Linux will turn 35 this year, with the free and open source operating system launching in 1991. Linus Torvalds created the Linux kernel, and since then, it has been built upon by an army of programmers. In those 35 years, Linux has gone from a niche project to one of the most installed operating systems of all time, partially thanks to the thousands of variations of distributions available. It has also become synonymous with the supercomputer sector of the tech world.

Key to Linux’s success in this realm is that it’s open source. That means it can be used either commercially or privately for free, however the developer sees fit. With that in mind, having no overhead cost on the core piece of software used to run their servers is immensely appealing to operations building out a supercomputer. 

Linux has become even more popular in recent months, with half a million Windows users shifting to it in 2025. While it’s been gaining traction for home users, Linux has been the go-to for powering supercomputers across the world for decades. Microsoft even uses Linux to power some of its Azure Cloud services. So why is it that supercomputers tend to stick with something like Linux over Windows or macOS? It all comes down to flexibility, and being flexible is one of the things Linux can do that Windows 11 can’t. And, of course, Macs are notorious for being virtually unchangeable (though that’s a bit of a myth).

Why do supercomputers use Linux?

Rawpixel.com/Shutterstock

Outside of the open source codebase and being free, Linux is incredibly flexible. It can be scaled to fit almost any project, including embedded systems, giant server farms, and even microcontrollers. With that level of customization at the developer’s fingertips, it’s only natural to go with what they can shape. This is why, despite Linux being the most-installed operating system on these types of machines, there’s still no standard distro to install on a supercomputer. Instead, think of Linux as the baseline, and then operators will customize it to the specifications of the job.

Supercomputers are used for massive calculations, simulations, and other data-intensive tasks. Some are even used to calculate the end of the world. Not only are some versions of Linux far more lightweight than competing operating systems, but they’re also significantly better in the areas regular users wouldn’t really have to consider. For example, task scheduling tends to be faster and more secure on Linux than on Windows, at least partially due to how the two are developed. Linux has thousands of individuals poking at it every day, trying to find ways to improve the OS or components of it in some capacity, even if it’s a microsecond faster, while Microsoft takes a slower approach, or not at all.

Being able to build out a supercomputer to fit the job at hand is of paramount importance over almost everything else. If an OS can’t be scaled or pivoted to a new task easily, then it’s functionally an albatross around the neck that could bring down the project. Without that level of flexibility and openness, a lot of the world’s supercomputers would be a much more rigid, frustrating experience for those who have to use them.

Source

john4ever02/Shutterstock

Wireless chargers are becoming more popular, especially now with modern devices offering faster and more efficient wireless charging, as well as public spaces, cars, and even sofas often having built-in pads to accommodate this need. It’s a drop-and-go charging method that makes refueling your device convenient, taking the stress off the port. If you’re thinking of using wireless charging in the long term, though, you might wonder if it’s better for the battery’s health, and the simple answer is no. Wireless charging is slower and less efficient than wired charging, but that doesn’t make it inherently harmful. It’s the additional heat caused by the method that can be a concern.

However, this doesn’t mean wireless charging will significantly degrade your battery over time or that you should avoid it. Modern devices that support this method have been built to handle the heat efficiently so it doesn’t reach unsafe levels. However, it just means that wireless charging is something you should use occasionally since you don’t want to constantly subject the battery to heat that is above the ideal operating range.

So, while wireless charging is safe, it can have a subtle impact on the long-term health of the battery. It should not become your primary charging method. Furthermore, you need to know how to create the ideal wireless charging scenario so that temperatures don’t become unsafe.

Understanding why wireless chargers produce more heat

Erstudiostok/Getty Images

A major issue with wireless charging is that energy loss is inherent to the process. The charging pad of a wireless charger has a transmitter coil that generates a magnetic field of alternating current (AC) around it when connected to an outlet. When you place your device on the charging pad, its receiver coil is induced by the current, which is then converted to direct current (DC) and transferred to the battery. However, not all of the power makes it from the charging pad to the battery. Since energy cannot be created or destroyed and can only change form (by the first law of thermodynamics), the form it takes in this scenario is heat, something known to make lithium-ion batteries age faster by accelerating their thermal degradation.

The energy lost during wireless charging is about 20-30% under ideal scenarios. Wired charging only loses about 5%, which is why wireless charging generates more heat. If the coils are misaligned, the energy dissipation gets worse, leading to even more heat being generated, and this can cause the device to overheat. Modern smartphones constantly monitor the battery’s temperature and throttle the charging speed or stop the process completely to prevent overheating. Thick cases are also a problem, as they add more distance between the coils, causing the wireless charger to draw more power. The increased energy output leads to more heat (something that thick phone cases are also good at trapping).

Keep these wireless charging tips in mind

Lee Charlie/Shutterstock

To ensure the best overall experience and optimum battery life, always make sure you’re using high-quality wireless chargers. Look for those that are Qi2- or (for Apple devices) MagSafe certified. These have a magnetic ring around them that enables compatible devices, which also have it, to snap into the optimal charging position. This prevents the misalignment issues of old wireless chargers, making the process faster and more efficient. Keep in mind that if you’re using a fast wireless charger, it will generate more heat than its standard counterpart because of the high current it delivers — more current means more energy loss and less efficiency. On the other hand, your device will be docked and charging for a shorter amount of time. So, using wireless chargers is a fine balance between long-term battery health and convenience, especially with fast wireless chargers.

Beyond that, avoid the common charging mistakes that people make. For instance, do not do high-intensity tasks, such as gaming or streaming 4K video, while charging. If you’re charging a phone or tablet, remove any thick cases and be sure to place the device on a hard surface that doesn’t absorb heat and keep it away from direct sunlight. Also, you might want to ensure you don’t charge the device past 80%, which is the threshold that ensures the battery isn’t under a lot of voltage and heat stress for too long. If you’re a phone user and can’t actively monitor this, you should enable Optimized Battery Charging on iPhone or the battery protection feature that some Android devices have (not all do) to delay or prevent charging past 80%.

Source

Framalicious/Shutterstock

What do you think of when you hear the name IBM? Maybe the first things you think about are home computers or business laptops. Maybe you think of IBM as a company that runs data centers. It’s not that these impressions are wrong exactly, it’s just that IBM is like an iceberg from a public point of view. We get to interact with a small public-facing part of the company, but don’t get to see the majority of the work going on under the surface.

