate to a restaurant that was about to expire. They got a baby sitter and made a Friday night reservation.

State of the Art: Canon N Takes On Phone Cameras

Incoming waves: tablets, e-books, movies online. Outgoing waves: Desktop PCs, landline phones, anything on disc, tape or paper.

It’s fascinating to watch outgoing industries struggle to remain relevant. Take, for example, the outgoing wave known as pocket cameras. No wonder nobody is buying them anymore. Your phone takes pictures nearly as well and is far more convenient.

You always have your phone with you, and you can transmit the photos wirelessly as soon as you take them.

But Canon, the world’s No. 1 camera maker, has dreamed up an ingenious response to the phone-camera threat. It’s a camera designed to attack the cellphone threat on three fronts.

First, it emphasizes the features that a smartphone can’t match, like a zoom lens. Second, it imitates the workings and design features of a smartphone. Third, it can transmit new photos to your phone for immediate sending or posting online. The result, the Canon N ($300), is half pocket camera, half photo-taking accessory for your phone.

In the category of features a phone camera lacks, the Canon N starts by offering a powerful zoom lens — 8X, compared with zero X on a smartphone. Digital zoom, where the camera just enlarges a photo to make it seem as if you’re closer, doesn’t count.

The N also has a much bigger, more sensitive sensor and lens. Now, the N’s sensor isn’t very big for a camera — it measures 0.4 inches diagonally — but it’s much better than what’s in a typical phone. Finally, the N’s screen flips out 90 degrees, so you can take photos at interesting angles.

The second category, imitating a phone’s design and operation, is more intriguing. The Canon N is one of the weirdest-looking cameras you’ve ever seen. It’s a nearly square, nearly featureless block, in black or white.

It has only three physical buttons, all tiny: Power, Play and Connect to Phone. As on a phone, the rest of the controls are all on the touch screen.

Now, you might have noticed that that list does not include “shutter button”; this camera doesn’t have one. Instead, you take a picture by pressing up or down on the silver plastic ring around the lens, which budges slightly and clicks.

And what, you may ask, is the point of that design? Simple: This camera works equally well upside down or at 90 degrees. Like a phone, it detects which way you’re holding it and flips the screen image accordingly. Thanks to this ring-shutter system, you can take a shot no matter how you’re holding the camera.

Left-handers might also appreciate this setup; it frees them from the tyranny of right-side shutter buttons. The downside of the shutter ring is that it’s very skinny and right next to the equally thin zoom ring. Often, you snap a shot by accident when you’re just trying to zoom.

The upside-down feature also mitigates the limitations of the flip-out screen, which has a hinge that is far less ambitious than the ones on other cameras. When you hold the camera upright, the flipping out aids you only in taking photos of low-down subjects (that’s low down as in “children and pets,” not “yellow-bellied scoundrels”). But because you can use the camera in any orientation, the flip-out screen also helps you take pictures holding the camera over your head or even around corners.

Even so, the screen can never face you, so it’s no help when you’re taking self-portraits — a real shame.

There are other cellphone similarities. There is no external battery charger; you charge the battery in the camera, by connecting a USB cable to your computer or a wall adapter. The battery itself looks like a squared-off AA battery; it’s tiny. Canon says it’ll give you about 200 shots on a charge, which is very low.

State of the Art: Galaxy S4 Crams in More Software, Some of It Good

There’s a world of wisdom there. When Apple designed its original iPhone, it had zero market share; the company had nothing to lose by taking risks. As a result, the phone teemed with bold ideas.

But as the iPhone became more iconic and more important to Apple, the company’s courage to shake things up has dwindled. Why mess with a great thing?

That timidity gave Samsung the opening it needed. Its Galaxy S phone went after the iPhone with all guns blazing, and soon became a cellular celebrity in its own right.

When it was a distant would-be, Samsung had nothing to lose. “Let’s try making the screen really huge!” “Let’s try hand gestures!” “Let’s try eye recognition!”

But now here’s the Galaxy S4, the fourth incarnation of Samsung’s best-seller. (All four big United States carriers will offer it for prices from $150 to $250 with a two-year contract, or around $640 up front.) And here’s the funny thing: Now Samsung is starting to play it safe.

The Galaxy is still a beautiful, high-horsepower Android phone. But basically, it’s an updated Galaxy S3. If this were Apple, who adds the letter S to denote a slightly upgraded model (“iPhone 4S,” for example), Samsung might have called this phone the Galaxy S3S.

