The assessments provide a strong counterargument to the exaggerated narratives being trumpeted by AI companies, many seeking new rounds of venture funding, that AI-generated malware is widespread and part of a new paradigm that poses a current threat to traditional defenses.
A typical example is Anthropic, which recently reported its discovery of a threat actor that used its Claude LLM to “develop, market, and distribute several variants of ransomware, each with advanced evasion capabilities, encryption, and anti-recovery mechanisms.” The company went on to say: “Without Claude’s assistance, they could not implement or troubleshoot core malware components, like encryption algorithms, anti-analysis techniques, or Windows internals manipulation.”
Startup ConnectWise recently said that generative AI was “lowering the bar of entry for threat actors to get into the game.” The post cited a separate report from OpenAI that found 20 separate threat actors using its ChatGPT AI engine to develop malware for tasks including identifying vulnerabilities, developing exploit code, and debugging that code. BugCrowd, meanwhile, said that in a survey of self-selected individuals, “74 percent of hackers agree that AI has made hacking more accessible, opening the door for newcomers to join the fold.”
In some cases, the authors of such reports note the same limitations noted in this article. Wednesday’s report from Google says that in its analysis of AI tools used to develop code for managing command and control channels and obfuscating its operations “we did not see evidence of successful automation or any breakthrough capabilities.” OpenAI said much the same thing. Still, these disclaimers are rarely made prominently and are often downplayed in the resulting frenzy to portray AI-assisted malware as posing a near-term threat.
Google’s report provides at least one other useful finding. One threat actor that exploited the company’s Gemini AI model was able to bypass its guardrails by posing as white-hat hackers doing research for participation in a capture-the-flag game. These competitive exercises are designed to teach and demonstrate effective cyberattack strategies to both participants and onlookers.
Such guardrails are built into all mainstream LLMs to prevent them from being used maliciously, such as in cyberattacks and self-harm. Google said it has since better fine-tuned the countermeasure to resist such ploys.
Ultimately, the AI-generated malware that has surfaced to date suggests that it’s mostly experimental, and the results aren’t impressive. The events are worth monitoring for developments that show AI tools producing new capabilities that were previously unknown. For now, though, the biggest threats continue to predominantly rely on old-fashioned tactics.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Although Google DeepMind’s Weather Lab only started releasing cyclone track forecasts in June, the company’s AI forecasting service performed exceptionally well. By contrast, the Global Forecast System model, operated by the US National Weather Service and is based on traditional physics and runs on powerful supercomputers, performed abysmally. The official data comparing forecast model performance will not be published by the National Hurricane Center for a few months. However, Brian McNoldy, a senior researcher at the University of Miami, has already done some preliminary number crunching.
The results are stunning: A little help in reading the graphic is in order. This chart sums up the track forecast accuracy for all 13 named storms in the Atlantic Basin this season, measuring the mean position error at various hours in the forecast, from 0 to 120 hours (five days). On this chart, the lower a line is, the better a model has performed. The dotted black line shows the average forecast error for official forecasts from the 2022 to 2024 seasons. What jumps out is that the United States’ premier global model, the GFS (denoted here as AVNI), is by far the worst-performing model. Meanwhile, at the bottom of the chart, in maroon, is the Google DeepMind model (GDMI), performing the best at nearly all forecast hours.
The difference in errors between the US GFS model and Google’s DeepMind is remarkable. At five days, the Google forecast had an error of 165 nautical miles compared to 360 nautical miles for the GFS model, more than twice as bad. This is the kind of error that causes forecasters to completely disregard one model in favor of another. But there’s more. Google’s model was so good that it regularly beat the official forecast from the National Hurricane Center (OFCL), which is produced by human experts looking at a broad array of model data. The AI-based model also beat highly regarded “consensus models,” including the TVCN and HCCA products. For more information on various models and their designations, see here.
Apple is reportedly working on a lower-cost Mac laptop that could sell well under $1,000 by using iPhone-class chips and a smaller LCD.
The project signals a strategic push to compete with Chromebooks and affordable Windows laptops, especially in education, where Apple currently trails rivals.