The truth is that IBM is one of the most important technology research institutions in history. To take a recent example, while companies like OpenAI get all the attention with breakthrough AI technology, IBM spent over 70 years advancing the field so that current AI companies could take the baton across the finish line.

But it’s not just amazing tech demos like IBM’s Watson managing to beat people in Jeopardy or (much more recently) IBM’s cutting-edge Granite 4.0 Nano AI that you can run locally in your web browser. The venerable International Business Machines (IBM) invented technologies that affect your life every day, and even these are only scratching the surface.

IBM’s punched cards were a computer industry knockout.

Slideo/Shutterstock

Depending on your age, your earliest experience of storing data to use on a computer might be wildly different. Perhaps your first computer used cassette tapes, like the ZX Spectrum. Perhaps your first computer used a big floppy disk format, or the smaller, stiffer 3.5″ floppy that came later. If you’re younger, your first computer might have had a CD burner. These days, we have 100GB Blu-rays, thumb drives that hold gigabytes of data, and tiny SD cards that can squeeze more than a terabyte into something the size of a fingernail.

Before all of that, there was the paper punched card. Now, IBM didn’t invent the punched card. They’ve existed as long as industrial automation. Early versions of punched cards were used to “program” looms and were a major part of the Second Industrial Revolution, where the cards moved from being used in textiles to controlling electromechanical systems. What IBM did was to take punched card technology and standardize it for computers. The “IBM card” was “a thin piece of stiff cardboard measuring 7⅜ inches by 3¼ inches comprising 80 columns, 12 rows and a series of tiny rectangular holes.”

At one point, according to IBM, most of the data in the world was stored on punched cards. Punched cards are also the origin of the common computing term “patch.” Since errors in a punch card could be fixed by literally patching it or punching additional holes.

IBM’s hard drive was the size of two fridges, but it changed everything

It’s difficult to imagine a modern computer without a hard drive. Yes, we’ve moved to SSDs today, which are much faster and generally more reliable than hard drives, but the “spinning rust” storage device is far from obsolete. Even if your computer or laptop doesn’t have one inside, you may have an external drive somewhere, and big data centers make extensive use of hard drives with massive storage capacities in the tens of terabytes.

While you can buy a hard drive with over 30TB of storage space today if you want to, it all started with a 5MB drive called the IBM RAMAC. This beast of a machine needed a forklift or a crew of burly human loaders to transport it, and was a revolutionary replacement for punched cards. This was the first “random access” drive and meant that information lookups on mainframes went from taking hours or days to just a few seconds.

The RAMAC was produced in the ’50s, but by the ’80s, with the rise of personal computers, hard drives were small enough to fit inside a small desk computer. If you bought a more expensive model, you could get them in ludicrous capacities like 40 megabytes. How could anyone ever fill that much space? In seriousness, hard drives changed the world even before they entered our homes, and it’s one of IBM’s greatest achievements.

IBM’s Memory Disk would go on to take over the world

Lezh/Getty Images

“Don’t copy that floppy!” was a popular anti-piracy campaign from the ’90s, and showed just how popular this computer disk format had become. Using a magnetic film disc inside a plastic sleeve, home computers with floppy drives could easily save, run, or install software using this inexpensive technology.

But the world-changing floppy (originally called the IBM Memory Disk) wasn’t invented for home computers at all. The research that would lead to the floppy started in 1967 in the IBM San Jose Research Lab. It was called “Project Minnow,” and the goal was to find a better way to enter data into mainframes and install updates. While these mainframes already had hard drives, punched cards were still being used to load data into the machines. Filling up five megabytes of hard drive capacity with thousands and thousands of punched cards is no one’s idea of fun, and the amount of data that needed to be transferred would grow over time.

Magnetic tape was the first option, but with Project Minnow, the researchers found that a Mylar disk coated with magnetic material could be used to read and write information. It was sort of like a flexible hard drive platter, but the spindle, motor, and drive heads were in the drive, and you could change out the disk as needed. The format isn’t completely dead either. For example, airplanes still use floppy disks for their software!

IBM’s ATM design made getting your cash easier and safer than ever

FotoDax/Shutterstock

Many parts of the world are moving towards being cashless today, but paper money is still important, and has been for decades. However, getting your cash used to be a labor-intensive process. You’d have to go into a bank, speak to a teller, go through a verification process, and then, some time later, walk out of the bank with your money. The advent of the Automated Teller Machine, or ATM, brought on a banking revolution.

Now, human tellers could focus on more complex and important services, and you could get cash from your account at any time of day in just a minute or two. Even better, you don’t even have to go to a bank. With ATMs at every gas station and shopping mall, cash became that much more convenient. None of this would have been possible without IBM.

IBM developed several of the key technologies that make an ATM practical. The magnetic stripe that still adorns modern chip-and-PIN cards is perhaps the most important. It allowed information about the account holder to be stored on the card and read immediately. Combined with a PIN, it was secure enough for the time. Though with attacks like the NGate Android phone ATM scam, these machines remain a juicy target for criminals to this day, and ATMs and cards keep advancing to thwart them.

The UPC barcode system changed your life and you didn’t even notice

Paul Bradbury/Getty Images

In case you haven’t noticed, just about everything you buy has a barcode on it. This is what allows a cashier to rapidly tally your shopping; it allows companies to do inventory with ease, and it makes worldwide shipping of the stuff you buy online cheaper, as packages are automatically tracked using their barcodes.

A barcode is a pattern of light and dark stripes of varying width that encodes a number. That number represents an entry in a database somewhere, and it removes so much manual data entry (and errors!) that it’s hard to imagine a world without them.

It was George Laurer of IBM who led the project that would become the UPC or Universal Product Code. The code offered a standardized machine-readable image that could be scaled up, scaled down, and used in any situation where you needed unique labels for objects. Today, we still use UPC, but others have built on the concept with more sophisticated solutions like QR codes, which can store enough text for a website address. QR codes are everywhere, but it’s unlikely the humble UPC itself will ever fall out of use completely.