The S4 is the same size as the S3 (well, seven-tenths of a millimeter thinner). It’s still huge, more Jumbotron than index card. Good for maps and movies, bad for small hands.

And the S4 is still made of plastic — lightweight and grippy, but not as classy as the iPhone’s glass or the HTC One’s metal.

All told, nobody at the office will notice that you’ve bought the latest and greatest.

Yet Samsung has managed to cram better components into this wafer without increasing its size. The bright, supersharp screen is now 5 inches diagonal, up from 4.8; the margins have shrunk.

The battery is 20 percent bigger, too. That doesn’t necessarily mean much improvement in the one-day battery life, because the larger screen drinks up more power. Fortunately, you can still pop off the back panel and swap batteries, which you can’t do on an iPhone without a blowtorch. You can also expand the storage with a memory card; the iPhone can only watch with envy.

Most of the other changes in the S4 are software features. More than ever, Samsung’s design approach this time was, “Throw everything in and see what sticks.” There was absolutely no filter. There’s also no consistency, coordination or unified direction; it’s just a big, rattling cargo bay crammed with features.

A few examples: SMART SCROLL This is the S4’s much anticipated eye tracking. Like its predecessor, the S4 can recognize your eyes; it can, for example, dim the screen when you look away, to save battery power. In the S4’s video app, playback pauses when you look away (usually).

Better yet, the Web page or e-mail message you’re reading scrolls when you tip your head, or tip the phone a little bit. No hands! It’s unpredictable and gimmicky, but hey — it’s innovation, right?

AIR VIEW Point to the screen without actually touching the glass to get a pop-up preview of something. For example, point to a calendar square to see a pop-up preview of that day’s events, or to a Gallery thumbnail image to see the full-size photo.

Unfortunately, this feature is inconsistent. Why does it work in the Mail program, but not the Gmail program? (For that matter, why does Android require one app for Gmail, and another for other e-mail services?)

AIR GESTURES A sensor sees when you’re waving your hand — a feature that “really adds value when you’re eating with greasy fingers,” Samsung says. You can scroll a Web page or e-mail message by flapping your hand, or accept an incoming call with a wave. When the phone is locked and dark, waving makes the screen light up long enough for you to see the time, battery gauge and notification icons.

State of the Art: Two New Accessories Move TiVo Premiere to Another Level

I do, anyway. TiVo made me a cultist. “I don’t know or care when a TV show will be broadcast or on what channel,” I’d explain to anyone who would listen. “I just tell the TiVo what show or actor or director I like, and it records shows automatically. I bypass ads with the 30-second skip button. I can watch an hourlong show in 40 minutes!”

Wow, how times have changed. Cable companies can now rent you less polished but far less expensive DVRs. The monthly fee is usually about the same as the TiVo, $15. (You can also pay TiVo a one-time $500.)

People started watching TV over the Internet, too. Most people watch TV the old-fashioned way — from cable or satellite — but many don’t want to be anchored to the living room. They want to watch from any room in the house, or even out of the house.

The TiVo is still out there ($150 to $400, depending on recording capacity). The latest models, the Premiere family, are smaller and better-looking than old TiVos; the high-end models can record from as many as four channels simultaneously.

But the best news comes from the Department of Better Late Than Never: two new accessories that let you both time-shift and place-shift your TV shows. The TiVo Mini ($100) lets you watch them on another TV in the same house; the TiVo Stream ($130) lets you watch them on an iPhone or iPad, either at home or away.

They both work very well. Each upholds TiVo’s reputation for simplicity and smoothness of operation. Video and audio quality are superb. Amazingly, someone can be using your TiVo even while you’re playing back a different show remotely.

Unfortunately, there’s enough fine print to fill an encyclopedia.

For starters, the setup is much too complicated.

Your TiVo, your Mini and your Stream must all be connected to a wired Ethernet network in your house. (The company says that Wi-Fi isn’t reliable enough to ensure stutter-proof high-definition video.) Depending on your tolerance for stapling new cables along the wall, this requirement could be a big drawback.

A workaround: you can buy an Actiontec MoCa adapter ($64). This little box transmits Ethernet signals from your router to coaxial cables (the round cords that bring cable into the house). Once you've attached a MoCa box to your router, your TiVo and TiVo Mini can then get network signals from plain old TV jacks on the wall. If your TiVo is close enough to the router to connect directly to it, you don't even need the MoCa adapter. Either way, presto: no rewiring.