If priced around $699-$799, the new Mac could reshape Apple’s entry-level lineup by offering macOS at budget pricing and pulling more students into its ecosystem.
For years, the most affordable way to experience an Apple laptop has been to wait for discounts on older MacBooks, or to recreate the “Mac” experience by pairing an iPad with a keyboard. But that may soon change. Apple is reportedly developing a lower-cost Mac laptop aimed at students and mainstream buyers, according to a new Bloomberg report. The machine is expected to sell “well under $1,000” by using less-advanced components such as an iPhone-class A-series processor and a smaller, lower-end LCD panel, sized slightly below the current MacBook Air’s 13.6-inch panel.
Don’t want to miss the best from Android Authority?
Interestingly, this isn’t the first time the idea has surfaced. Back in 2023, reports suggested that Apple was exploring a sub-$700 MacBook to compete in the education and Chromebook space. What’s different now is the clearer picture: the pricing target, the use of an iPhone chip, and a smaller display, all hinting at a more focused strategy for entering the budget-laptop arena.
It’s a smart move — Apple has historically leaned into premium pricing, but the student market tells another story. Chromebooks dominate classrooms in many regions thanks to their low cost and ease of use. According to IDC, Apple held only about 9% of the global PC market in Q3 2025, which is well behind Lenovo, HP, and Dell, all of which sell Windows or ChromeOS devices. A more affordable Mac that still offers Apple’s hardware design and ecosystem advantages could drive new adoption, especially in the US, where iPhones already have a huge foothold.
Using older A-series silicon could be an effective way to get there. The performance-per-dollar is proven, especially for schoolwork and general productivity, and the smaller display aligns well with the compact Chromebook segment. That said, hitting “well under $1,000” is still the key here. One could argue that an iPad paired with a keyboard already delivers laptop-like performance, touchscreen utility, and portability. The real differentiator here, however, is that this new machine would run macOS, a more traditional desktop OS compared to iPadOS, giving it a clearer separation as a true laptop rather than a tablet-first device.
Still, this feels bigger than just a ChromeOS play. Microsoft’s growing push into ARM-based Windows laptops, particularly those powered by Snapdragon X-series chips, represents another competitive threat. These lightweight PCs offer long battery life, silent operation, and increasingly competent AI acceleration.
Now there’s more heat coming: Google has been testing Android-on-PC experiences, signaling its own intent to blur the line between phones and laptops, particularly in emerging markets and education. As such, Apple stepping into this arena suggests it’s not just defending the iPad, but also fortifying the whole ecosystem. By offering a lower-priced Mac, Apple could hook students and first-time buyers earlier, increasing the likelihood they’ll stay within its product lineup long-term.
Ryan Haines / Android Authority
As it stands, Apple’s most affordable Mac is the $999 M4 MacBook Air (or $899 with education pricing). On the other hand, most Chromebooks sell for as little as a few hundred dollars. That’s a wide gap, and Apple will need to close it aggressively to compete. Fortunately, using older chips, a 60Hz LCD panel, and perhaps even a plastic chassis could meaningfully reduce costs. If Apple can deliver a capable macOS laptop in the $699-$799 range, it could reshape how the company approaches price-sensitive markets.
This strategy may also signal a meaningful shift in Apple’s product structure. If students and new users can buy a MacBook at a true value price, Apple broadens its ecosystem funnel. Until now, the iPhone and iPad have served as entry points. However, a new budget Mac would add a new vertical, potentially locking users into the desktop/laptop tier earlier. Then again, it also complicates the iPad’s role. If a low-cost Mac can handle schoolwork and daily computing better, the iPad may need to lean harder on creative and niche workflows to justify its place.
Ryan Haines / Android Authority
Of course, everything remains speculative for now. Apple hasn’t confirmed the existence of a budget MacBook, and likely won’t until next year, when it’s already expected to launch new M5 and M5 Pro Mac mini models, M5 Max and M5 Ultra Mac Studio updates, and refreshed MacBook Pros with M6 chips. Still, if the plan is real, it could mark an inflection point in how Apple approaches value computing, and how it intends to fight ChromeOS and low-cost Windows PCs in schools and beyond.