DRAM makes the world go round, and IBM invented it

Kinek00/Shutterstock

As we write this, the world is undergoing a massive computer memory shortage caused by AI data centers, and it’s wreaking havoc on prices. Hopefully, it will be over when you read this, but clearly, DRAM or Dynamic Random-Access Memory is important, and we have IBM to thank for its existence.

When IBM invented the RAMAC hard drive, it revolutionized data storage and retrieval speeds, but it’s still relatively slow when it comes to feeding data into a computer processor. At that time in the ’50s, computers used magnetic core memory or expensive SRAM that needed six transistors to store just a single bit of data. In 1966, IBM’s Robert Dennard came up with an idea to store a bit of data using just a single transistor, and that was the foundation for what would eventually become DRAM. 

This new type of memory stores a charge that represents a one or a zero, which is all you need to represent a bit of data. The patent was awarded in 1968, and just about every computer today uses DRAM along with every computer-adjacent product, from smart washing machines to jet fighter planes.

Virtual Machines make your life easier and safer even if you don’t know it

Vladimir_timofeev/Getty Images

Even though you might not work with them directly, VMs or Virtual Machines are a crucial part of modern computing. To put it in simple terms, a virtual machine is a simulated computer running on a real computer, often referred to as the “host” or the “bare metal” system. The operating system of the virtual machine doesn’t know the difference, but there’s a layer of separation. So, for example, you could have a computer running Microsoft Windows on bare metal, and have a Linux virtual machine running inside that.

What’s the point? Well, anything bad that happens to the virtual machine can’t affect the host. It’s also a great way to make full use of a computer that might have hundreds of CPU cores and terabytes of RAM, as is often the case in data centers. You could have dozens or hundreds of virtual servers doing their individual jobs without affecting one another or the host. There are also security benefits to VMs, and they’re useful for software development too. Really, VMs have a long list of clever uses, and we can discuss them all day, but the bottom line is they’re important.

So you might be surprised to know that IBM invented virtualization technology all the way back in the ’60s. It was developed to allow their mainframes to run multiple operating systems at once on the same hardware.

Your PC was probably invented by IBM

Photology1971/Shutterstock

Most of the personal computers in the world today descend directly from the original IBM PC. Specifically, the IBM PC 5150, which was unleashed on the world in 1981. It can be a little confusing, because any computer that’s meant for personal use is a “PC,” but when we talk about PCs versus, for example, Apple Mac computers, it has a very specific meaning. The IBM PC represents a specific architecture, and (in theory) software written for this 1981 computer should still run on a modern PC from the 2020s. Though in practice it’s rarely that straightforward.

The irony is that the IBM PC architecture came to dominate the world in a way that didn’t please IBM. It was the rise of legal IBM-compatible clones that popularized it and, by extension, blew up the market for PC software, such as the MS-DOS operating system and popular productivity software packages.

By inadvertently creating an open ecosystem, IBM’s technology became the foundation for PCs today. Since anyone could create hardware or software for IBM PCs, it led to competition. Hardware and software improved rapidly, and whether it was the intention or not, the IBM clone wars birthed a standardized PC market. Ultimately, it was to IBM’s benefit, but ironically, IBM exited the PC market in 2005, when it sold its personal computing division to Lenovo.

IBM invented the language behind modern data

Tee11/Shutterstock

Whether you know it or not, you interact with computer databases daily. Whether it’s an app, a website, or accessing your own bank account, it very likely relies on SQL or a SQL-based system.

IBM’s RAMAC hard drive laid the physical groundwork for the invention of the relational database, which got its start when Edgar F. “Ted” Codd published a paper while working at the IBM San Jose Research lab. Titled “A Relational Model of Data for Large Shared Data Banks,” this showed how data could be stored using tables that are queried mathematically quickly and efficiently. While this theoretical work didn’t need the invention of the hard drive to exist, without something like RAMAC, you’d have no way to implement it effectively.

IBM researchers built on this foundational model and came up with SEQUEL (Structured English Query Language), which made it simple to write queries to retrieve data from a relational database. Today we know that language as SQL, and it’s now the standard language for relational databases. Essentially, IBM invented the storage device, then invented the database model that could effectively use that device, and topped it off by inventing the very language we use to access that data!

IBM advanced science with its scanning tunneling microscope

While it’s interesting to know about the IBM inventions that affect our daily lives directly, the company did plenty of fundamental research that advanced science itself. In 1981, Gerd Binnig and Heinrich Rohrer developed the scanning tunneling microscope (STM) at IBM’s Zurich lab. This device measures quantum forces between a sharp tip and the surface that’s being scanned. 

This allows you to map an object at the atomic level. In other words, for the first time, scientists could look at individual atoms! Beyond simply being able to look at these fundamental building blocks of matter, the STM allows you to manipulate atoms, making it the first major step towards developing nanotechnology.

Of course, this wasn’t completely altruistic research. If you work with semiconductors where components measure in micrometers and, eventually, nanometers, you need some way to see what you’ve produced at that scale. Nonetheless, this amazing microscope had an immediate impact on all physical sciences that deal with the atomic structures of physical objects. This is a wonderful list of accomplishments, but don’t think that IBM’s research has stopped! We can’t help but be excited for whatever game-changing discoveries we’ll get from Big Blue in this century! 

Source

Paramount Pictures

Alex Garland’s 2018 follow-up to his masterful directorial debut “Ex Machina” wasn’t exactly a clear winner. “Annihilation” — starring Natalie Portman, Jennifer Jason Leigh, and Oscar Isaac — was the kind of cerebral cosmic horror that leaves you with a head full of thoughts and wild theories, especially after its divisive finale. It’s the sort of provocative, nuanced, and atmospheric filmmaking that instantly lifted Garland up as one of the most promising new voices in contemporary cinema.

A promise that’s still in debate with no clear verdict as the writer-director seemed to have moved away from brainy and speculative science fiction with his later films like the underperforming folk horror, “Men,” the politically turbulent “Civil War,” and his latest docudrama, “Warfare.” Nevertheless, “Annihilation” remains his second-best film to date.