You have to “activate” each on TiVo’s Web site. You have to permit remote access on the TiVo itself. There’s a 20-minute period of downloading and processing. For the Stream, into each iPhone or iPad, you have to type your Media Access Key: a long string of numbers that’s unique to your TiVo. That’s an antipiracy step, meant to appease the TV networks. But it feels paranoid.

Keep in mind, furthermore, that these new products work only with the TiVo Premiere family. The Mini, in fact, works only with the Premiere 4 or Premiere XL4, models that require a CableCard; cable boxes and antennas don't work.

A CableCard looks like a metal credit card, and it replaces the cable box (and its remote control) that used to clutter up your TV area. From now on, you change channels and volume using the TiVo remote control. But exchanging your cable box for a CableCard means a visit to your cable company’s office, or a visit from one of its technicians.

All right. Once all of those setup headaches are complete, how do these things work?

The TiVo Mini, which became available just this week, is a 6-inch-square, black, cheap-feeling plastic slab with sloped edges, like a pyramid sawed off close to the base. It’s meant to be a satellite for a TiVo Premiere (4 or XL4 model) you already own; it brings that TiVo’s screen to a second TV.

It comes with the same brilliantly designed TiVo remote control. It offers the same menus on the screen — including access to services like Hulu Plus, YouTube, AOL On, Rhapsody, Spotify, Live365, Pandora, PhotoBucket and Google Picasa — and makes the same distinctive sounds. But behind the scenes, it’s operating your real TiVo in another room.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: March 16, 2013

The State of the Art column on Thursday, about new products from TiVo, the digital video recording company, misstated the number of ActionTec MoCa adapters required to use the new TiVo Mini on a home network. Only one adapter is required, not a pair, and only if the TiVo is not close enough to the network router; otherwise, the TiVo can be plugged directly into the router. The column also referred imprecisely to the compatibility of the Mini with various TiVo Premiere models. While it works with the Premiere 4 and XL4, which require a cable card for reception, it is not compatible with older Premiere models connected to an antenna.

State of the Art: 2 Ways to Subscribe to Microsoft’s Office, Eternally

But how do you do that? Microsoft Word is already a word processor, a Web design program, a database and a floor wax. What on earth is left to add?

For the last few versions, Microsoft has mostly just shuffled around the existing features. Reorganizing them into a Ribbon toolbar to make them easier to find, for example, or brightening the background for a cleaner look.

This year, the biggest news isn’t the software, but how you pay for it.

Way 1: buy the Office suite as you always have, for $140 (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, OneNote) to $400 (those programs plus Outlook, Access and Publisher).

Way 2: buy an annual subscription to these programs for $100 a year. That plan is called Office 365. (That’s right: the programs known for a year as Office 15 are sold as Office 2013, and available through Office 365. Nobody ever accused Microsoft of clarity in naming.)

Microsoft argues that this subscription offers all kinds of benefits. First, you can download and run the Office programs on up to five computers, including Macs and PCs. You can change which five they are at any time. (Windows PCs get Office 2013, with settings magically synced across computers. Macs get the older, less refined Office 2011 for Mac.)

If your home or office has a bunch of computers, you could save money; buying five copies outright would set you back $700. That’s more economical only if you plan to use that increasingly ancient version for at least seven years.

With a subscription, you’ll always get the latest version — Office 2015, Office 2031, Office 2119 — but, of course, you have to pay $100 a year forever. (If your subscription lapses, you can open or print your documents, but you can’t edit them or create new ones.)

You might be appalled at the notion of paying Microsoft an annual fee forever to get something you used to own outright. Or might like the idea of a fixed, knowable fee that keeps you up to date.

Either way, an Office 365 subscription gets you more than just five copies of the software. It also includes Office on Demand, which is the ability to download Office programs onto any Windows 7 or Windows 8 computer — at a branch office or a friend’s house, say. Touch up your slides, write up that proposal; when you log out, the downloaded Office software vanishes.

The SkyDrive is a free 7-gigabyte online storage disk for files that you want to access from anywhere, from any computer, tablet or smartphone with an Internet connection. In Office 13, it’s more important; in fact, the factory setting is to save new documents onto your SkyDrive. And if you subscribe to Office 365, you get another 20 gigabytes. That’s a lot of slides and spreadsheets.

Even that isn’t the end of the pot-sweetening. The same $100 fee also buys you one hour a month of free Skype-to-phone calls. (Microsoft bought Skype last year.) That is, from a computer, tablet or phone that has Skype installed, you can call to regular landline or cellphone numbers — something that usually costs a few cents a minute. (Calls to computers and smartphones, using Skype addresses, like Skibunny20304, are still free.)