Thank you for being part of our community. Read our Comment Policy before posting.
When we gather ’round the proverbial fire and exchange our online dating war stories, we’re usually talking about the usual suspects: Tinder, Bumble, Hinge, Grindr, and sometimes more niche apps like Lex. But ever since Facebook Dating launched in 2019, I’m not sure I have ever heard a tale that began there — I know more people who met in Facebook meme groups than on the actual Facebook Dating product.
Turns out my anecdotal data may be wrong — because people actually do use Facebook Dating! Meta shared user metrics for the first time on Monday, revealing that Facebook Dating has 21.5 million daily active users (DAUs) across 52 countries.
Facebook Dating is a feature within Facebook, rather than a standalone app, and Facebook puts its dating product front and center in the main bottom navigation bar on the app. (Even if your relationship status is not set to single, Facebook Dating remains in its prominent spot.)
What’s most surprising, though, is how Facebook Dating seems to be slowly catching on among young people. The platform counts 1.77 million users between the ages of 18-29 in the U.S., which is still not quite up to par with the “usual suspects,” but it’s getting closer. App analytics firm Sensor Tower estimated that as of this summer in the U.S., Tinder had 7.3 million active users across all age groups; Hinge had 4.4 million; Bumble had 3.6 million; and Grindr had 2.2 million.
Facebook has publicly addressed the fact that it struggles to keep Gen Z and young millennials on the platform, yet the company said last year that daily conversations on Facebook Dating in the 18-29 demographic spiked 24%.
Facebook Dating’s best feature is not something it actively does, but rather, it’s what Facebook Dating doesn’t do. Unlike Hinge, you don’t have to pay to “unlock” your most desirable matches or buy other premium features that supposedly bring you closer to finding “the one.”
Hinge debuted its “Standouts” feature in December 2020, which has become symbolic of everything wrong with dating apps. Hinge’s algorithm finds the people whom it thinks you will be most interested in, then places them in their own elite tab of the app. The only way to swipe right on these people is to give them a “rose,” which users get for free once a week — unless you buy more roses for $4 a pop. Even if you buy roses, your maybe-possibly future husband will know you used a precious rose on him, which is kind of embarrassing. So, like a true star-crossed-lovers situation, some users have devised increasingly complex schemes to trick the Hinge algorithm into freeing these people from “rose jail.”
Techcrunch event
San Francisco | October 13-15, 2026
By comparison, Facebook Dating’s free model looks pretty good. It’s not that Mark Zuckerberg is a benevolent Silicon Valley cupid — Meta is already making bank off of you by relentlessly collecting your data, so it doesn’t need you to buy roses. But as users grow more aggrieved with their usual rotation of apps, Facebook Dating may not seem so cringe anymore.
Today, Google released the 2025 edition of the Holiday 100, its annual gift guide based on the year’s biggest Google Search trends. The list includes new tech releases like the Nintendo Switch 2, the Ninja Creami Swirl, and the Google Pixel Watch 4 as well as apparel, home, beauty, and toy picks. Obviously, Labubus are on there.
Google chooses items for its Holiday 100 list by analyzing U.S. Google Trends data from May through September. The tech giant says that more than 1 billion shopping-related searches are conducted every day on Google, providing it with a vast data pool to draw from.
Mashable Light Speed
The Nintendo Switch 2 and Google Pixel Watch 4 were two of the most-searched products of the year. Credit: Google
This year’s top-searched items and breakout trends include items we’ve reviewed, written about, and featured in our own gift guides here at Mashable. Below, we’ve highlighted ten Holiday 100 picks, ranging from $28 to $1,300, that we’d love to unwrap ourselves. If you need some wishlist inspo ahead of the holidays (and Black Friday), just keep scrolling.
To see the full Google Holiday 100 list for 2025, click the Shopping tab on Google Search or visit g.co/holiday100.