Based on Jeff VanderMeer’s 2014 novel of the same name, the plot follows Lena (Portman), a cellular biology professor, as she joins an expedition into a quarantined zone dubbed the Shimmer in Florida. You learn about this through flashbacks as she’s interrogated in the present as the only survivor of her group. She went into the zone after her sergeant husband, Kane (Isaac), disappeared in it with a different team for a year, then reappeared out of nowhere as a shell of himself in a critical condition. Apparently, the Shimmer was created by a meteor (presumably containing an alien presence) that began mutating plants and animals in the area while rapidly expanding. Lena’s crew is sent in to gather data from its center (the lighthouse) and return, but she’s really there in the hope of finding a cure to save her dying husband.

The visceral horrors of change and evolution

Paramount Pictures

Besides its constantly evolving themes like identity and self-destruction, “Annihilation” revels in delivering eerie and disturbing environmental horror (very much in the vein of HBO Max’s “Scavengers Reign”). Garland steers away from traditional jump scares because he knows that silent terror and the fear of the unknown can be potent enough to sneak under your skin and into your minds to agitate your inner peace. But that’s not to say he doesn’t deliver some delicious macabre moments to chew on.

The albino alligator with concentric teeth, the mural-like abominations made of flora and human bones, and the mutated bear imitating the cry of a woman are the most thrilling and visually arresting moments in the film. But what they collectively indicate — a mutation that rips everything off its identity and DNA, including humans — is the true white-knuckle horror of “Annihilation.” The Shimmer makes everyone who enters forget things. It alters and essentially kills short-term memory, and the longer you’re in it, the more it eviscerates your identity both physically and mentally.

The Kane from Lena’s memories and his post-Shimmer iteration isn’t the same person. Anya (Gina Rodriguez), the rational and conscious medic of the team, gradually grows more aggressive and paranoid the deeper the crew ventures. Her theory that the Shimmer either has something that kills everyone who enters, or makes humans go crazy so they kill each other is only partially true. As Lena concludes late in the film, whatever it is that causes the rapid mutations within the Shimmer doesn’t necessarily destroy the beings there but rather uses them to create something new. But at the same time, that inevitably means eradicating their original form.

Annihilation was a cinematic delicacy, and it showed

Paramount Pictures

Although the final act of “Annihilation” is mesmerizing, movingly evocative, and intriguingly off-putting at the same time, it’s also densely ambiguous. Beyond a few vague explanations, there are no clear answers about what happened to Lena and Kane, or how they managed to survive the Shimmer — you’re only given nebulous indications. I believe that’s a fitting ending in line with the cryptic nature of the movie, but I’m hardly surprised it divided the average moviegoer crowd back then (and still does so today).

The majority of critics loved it (myself included), but commercially, Garland’s second feature was a hard sell; therefore, its box office performance was muted. It grossed $43 million worldwide against its estimated $40 million budget, but part of the truth is that Netflix acquired and added it to its streaming roster after only 17 days into its theatrical run, nixing the movie’s chance to generate a bigger profit in cinemas. Whether that was a wise and beneficial decision, I leave to the box office experts, but I will say that the streaming giant likely played a pivotal part in the feature reaching a significantly wider audience than it would’ve done theatrically.

For such an eccentric and eclectic piece of work that “Annihilation” is, that might not be such a bad thing. All I can say with certainty is that if you’re drawn to complex and thought-provoking genre blends, you should definitely give it a watch. If for nothing else, it’s for the food for thought it provides long after the credits roll.

Source

The rise of drone warfare has resulted in a new arms race revolving around the art of shooting down drones without any conventional “shooting.” The Ukrainian army is testing a laser that blasts UAVs out of the sky, and cities in the country are setting up fishing nets to fight against drones. Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy has a different solution: Fight drones with more drones.

Recently, the military contractor Leonardo DRS launched its new maritime defense solution, the Maritime-Mission Equipment Package (M-MEP). This system is attached to a small fleet of dinghy drones that launch out from larger vessels. Each M-MEP ship is equipped with an electronics suite that can detect and track potential UAV threats and, more importantly, use “electronic warfare systems” to scramble the navigation arrays of the opposing drones and knock them out of the sky.

Leonardo DRS describes the M-MEP as a “modular” system that can integrate with “multiple kinetic and non-kinetic effectors.” These terms imply that M-MEP isn’t limited to just dinghies or EMP-like systems. While the Navy can use a fleet of M-MEPs to knock out drones without firing a shot, engineers could very well equip M-MEPs with more traditional systems that shoot drones out of the sky with various rounds of ammunition.

How M-MEP detects threats

Unlike anti-drone systems other organizations are developing, the M-MEP isn’t a weapon in and of itself. As previously stated, the M-MEP is designed to integrate with different “effectors” and systems. Think of it less like the buggy Ukraine is employing to hunt drones and the weapons piled in the back and more like a radar system used to detect drones … and remotely tell pilots calling the shots from a safe distance.

The M-MEP primarily runs off an advanced maritime radar that functions in conjunction with electro-optical and infrared systems. These components integrate into Leonardo DRS’ SAGEcore platform, which uses AI to quickly sift through all of the data and determine what, if anything, has been detected and notify crew members if it’s a threat. When deployed on advanced autonomous scout drones, M-MEPs can provide a “defensive line” that beams data back to remote operators. While the M-MEP can use onboard systems to scramble enemy drones, even if these countermeasures don’t work, at least operators will know to expect company.

Unfortunately, the M-MEP isn’t perfect. The platform is designed to counter “airborne threats” and should be installed in unmanned surface vehicles a minimum of 14 feet in length. Still, modality is the central focus of the M-MEP, and Leonardo DRS plans to alter and improve the system based on “emerging threats,” so these limitations might disappear one day.

Source

Fitness and sleep trackers are all the rage, especially rings. They can’t do as much as smart watches, but what they do, they often do better. If you own a smart ring, you probably wear something like an Oura Ring 4 or alternatives like the Samsung Galaxy Ring. Of course, you need to keep these items clean if you want any form of accuracy, and you must do so regularly.

If you own a Galaxy Ring, Samsung recommends cleaning the device, specifically the sensors on the inside, at least once a week to remove debris that could block the full functionality. Oura echoes this sentiment, as the device functions much the same way as the Galaxy Ring. It’s probably a good idea to follow this schedule regardless of your smart ring’s manufacturer.