So far, it must sound as if the only thing new in Office 2013 is how you pay for it. But there are also plenty of nips and tucks to the software itself.

The programs have a new design that matches the clean, rectangular lines of Windows 8’s Start screen. No drop shadows, shaded toolbars or rounded corners on buttons or boxes.

Speaking of touch screens — and Microsoft has been speaking of them incessantly lately — a new Touch Mode is supposed to spread out Office’s buttons and menu items, so that you can more easily hit them with a finger. It’s not much spreading, though. You’ll still wish you had a mouse.

State of the Art: Imagining Ho-Hum C.E.S. as an Action Movie - State of the Art

I mean, think about it: Apple, Google, Microsoft and Facebook don’t even attend C.E.S.; they’d rather make their product announcements on their own schedules without being locked into this every-January thing. It’s still a big show, bigger than ever this year, with 3,200 exhibits and 150,000 attendees, but I wonder why people bother. Whose product announcement will get any press at all when it’s buried by 3,199 others?

C.E.S.’s organizers publish a daily magazine during the show that profiles new products announced there. Here are some actual examples: “Braven Expands Bluetooth Speaker Line.” “Armpocket Unveils Smartphone Cases.” “Bits Ltd. Expands Line of Surge Protectors.”

So if you want an exciting column from me, the thrills won’t come from the news of new products at C.E.S. I’ll have to spice things up another way. See what you think of this.

As he plummets toward the Nevada desert, two deafening sounds assail Daxton Blackthorne’s eardrums — the wind rushing past his ears at terminal velocity, and a deafening explosion over his head. Fumbling for his parachute cord, he’s blasted by the searing heat from the fireball that, until seconds ago, was his Cessna Citation.

For now, though, his concern isn’t the air-to-air missile that has just dispatched his jet, courtesy of the Bora Boran Mafia on his tail. It isn’t even the fact that Daxton Blackthorne is all that stands between them and the collapse of American democracy.

It’s finding a good place to land.

There! Squinting in the blinding sun, he spots an enormous chain of low-slung buildings, stretching through the bustling downtown like a sleeping cobra: the Las Vegas Convention Center.

He hits the roof of the South Hall hard — too hard. Keeping low, he scuttles across the gravel to a ventilation shaft and emerges, moments later, in a blasting cacophony of color, sound and electronics.

He hears the crash of boots behind him as his pursuers explode from the same shaft. Got to move, Daxton thinks. Detaching his ’chute, he darts among the booths, dodging clumps of buyers, reporters and electronics executives.

He weaves among the exhibits, barely noting their wares. External battery packs for phones. Car chargers for phones. Screen protectors for phones. Cases for phones.

What is this place? he thinks, pulse pounding.

Booth after booth. GPS units. Tablets. Earbuds. Bluetooth speakers. Phone cases. Row after row of Chinese manufacturers he’s never heard of. Like this one, Huawei, selling the world’s largest Android phone — the thin, shiny Ascend Mate, with a 6.1-inch screen. That’d be like talking into a cutting board, he thinks.

He bursts into the Central Hall, and the sensory overload is immediate; he pauses, gasping, to take it in. TV screens. Thousands. Screens bigger than a man. Screens stacked up to the distant ceiling. Screens brighter and louder than explosives in the morning. Sharp, Sony, Samsung, LG, Toshiba, Panasonic. The bombardment is almost as lethal as the one that took down his Cessna.

Here are OLED screens, with incredibly black blacks, vivid colors and razor-thin bodies; this LG model is only 0.16 inches thick. Panasonic and Sony each claim “the world’s largest OLED screen” — 56-inch prototypes.

Footsteps pound behind him. Too late to run. He’ll blend in. He merges into a throng of eager showgoers.

“Three-D may have been a flop,” a rep is saying. “But this year, the industry is back with an irresistible offering: 4K television. Ultra HD, we call it. You thought HDTV was sharp? Now imagine: four times as many pixels. Stunning picture quality, in stunning screen sizes.”

Daxton figures you’d have to sit pretty darned close to see any difference between HDTV and 4KTV. But never mind that — out of the corner of his eye, Daxton spots the black uniforms of his pursuers, fanning through the crowd. Play along, he thinks. “Excuse me,” he shouts in a faux French accent. “What is there to watch in 4K?”