While the internal sensors should be your primary concern, you should also take steps to keep the external surface clean. Stick to a similar cleaning schedule for the outer surface (might as well clean the whole device while you’re wiping down the sensors), but if you follow a few simple steps, you will have less to clean. For instance, to avoid scuffs, Oura recommends wearing its rings on your non-dominant hand and not wearing other rings next to them. Also, while you’re at it, avoid exposure to cosmetics, antibacterial sprays, insecticides, and detergents while wearing a smart ring, as those can damage the gadget and build up on surfaces. Finally, remove the ring before getting your hands wet to prevent skin irritation and avoid exposing the ring to excess moisture.

How to clean your Smart Ring

Since smart rings are electronic devices, you must clean them in a specific way. If you don’t, you risk damaging the product, which is arguably worse than some dust and grime blocking the blood oxygen level sensors.

In order to clean a smart ring, Samsung recommends wiping it down with a soft cloth or rinsing it with soap-free detergent. Again, Oura’s instructions mirror this recommendation but clarify that the inside of your t-shirt can also work in a pinch, and that mild dish soap can properly clean the sensors. If you use soap, you need to dry the smart ring thoroughly, not just for the device’s sake but for yours — leftover soap and detergents on the ring can also lead to skin irritation. It is also important to clean the ring with a soap-free detergent and a cloth if you get any sunscreen or insecticides on it for the same reason.

Since a smart ring also technically counts as jewelry, you might be tempted to polish it with a dish soap and a slightly abrasive cleaning implement — or to chuck it in an ultrasonic jewelry cleaner. That would be a bad move — don’t do it! Ultrasonic waves, abrasive materials, and even compressed air can damage smart rings. Instead, only use buffing and polishing products that the manufacturers provide. For instance, if you own an Oura Ring 4 Ceramic, polish out scuffs with the purple side of the included polishing pad. Do not use this pad with the Oura Ring 4 Titanium variant, though. If you do, you could damage the device since the pad is made to clean ceramic surfaces and may scratch metal.

Source

Apple isn’t a company that messes up designs very often. Since bringing Steve Jobs back under its roof in 1997 and handing over the reins of design to Jony Ive, who helped design the iPod and iPhone, among many others (until he left in 2019), the company’s design faux pas have been rare. However, when the company does miss, it’s major news.

From antenna problems to ports in the wrong places and class-action lawsuits over a keyboard design, the Cupertino company has had its fair share of mishaps. People often focus on these failures from Apple because it’s a company that prides itself on its designs. When something goes horribly wrong, it’s irritating as a consumer, but still endlessly fascinating.

If you want to see what Apple really looks like on its back foot, you should read up on the period after Jobs left the company. With a new CEO about to enter the scene for the first time since 2011, we’re sure that at some point, this article will be updated with yet another set of problematic hardware. Who knows, maybe the foldable iPhone or even the rumored all-glass iPhone might wind up on here soon.

iPhone 4 ‘Antennagate’

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

There aren’t many incidents of Apple coming out and admitting fault. The iPhone 4’s antenna problems were one of those times. Built with a wrap-around, external cover for the antenna, the iPhone 4 was susceptible to a reduction in signal if touched in the wrong spot. In a 2010 “Letter from Apple,” the company claimed that this was due to an incorrect formula for tracking how much signal the phone was receiving. Even Steve Jobs himself got out there and said that people should just hold the phone differently.

However, as the scandal rolled on, it became apparent that Apple was aware of the problems. Internally, the senior antenna expert, Ruben Caballero, had told Jobs and senior management at Apple that there could be problems with the design. According to Bloomberg in 2010, a phone carrier also envisioned problems with the external ring. The small gap in the corner of the shield was enough to cause problems when covered by hands.

Eventually, the problem escaped Apple’s PR department, with Consumer Reports also finding that the issue persisted in its review of the hardware. Apple rightfully folded under the pressure, offering free bumper cases to help solve the issue. The class-action lawsuit was eventually settled in 2012, with the court ruling that those who hadn’t already taken Apple up on its free bumper case offer were due a $15 payment.

Butterfly keyboards

Tyukin/Getty Images

One of Apple’s biggest blunders, the butterfly keyboard, was a disaster from start to finish for the company. A fresh design underneath the keys, the butterfly mechanism introduced a hinge when the key was pressed, with the hinge pushing down like a butterfly wing in motion on the connection below. However, the design left it open to damage, with even dust or small bits of debris able to completely break the keyboard if caught in the mechanism.

While probably missed by a good majority of Apple users, the resultant lawsuit eventually meant Apple had to shell out $50 million to make up for the disastrous keyboard. Even future iterations that introduced more protections and membranes to the design weren’t enough. When Apple refreshed its MacBook line in 2020 alongside the switch to Apple silicon (M-series chips), it also ditched the butterfly keyboard.

It’s not known how many keyboards were affected by the problem. Apple remained coy about the entire issue, hoping to shuffle it under the rug. Since the butterfly keyboard incident, the company has stuck with more traditional designs instead.

Magic Mouse 2

gd_project/Shutterstock

Yes, we could talk about the hockey puck mouse, but aside from it being a flop in terms of design, do you know how annoying it is that the Magic Mouse 2 still isn’t fixed? Released in 2015, the multi-touch mouse, meant to be a bridge between the touchpad and a regular mouse, has its charging port on the bottom. Even when the device was revised to drop the Lightning port in favor of USB-C, Apple still kept it underneath.

Yes, the Magic Mouse 2 has a truly impressive battery, but it is completely unusable while charging. Most computer mice come with a charging port situated on the front of the mouse, acting like a traditional cable when connected. At some point, Jony Ive and his design team just got a little too contentious for no real reason. Apple has never really commented on why it decided to place the port there, either.

There’s also no indication from the company as to when or if it will ever replace the aging peripheral. Being over 10 years old at this point, it’s simply easier to hook up a regular mouse to a macOS device and tweak the settings. Apple reporter for Bloomberg, Mark Gurman, did publish a piece with rumors that Apple was redesigning the mouse with the port in mind, but that was in 2024. For now, it’s either the Magic Touchpad or Magic Mouse 2 for official mice from Apple.