“Unfortunately, 4K video requires too much data for today’s cable, satellite, broadcast, Blu-ray, or Internet streaming,” is the reply. “But at Sony, we’re leading the way! If you buy our 84-inch 4K television for $25,000, we’ll lend you a hard drive with 10 Sony movies on it — in gorgeous 4K.”

Daxton can think of better uses for $25,000; a jetpack would come in handy right about now. He dives into the crowd. Must. Find. Disguise.

A crowd wearing headsets is gathered before a Samsung TV. That’ll do. He grabs one; it covers both his eyes and his ears.

“You’re seeing a prototype of Samsung’s OLED dual-view technology,” the spokesman says. “This TV can display two 3-D video sources simultaneously, or four regular ones. Imagine: Your children can be playing Xbox while you watch the Super Bowl!” Daxton moves the switch on the earpiece; sure enough, the TV’s image changes accordingly, along with the audio from the tiny earpiece speakers.

But angry shouts in Tahitian are closing in. He bolts through an archipelago of audio booths, hawking celebrity headphones bearing the names of the rapper 50 Cent, the heavy-metal band Motorhead, the runner Usain Bolt, the N.F.L. quarterback Tim Tebow and the TV reality star Snooki. When did Snooki become an audiophile? he wonders.

By the time he storms into the North Hall, his lungs are screaming. He stands, panting, in a broader area populated by gleaming, polished automobiles. Here are Ford and General Motors, announcing new developer programs, open platforms for new apps that will run on their cars’ computer screens. Ford’s Sync AppLink bans games and video apps, for safety reasons. Good thinking, Daxton thinks. Wouldn’t want distracted driving.

Here are Audi and Lexus, announcing self-driving cars. Glancing at the video loop, he notes that the Audi prototype can, at this point, drive itself only through specially equipped parking garages, like the one set up at the Mandarin Oriental for a demonstration.

But on the Lexus stage, he spots something much more enticing: a car, festooned with sensors, that can actually drive itself on regular roads, much like Google’s fleet of 12 autonomous cars.

“California and Nevada have both made self-driving cars legal, with certain restrictions,” the executive on stage says. “And this Lexus LS safety-research vehicle is a pioneer. The 360-degree laser on the roof detects objects up to 230 feet away; the front camera knows if the traffic light is red or green. Side cameras, GPS and radar enhance what could someday be a safe, efficient, road-aware vehicle.”

There’s a burst of commotion from Daxton’s near right. It’s them. He vaults onto the stage. “Love the idea of self-driving cars,” Daxton tells the presenter. “But right now, I need a car I can drive myself.”

A saber blade shatters the air next to his ear. With a burst of adrenaline, he dives through the open window of the Lexus. His assailants push through the crowd and clamber after him, but he’s already powered on the car. Huddling low, he guns the engine and shifts into gear.

As a hail of bullets shatters the rear window, the Lexus arcs off the stage, plows through seven rotating shelves of phone cases, and, in a cloud of plaster and twisted beams, erupts through the wall of the convention center.

With a wry smile, Daxton adjusts his rear-view mirror just in time to see the knot of black-suited Bora Borans shaking their fists in the distance.

He brushes some safety glass off his shoulder, slips on sunglasses, and leans back into the leather seat.

“Now that’s what I call an exciting show,” he says, grinning, and he swings onto the open road for home.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: January 18, 2013

The State of the Art column on Thursday, about the range of wares on  display at the Consumer Electronics Show, misspelled the name of a Chinese electronics manufacturer at the show. The company is Huawei, not Huwei.

State of the Art: Android Cameras From Nikon and Samsung Go Beyond Cellphones - Review

But yes, that’s what it has come to. Ever since cellphone cameras got good enough for everyday snapshots, camera sales have been dropping. For millions of people, the ability to share a fresh photo wirelessly — Facebook, Twitter, e-mail, text message — is so tempting, they’re willing to sacrifice a lot of real-camera goodness.

That’s an awfully big convenience/photo-quality swap. A real camera teems with compelling features that most phones lack: optical zoom, big sensor, image stabilization, removable memory cards, removable batteries and decent ergonomics. (A four-inch, featureless glass slab is not exactly optimally shaped for a hand-held photographic instrument.)

But the camera makers aren’t taking the cellphone invasion lying down. New models from Nikon and Samsung are obvious graduates of the “if you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” school. The Nikon Coolpix S800C ($300) and Samsung’s Galaxy Camera ($500 from AT&T, $550 from Verizon) are fascinating hybrids. They merge elements of the cellphone and the camera into something entirely new and — if these flawed 1.0 versions are any indication — very promising.