Apple III

Photology1971/Shutterstock

Sometimes old tech is hilarious in retrospect. The Apple III is one of those devices, but with a maximum price of $7,800 in 1980 (around $30,600 in 2026 dollars), this is a machine that shouldn’t have had these problems. There’s a reason it often gets brought up when Apple’s biggest product disasters come up as a topic. Due to its overall design, the Apple III got incredibly hot. Between early DRAM chips, actual moving parts, and no vents, it was reported by a computer magazine of the time, Byte, that “the integrated circuits tended to wander out of their sockets.” A reported fix for this that supposedly came out of Apple at the time was to lift the device 3 inches off the desk and drop it, hoping the chips would reseat themselves.

In the 1980s, Steve Jobs was a tyrant in the making, but was already issuing wild design decisions. He wanted a PC that would run quietly, so fans and vents to keep the device cool were out of the question. With everything contained inside, including the power supply, the Apple III would get so toasty that key components would slide out of position and cause data corruption. The built-in clock also stopped working after hours of use.

According to reports, each of the first 14,000 units had these defects, leading to a recall. It was such a bad situation that Apple eventually killed the Apple III not long after launching the IIe, which leveraged the success of the Apple II with fresher hardware. A III Plus was also launched in December 1983, less than two months before the launch of the original Macintosh. However, despite being an improved version over the very faulty original, Apple culled the line entirely by September 1985.

Third-generation iPod Shuffle

Tony Wu Studio/Shutterstock

The iPod Shuffle was an ingenious concept from a business standpoint when it launched. It provided a fairly cheap way to enter the iPod ecosystem, but you had to sacrifice the decision-making that iPods brought with them. The original was released in 2005 and was effectively a glorified USB stick with music controls. Its follow-up in 2006 redesigned the device to be smaller — like a small badge with music controls on the front. Its fourth and final design squared things off in 2010, offering familiar controls without relying on earbud buttons.

Notice how we skipped over the third generation? That’s because it was a bizarre choice from the company. The iPod Shuffle was already a limited device in terms of what it could do. There was no real control over what music would play, but you could at least easily pause and skip songs. The third-generation iPod Shuffle did away with all buttons on the device, turning it into a small object that had a headphone jack. Using the included earbuds was, for some, the only way to have direct control over what was being pumped into their ears, even if the quality of those old Apple earbuds was not great.

Thankfully, the ultra-minimalistic music player was dropped in 2010, as the final generation of the iPod Shuffle debuted. The iPod brand would be entirely dropped in 2022, with the Shuffle’s fourth generation being there to see it out.

Source

DC Studio/Shutterstock

If you think it’s time to replace your computer monitor, you shouldn’t just focus on specifications when choosing a new one. You also need to consider reviews from reputable websites and shoppers who have purchased them. Costco is a reliable source of offers on computer monitors, and we’ve identified the eight models with the highest average scores after a healthy number of reviews from the retailer’s customers.

There are various things to think about when buying a new computer monitor. Some of these are your preferences regarding the best monitor size, whether you’re planning to use dual monitors, and whether you need to go for cheap computer monitors due to a tight budget. In any case, you need to get a model that’s backed by positive reviews so that you won’t regret your purchase.

This roundup of computer monitors includes affordable monitors, a 4K monitor, an ultrawide gaming monitor, and even a portable monitor. Whichever kind of screen you need, at least one of the devices we’ve selected from Costco should catch your eye.

Acer Nitro 32-inch ED320QR S3 FHD curved monitor

Sharing the honors as the highest-rated computer monitor on Costco is the Acer Nitro ED320QR S3, with 4.5 stars based on more than 150 reviews. It’s a budget-friendly option at just $189.99 for a 32-inch curved screen with full HD resolution, but it’s only available online. Despite the affordable price, Costco shoppers are satisfied with the display’s performance in terms of brightness and clarity.

With its 165Hz refresh rate and 1ms response time, this Acer Nitro monitor is a decent choice for gamers, according to Laptop Decision, which said that while you’ll get smooth visuals and low latency, it’s not for hardcore gaming. It added that it’s great for productivity, and while Costco customers have placed two of these displays side-by-side in a dual-monitor setup, some said just one is big enough to comfortably view two documents or browser tabs at the same time.

Acer Nitro 32-inch XZ322QU V3 WQHD curved gaming monitor

With an average score of 4.5 stars on Costco, the Acer Nitro XZ322QU V3 has more than 130 reviews from the retailer’s customers. However, compared to the Acer Nitro ED320QR S3, it has sharper WQHD resolution and a faster refresh rate of up to 180Hz, with the same curved 32-inch screen and a 1ms response time.

Rtings.com described this Acer Nitro monitor as a decent option for both PC gaming and office work, with support for AMD’s FreeSync Premium technology and brightness that can overcome some glare on the screen. Costco customers said it’s a great screen for multitasking, and while it can also be used in dual-monitor setups, it’s big enough to work with multiple spreadsheets simultaneously on a single display. This Acer Nitro monitor is originally priced at $249.99, but a $60 discount at the time of writing brings it down to the same price as the Acer Nitro ED320QR S3 at $189.99.

LG 32-inch 32UN650 Ultrafine 4K UHD monitor

If you need a 4K monitor for work, the LG 32UN650 is a well-regarded option on Costco, with 4.4 stars based on more than 130 reviews. It features IPS panels, which are designed for professionals with better color consistency than VA panels, but this 32-inch screen is an affordable way to access the technology, according to Display Ninja. It’s currently available on the retailer’s website for $299.99.

The performance of this LG monitor exceeded the expectations of some Costco shoppers, as it has excellent clarity and vibrant colors. For them, it delivers a premium experience at a relatively affordable price, and its internal speakers are a nice bonus. The display comes with a tilt/height-adjustable stand and support for HDR10, and while its 60Hz refresh rate and 5ms response time aren’t as impressive as the other monitors on this list, they’re more than enough if work is the primary purpose of this screen.

Samsung 57-inch Odyssey Neo G9 Dual UHD curved gaming monitor

If your gaming PC upgrades have turned it into a beast of a machine, you’ll be wasting that power if you haven’t switched to a top-of-the-line gaming monitor. You’ll want a dedicated gaming display like the Samsung Odyssey Neo G9, which has a 4.4-star rating on Costco and features a 57-inch curved screen and Dual UHD resolution. That means native resolution equivalent to twin 4K panels, and it’s as wide as a pair of 32-inch 4K monitors placed side by side, as explained by PCMag in its review.

This Samsung monitor is designed for gaming, with a 240Hz refresh rate and 1ms response time, and while Costco shoppers said it works flawlessly for this purpose, it’s also excellent for multitasking and work such as video production and editing. This is supported by its expansive port hub, which includes three HDMI 2.1 ports, two USB-A ports, two USB-B ports, a headphone jack, and a DisplayPort 2.1 port, as noted by PCMag. This gaming monitor is available from Costco for a hefty $1,599.99, but every purchase comes with a $120 Costco Shop Card that you can use in future transactions and a copy of “Resident Evil: Requiem” for the PC.

Samsung 49-inch Odyssey G95C Dual QHD curved gaming monitor

If you want to spend below $1,000 on a gaming monitor, the Samsung Odyssey G95C is a well-reviewed display on Costco with an average score of 4.3 stars after more than 80 reviews. For $899.99 (discounted to $749.99 at the time of writing), you’ll get a 49-inch curved screen with Dual QHD resolution, a 240Hz refresh rate, a 1ms response time, and support for AMD’s FreeSync Premium Pro technology.

This Samsung monitor is built for video games, but in terms of productivity, both Costco shoppers and Tech Guided said it replaced multi-monitor setups for them. According to the retailer’s customers, it’s perfect for multitasking, as you can have multiple apps and windows open at once thanks to its large yet not overwhelming size. Tech Guided said that working on this screen feels “less cramped” and delivers amazing value if you can get it at a discount.

Acer 15.6-inch PM161Q portable monitor

A portable monitor is very useful for remote workers and gamers who need a second display that they can carry along with their laptop. If you think you need one, you can get the Acer PM161Q from Costco for $89.99. It has a 15.6-inch screen with full HD resolution, and according to Mathias Does Tech’s review, it’s a solid choice if you want an extra display that’s portable and affordable.

Costco shoppers have rated this Acer portable monitor at 4.3 stars, with many reviews praising the device for being very lightweight at just 1.43 lbs. with its stand. The screen has a 60Hz refresh rate and a 6ms response time, so it’s not for professional creatives and high-end gaming, said Mathias Does Tech, but it’s enough for general tasks such as remote work and watching videos. A Costco customer also mentioned the usefulness of a VESA mount on this monitor, in case you want to have it as a semi-permanent fixture in your PC setup.

Acer Nitro 34-inch ED340CU WQHD curved gaming monitor

The Acer Nitro ED340CU continues to boost Acer’s popularity among Costco shoppers, with an average score of 4.2 stars based on more than 100 reviews. This 34-inch curved gaming monitor offers WQHD resolution, a 120Hz refresh rate, and a 1ms response time for $199.99, and YouTube reviewer Altryn said that it’s a solid display for this price.

As an ultrawide monitor, this Acer screen is great for both gaming and productivity, according to Altryn. Costco customers said that video game graphics look crisp and clear on this display, especially for titles like flight simulators, and its support for Adaptive Sync means it can adjust its refresh rate based on your PC’s graphics card. Some shoppers, meanwhile, have replaced two or three of their monitors with this screen because they can work with multiple windows at the same time.

MSI 27-inch G274QPF WQHD gaming monitor

The MSI G274QPF, available at Costco for only $149.99 after a $50 discount, is an affordable gaming monitor with a 27-inch WQHD screen. It’s also got a 170Hz refresh rate and a 1ms response time, as well as compatibility with Nvidia’s G-Sync, which is enough to get it an average score of 4.2 stars after reviews from more than 230 Costco customers.

There are solid reviews from TweakTown for the MSI G274QPF-QD, which is the version of the monitor with quantum dot technology, and from TechNuovo for the MSI G274QPF-E2, which has slightly upgraded specifications, such as a 180Hz refresh rate. We didn’t find a reputable reviewer for this base model, but Costco customers have shared their experience with this gaming monitor and found that it offers excellent value for money, with solid performance and amazing color accuracy. Some shoppers have claimed to use this screen to boost their productivity in a dual-monitor setup.

How we chose these computer monitors

Bing-jhen Hong/Getty Images

For this roundup, we listed the highest-rated computer monitors on Costco with at least 30 reviews. This is to ensure that the average scores for these products, which range from 4.2 to 4.5 stars out of 5, are authentic. Many of these deals are available only online, so don’t necessarily run to your nearest Costco to pick one up right away.

Costco customers have appreciated these computer monitors in real-world applications, as evidenced by the feedback and overall sentiment in their reviews. We’ve highlighted comments from these shoppers, focusing on the reasons behind the impressive scores, and paired them with insights from reputable websites and channels, whenever available. The goal is to showcase each computer monitor’s capabilities and help you decide which one will best meet your needs.

Source

El editorial/Shutterstock

It’s Friday night, work is over, and the weekend is here. You want to sit back with a giant bowl of popcorn and enjoy the latest blockbuster movie. You head to Apple TV, purchase a movie, and away you go. But do you actually own the movie you bought? It’s a question many may not consider when shopping for digital movies, TV shows, and even games.

Each digital streaming service has its own terms and conditions for digital purchases. For Apple TV, simply buying a movie doesn’t mean you own it like you would a physical product. You can watch the movie through Apple TV as long as it is available through the service. While Apple states content should remain, there is a possibility it could be removed. Apple TV does allow you to download any purchased movie or episode to the Apple TV app.

What you’re actually getting when you purchase a digital movie from Apple TV is a license to view it. This essentially grants you permission to watch the movie or show you purchased on Apple TV or a device you have access to the Apple TV app. If you’re tired of spending money on digital movies, you could say goodbye to streaming subscriptions with this cheap alternative.

Physical versus digital purchases

FrameByte/Shutterstock

There is a lot of fine print when it comes to purchasing digital content such as movies, TV shows, and games through Apple TV and the Apple App Store. It’s left many viewers confused and even has a Reddit thread devoted to the topic of you not owning the movies you buy. All your purchase gets you is a license that states you have the right to view the purchased item through the service you paid for it, in this case Apple TV.