From the back, you could mistake both of these cameras for Android phones. The big black multitouch screen is filled with app icons. Yes, app icons. These cameras can run Angry Birds, Flipboard, Instapaper, Pandora, Firefox, GPS navigation programs and so on. You download and run them exactly the same way. (That’s right, a GPS function. “What’s the address, honey? I’ll plug it into my camera.”)

But the real reason you’d want an Android camera is wirelessness. Now you can take a real photo with a real camera — and post it or send it online instantly. You eliminate the whole “get home and transfer it to the computer” step.

And as long as your camera can get online, why stop there? These cameras also do a fine job of handling Web surfing, e-mail, YouTube videos, Facebook feeds and other online tasks. Well, as fine a job as a phone could do, anyway.

You can even make Skype video calls, although you won’t be able to see your conversation partner; the lens has to be pointing toward you.

Both cameras get online using Wi-Fi hot spots. The Samsung model can also get online over the cellular networks, just like a phone, so you can upload almost anywhere.

Of course, there’s a price for that luxury. Verizon charges at least $30 a month if you don’t have a Verizon plan, or $5 if you have a Verizon Share Everything plan. AT&T charges $50 a month or more for the camera alone, or $10 more if you already have a Mobile Share plan.

If you have a choice, Verizon is the way to go. Not only is $5 a month much more realistic than $10 a month, but Verizon’s 4G LTE network is far faster than AT&T’s 4G network. That’s an important consideration, since what you’ll mostly be doing with your 4G cellular camera is uploading big photo files. (Wow. Did I just write “4G cellular camera?”)

These cameras offer a second big attraction, though: freedom of photo software. The Android store overflows with photography apps. Mix and match. Take a shot with one app, crop, degrade and post it with Instagram.

Just beware that most of them are intended for cellphones, so they don’t recognize these actual cameras’ optical zoom controls. Some of the photo-editing apps can’t handle these cameras’ big 16-megapixel files, either. Unfortunately, you won’t really know until you pay the $1.50 or $4 to download these apps.

State of the Art: Google Maps App for iPhone Goes in the Right Direction - Review

As everybody knows by now, Apple got lost along the way. It was like a 22-car pileup. Timothy Cook, Apple’s chief executive, made a quick turn, publicly apologizing, firing the executive responsible and vowing to fix Maps. For a company that prides itself on flawless execution, it was quite a detour.

Rumors swirled that Google would create an iPhone app of its own, one that would use its seven-year-old, far more polished database of the world.

That was true. Today, Google Maps for the iPhone has arrived. It’s free, fast and fantastic.

Now, there are two parts to a great maps app. There’s the app itself — how it looks, how it works, what the features are. In this regard, few people complain about Apple’s Maps app; it’s beautiful, and its navigation mode for drivers is clear, uncluttered and distraction-free.

But then there’s the hard part: the underlying data. Apple and Google have each constructed staggeringly complex databases of the world and its roads.

The recipe for both companies includes map data from TomTom, satellite photography from a different source, real-time traffic data from others, restaurant and store listings from still more sources, and so on. In the end, Apple says that it incorporated data from at least 24 different sources.

Those sources always include errors, if only because the world constantly changes. Worse, those sources sometimes disagree with one another. It takes years to fix the problems and mesh these data sources together.

So the first great thing about Google’s new Maps is the underlying data. Hundreds of Google employees have spent years hand-editing the maps, fixing the thousands of errors that people report every day. (In the new app, you report a mistake just by shaking the phone.) And since 2006, Google’s Street View vehicles have trawled 3,000 cities, photographing and confirming the cartographical accuracy of five million miles of roads.

You can sense the new app’s polish and intelligence the minute you enter your first address; it’s infinitely more understanding. When I type “200 W 79, NYC,” Google Maps drops a pin right where it belongs: on the Upper West Side of Manhattan.

Apple’s Maps app, on the other hand, acts positively drunk. It asks me to clarify: “Did you mean 200 Durham Road, Madison, CT? Or 200 Madison Road, Durham, CT?”

Um, what?

And then there’s the navigation. Lots of iPhone owners report that they’ve had no problem with Apple’s driving instructions, and that’s great. But I’ve been idiotically misdirected a few times — and the trouble is, you never know in advance. You wind up with a deep mistrust of the app that’s hard to shake. Google’s directions weren’t great in the app’s early days either, and they’re still not always perfect. But after years of polishing and corrections, they’re right a lot more often.

The must-have features are all here: spoken driving directions, color-coded real-time traffic conditions, vector-based maps (smooth at any size). But the new app also offers some incredibly powerful, useful features that Apple’s app lacks.

Street View, of course, lets you see a photograph of a place, and even “walk” down the street in any direction. Great for checking out a neighborhood before you go, scoping out the parking situation or playing “you are there” when you read a news article.

Along with driving directions, Google Maps gives equal emphasis to walking directions and public transportation options.

This feature is brilliantly done. Google Maps displays a clean, step-by-step timeline of your entire public transportation adventure. If you ask for a route from Westport, Conn., to the Empire State Building, the timeline says: “4:27 pm, Board New Haven train toward Grand Central Terminal.” Then it shows you the names of the actual train stops you’ll pass. Then, “5:47 pm, Grand Central. Get off and walk 2 min.” Then, “5:57 pm, 33rd St: Board the #6 Lexington Avenue Local towards Brooklyn Bridge.” And so on.

Even if public transportation were all it did, Google Maps would be one of the best apps ever. (Apple kicks you over to other companies’ apps for this information.)

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: December 14, 2012

The State of the Art column on Thursday, about a new Google Maps application for the iPhone, misstated the type and, because of an editing error, the number of businesses for which interior views are available. It is 100,000, not 100, and the number includes many kinds of businesses, not just restaurants.

State of the Art: All-in-One PCs From Vizio, H.P. and Apple - State of the Art

Right. Nobody knows.

And nobody cares. Today, it’s all about phones and tablets, baby. Nobody buzzes about the PC anymore. Innovation is dead. Sales are down, right?

Actually, there’s one pocket of surging sales and innovation in PC land: the luxury all-in-one computer, of the type made famous by the iMac.

I took a look at three silver, high-design, screen-on-a-stalk competitors: Apple’s new iMac ($1,300 and up), Hewlett-Packard’s SpectreOne ($1,300 and up), and the Vizio All-in-One Touch PC ($1,000 and up). (Lenovo, Dell, Samsung and Acer also offer, or soon will offer, very similar all-in-ones.)

What characterizes these computers? First, an emphasis on looks. They’re shiny, sleek, futuristic, uncluttered and cordless (they come with Bluetooth wireless keyboard and trackpad or mouse). They’re sculpture. In your kitchen or on your desk, they contribute to the décor even when they’re turned off.

The usual box of innards is missing. In the iMac, the guts are concealed behind the screen. In the Vizio, they’re in the foot of the monitor. In the H.P., they’re inside the stalk that supports the screen.

The second common trait is state-of-the-art components. These computers offer gorgeous, vivid, high-definition screens. And they’re fast; they’re powered by the latest Intel chips and lots of memory.

Third characteristic: no DVD drive.

What? Do these companies really think that the era of the disc is over? That nobody will ever again want to digitize music from a CD? Or burn some files to a disc to hand to a colleague? Or borrow a DVD from the library?

Apple, H.P. and Vizio seem to believe that everything is online now. Well, it’s not. Want to rent an Indiana Jones movie, “Jurassic Park” or “Schindler’s List”? How about “Star Wars,” “A Beautiful Mind,” “Bridget Jones’s Diary,” or “My Big Fat Greek Wedding”? Too bad; they’re not available to rent online.

You can, of course, buy an external DVD drive. But aren’t these called “all in ones”? A drive just looks stupid.

Now, on a laptop, eliminating the DVD drive is understandable. You carry laptops. Weight matters. Bulk matters. But why eliminate DVD drives on computers that stay in one place?

All right, end of rant.

The new iMac, clad in its traditional aluminum, is stunning. The stand is still a thin, curved L of metal — but now, the screen appears to be just as thin (0. 2 inches). Where are the guts?

Turns out it’s a trick — an illusion. Behind the screen, you see a substantial bulge; Apple tapered the aluminum as it approaches the screen, so that from front angles it seems that the whole screen is razor thin. Apple has also eliminated much of the glare that has long dogged today’s glossy screens. Viewed side-by-side with its rivals, the iMac is a lot less reflective.

There are two iMac sizes: 21.5 and 27 inches. The $1,300 and $1,800 base models come with a 1-terabyte hard drive, 8 gigabytes of memory and an i5 Intel processor. Each has four USB 3.0 jacks, two Thunderbolt jacks (for video input or output or external hard drives), and camera memory-card slot, awkwardly positioned on the back. Apple has ditched the FireWire jack it spent so many years promoting.