The Apple Media Services Terms and Conditions are full of legal text with information about purchasing digital content. “Purchased Content will generally remain available for you to download, redownload, or otherwise access from Apple. Though it is unlikely, subsequent to your purchase, Content may be removed from the Services and become unavailable for further download or access from Apple (for instance, because Apple loses its right from the Content provider to make it available). To ensure your ability to continue enjoying Content, we encourage you to download all purchased Content to a device in your possession and to back it up.”

Buying digital movies may be more convenient as it’s accessible from your home. But if you want to own a physical version, you could always pick one up. Here are five reasons to buy physical video games over digital, which are similar to buying digital movies.

Do you still own downloaded Apple TV purchases?

Yuganov Konstantin/Shutterstock

Once you purchase a movie on Apple TV, you can then download it to the Apple TV app to watch it offline. Since you’ve only been granted a license to view the movie, it is only playable through wherever you can access Apple TV. This has to do with what is called digital rights management (DRM). In this case, DRM ensures only authorized users can view movies or TV shows, which are assets protected by copyright.

You can watch any of your purchased shows, movies, or events as long as you download them to the Apple TV app. In the Apple TV app, find the movie, and select Download to save it locally on your device. In the Library tab, choose Downloaded to see all of your content that’s available for offline viewing. You can only watch this content inside the Apple TV app. Apple’s terms and conditions state downloaded content could be taken down as well, so you can’t keep content forever just by downloading it.

Streaming services are a convenient tool for renting and buying movies or shows. You don’t have to plan a trip to the movie theater and can watch from the comfort of home and just about anywhere you can imagine. If you’re not a fan of not owning digital purchases in the traditional way, you could always go physical, like how Gen Z is ditching streaming for physical media.

Source

NASA chief Jared Isaacman rekindled a now two-decade-long controversy when he pushed to reinstate Pluto as a planet before the U.S. Senate. Stripped of its planethood in 2006, Pluto’s planet status has been a source of consternation both within and outside the scientific community. As it stands, Pluto is considered a “dwarf planet” by the International Astronomical Union, the scientific body in charge of such broad astronomical inquiries and rules. Isaacman, for his part, believes that NASA should disregard the considerations cited by the IAU in its designation. 

The Pluto discussion was reignited during the administrator’s April 28 testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations, when Republican Senator Jerry Moran asked the administrator’s take on the 20-year-old question. Isaacman, a billionaire tech entrepreneur and self-made astronaut who many considered a controversial appointment, answered that he’s “very much in the camp of ‘make Pluto a planet again.” Many scientists have since criticized both the scientific merit and political timing of the comments, noting that Isaacman’s statement came during a hearing in which he justified potentially catastrophic budget cuts to NASA and the National Science Foundation.

Since his appointment in December 2025, Isaacman has taken a unique approach to governing the space agency. From stressing private partnerships to announcing nuclear propulsion projects, the tech mogul has pledged to transform the space agency for a new era. Apparently, pushing for Pluto to be renamed a planet has become a priority for the new administrator. In the hearing, he continued, saying, “And I would say, we are doing some papers right now on, I think, a position that we would love to escalate through the scientific community to revisit this discussion and ensure that Clyde Tombaugh gets the credit he received once and rightfully deserves to receive again.”

Pluto: dwarf or planet?

Heather Diehl/Getty Images

The IAU uses a three-pronged approach to determine planets. First, the object must orbit the sun. Second, it must be large enough to condense into a spherical shape. Third, it possesses a gravitational pull strong enough to clear its orbit of space debris. This last criteria is where Pluto falls short. Found in the Kuiper belt, the dwarf planet is one of a litter of celestial bodies considered too small to be a planet. As it stands, the IAU has designated five such bodies in our solar system as dwarf planets, although scientists note that there are at least 100 qualifying bodies.

Critics argue that the IAU’s definition of a planet is too narrow. Some note that defining planethood by the other objects in its orbit can create issues. David Grinspoon of Washington D.C’s Planetary Science Institute told Nature that “the word ‘planet’ should be defined by the intrinsic properties of a body, not by its dynamical environment.” According to Grinspoon, the line “seems silly” given Earth’s hundreds of millions of years with similar small objects as Pluto in its orbit. In illustrating a similar point to The Independent, astronomer Erik Ian Asphaug said “If one day we discover an Earth-mass planet full of inhabitants, orbiting a super-Jupiter, it would not be a planet according to the IAU — how silly is that!”

Other astronomers push back on broadening planetary definitions. For one thing, there are potentially thousands of similarly-sized objects in our solar system, making an expanded planet list complicated. Some have discussed centering a planet’s definitions on its geology. One December 2025 study argues that such a definition would expand the solar system’s planet count from eight to 150, including Pluto, the asteroid Ceres, and the moons Titan and Europa.

A distracting discussion

Andrew Harnik/Getty Images

Much of the Pluto argument is political, due in large part to its former status as the only planet in our solar system discovered by an American. First sighted by Clyde Tombaugh in 1930 at the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona, the dwarf planet has gained a second life as a totem for nostalgia-bitten activists, a notion Isaacman alluded to in his mentioning of Tombaugh. With hundreds of similar objects in the solar system alone, Pluto’s distinguishing characteristic remains its discoverer. Unfortunately for Isaacman, NASA has no control over Pluto’s planet designation. And while projects like New Horizons can further develop our understanding of the dwarf planet, its unclear how “papers” the NASA chief referred to can sway the international body’s opinion. 

More compelling than the merits of Isaacman’s “Make Pluto A Planet Again” statement is when it took place: during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing in which the administrator justified the Trump administration’s proposed 23% reduction in NASA’s 2027 budget, a decision that would result in cancelling over 50 missions. The irony of arguing to preserve America’s status as scientific pioneers while pushing for a 46% cut to NASA’s science budget exemplifies an administration that continues to escalate the agency’s ambitions while undercutting its budgetary support to achieve them.

Realistically, the fight to include Pluto is largely about semantics. As Kelsi Singer, a scientist on the New Horizons probe that studied the dwarf planet told Nature, the Pluto debate is “more of an unhelpful distraction than anything.” Astrophysicist Adam Frank, meanwhile, wrote in Forbes that critics should “celebrate, not cry” about Pluto’s fate. Rather than a demotion, Frank argues, Pluto’s dwarf planet title was a triumphant announcement that scientists had expanded their understanding of the universe.

Source