On the 21.5-incher, you can’t upgrade the memory yourself; what you buy is what you’ll have forever, unless you take it into the shop.

On the 27-inch model, you can install as much as 32 gigabytes yourself, through an easily opened door. (That, for the record, is about 262,144 times the memory as the original Macintosh.) Online, you can order your iMac with a 3-terabyte hard drive, 32 gigabytes of memory, a 768-gigabyte flash-memory drive and a $3,700 invoice.

Vizio isn’t a company you expect to be in the PC business; it made its mark selling high-quality, low-price TV sets. And sure enough, by far the best part of the All-in-One Touch PC is its lovely touch screen, available in 24- and 27-inch versions.

A nontouch version is also available, but the Vizio comes with Windows 8, which is far more pleasant to use with a touch screen.

State of the Art: Nokia Lumia 920 and HTC Windows Phone 8X Are Great, and Yet

Because competition drives innovation. Innovation leads to improvement. Improvement begets happiness.

In the tech world, some companies do their most innovative work when their backs are against the wall — especially Microsoft. Last month, it took the wraps off Windows Phone 8, the most polished edition yet of its beautiful, crystal-clear software for touch-screen phones. (My review of Windows Phone 8 is at http://j.mp/Qqfz2F.)

Unfortunately, as a Microsoft product manager told me understatedly, “We have an awareness problem.” Translation: Nobody is buying Windows phones. And since nobody’s buying them, nobody’s writing apps for them. And since nobody’s writing apps — well, you can see where this is going.

Still, Microsoft isn’t giving up. This month, Windows Phone 8 arrives aboard two fascinating new phones: the Nokia Lumia 920 ($100 with a new AT&T contract) and the HTC Windows Phone 8X ($200 from AT&T, Verizon or T-Mobile).

It’s funny about Nokia and HTC; they, too, are fallen giants. Nokia was the world’s largest cellphone maker for 14 years straight; not anymore. At the moment, it’s in seventh place among smartphone makers. It has shed tens of thousands of employees. HTC is struggling, too, having sold 36 percent fewer smartphones this year than last.

How intriguing, then, that HTC and Nokia have each chosen Microsoft as its savior, and vice versa. Loser + loser = winner?

Yes, actually. The two new phones have a lot in common — for one thing, they’re both awesome. For another, both have bigger, sharper screens than the iPhone’s famous Retina screen. (The HTC and Nokia phones have 4.3- and 4.5-inch screens. That’s 1,280 by 720 pixels, packed in 341 and 332 to the inch.)

Both have rounded backs and edges, which make them both exceptionally comfortable to hold. (The curve also makes it easy to pull them out of your pocket the right way.)

Both come in a choice of bright colors. Both phones have the same blazing fast processor. Both can get onto their respective carriers’ 4G LTE data networks (meaning very fast Internet), in the cities where those are available.

And get this — both of these phones can also charge without being plugged in. That’s right: magnetic charging is finally built right into phones. Come home at the end of the day, throw your keys in the bowl, set the phone down on the charging pad (a $50 option) — and a little chime tells you that it’s happily charging, even though no cable is in sight.

It’s pretty great. It will become even greater if this charging method (an industry standard called Qi, pronounced chee) catches on. Someday there may be charging surfaces at coffee shops, airports and hotel rooms. (Only the Verizon version of the HTC phone has this feature turned on — not the AT&T or T-Mobile versions.)

Both phones also have built-in NFC chips. These allow near-field communications, which means “this phone can do things when you tap it against another gadget.” The promise is that you’ll be able to tap on a cash-register terminal to pay for something; tap against an NFC-enabled bus shelter ad to download promotional goodies; tap two phones together to transfer a photo or address; and tap against a Bluetooth speaker to “pair” it with the phone.

In practice, there’s more to it than that. Unfortunately, the tap only introduces the phones; Bluetooth or some other technology is needed to complete the connection. And Microsoft’s coming tap-to-pay initiative is incompatible with the one Google has spent millions of dollars setting up at cash registers across the land. But we can always hope.

The HTC Windows Phone 8X is the smaller of the two new phones, but even so, it dwarfs the iPhone — it’s wider, taller, heavier and thicker. If you get the Verizon model, your Internet experience will be faster and better in more cities than on the Nokia phone, which is available only on AT&T.

The back panel is faintly textured, so you’re less likely to drop this phone than you are the shiny-backed Nokia. But the buttons — power, volume, camera — are skinny and utterly flush with the phone’s body; you practically need an ice pick to push them in.