1. The Nintendo Switch 2
The successor to Nintendo’s bestselling hybrid console arrived in May (and promptly sold out everywhere), fueling a surge in “Switch 2” searches. It’s pretty easy to find in stock nowadays, but that might change as the holiday shopping season kicks into high gear. Consider yourself warned.
2. The Ninja Creami Swirl
Searches for “Ninja Swirl” hit an all-time high this year, and the hype is real: Our reviewer found that Ninja’s latest countertop ice cream maker is as good as TikTok says it is. The added soft-serve dispensing feature makes it a better value than the original Creami.
3. A smart ring
Search interest in these small, fashion-forward fitness trackers hit a new peak in 2025. Our favorite model for most people is the Oura Ring 4, which is sleeker, comfier, and more accurate than the competition. It comes in ten finishes, including four new ceramic designs in pretty pastels.
4. The Google Pixel Watch 4
Everyone was googling the big G’s newest wearable (even before it made its debut in early October). Our reviewer called it “a true runner’s watch,” praising its bright domed display, custom workout features, and repairable design. If your current smartwatch is more than a generation old, it’s a worthy upgrade.
5. A red light mask
2025 was the year everyone got into red light therapy. The best red light mask we’ve tested ourselves is the Shark CryoGlow, which incorporates blue and infrared lights for added acne- and wrinkle-reducing benefits. It also comes with built-in chill pads that de-puff the under-eye area — something you won’t find on any other LED mask.
6. A styling wand
$249.99 at Walmart
$349.99 Save $100
Interest in “Styling wand” has ramped up during the holiday season every year since 2011. Hopefully everyone’s stopped splurging on Dyson Airwraps by now: Its best dupe, the Shark FlexStyle, is a more useful device that’s almost half the price. It comes in some highly giftable limited-edition colorways, too.
7. A photo printer
$99 at Amazon
$109.99 Save $10.99
Google saw a 65 percent spike in searches for “photo printer” over the past year. One of our editors is obsessed with the ultra-portable Canon Ivy 2, which has a user-friendly app and offers better photo quality than any other model she’s tried. What’s more, it’s often on sale for just $100.
8. A home projector
$962.59 at Amazon
$996.99 Save $34.40
Movie theater attendance is still on the decline; is it any wonder that “home projectors” got 60 percent more searches this year? The lightweight LG CineBeam Q can throw a picture up to 120 inches wide, and it made our reviewer think about ditching her TV for good. It’s not exactly cheap, but it’s more affordable than other 4K options.
9. The Lego Willy Wonka set
Wonkamania endures. “Lego Willy Wonka” was a breakout search term following the September release of a new fan-voted building set inspired by the 1971 movie (complete with a chocolate waterfall). It contains 2,025 pieces, including a Gene Wilder mini-figurine. It’s a Lego.com exclusive, FYI.
10. A Labubu
Furry, pointy-toothed, and inescapable on FYPs, Labubu dolls were one of the biggest viral hits of 2025. (They’re part of the larger “backpack charm” trend, which was more searched than ever.) They come in sealed “blind boxes,” so collecting a full set can be a challenge. Put one in your favorite Gen Zer’s stocking to earn major brownie points.
Wireless headphones are the default these days, and there are roughly 1 gazillion of them (and counting). We do our best to test them all, but not everything we test can make the big list. Here are some other good options worth trying.
Status Audio Pro X for $249: The Status Audio Pro X are an excellent pair of earbuds that are slightly overshadowed by their mainstream competitors when it comes to daily use. That said, these buds look and sound awesome, with a triple driver array (one dynamic for bass, two Knowles balanced armatures for mid and high end), which allows them to stand above many other earbuds.
Sony WH-1000XM5 for $398: Sony’s XM5 remain a top headphone, even after being supplanted by the fancier XM6. For a fairly sizable price reduction, you’ll get still-fabulous noise-canceling tech, great sound, and luxe comfort in a supremely portable package.
Beyerdynamic Amiron 300 for $280: These premium earbuds from Beyerdynamic are nondescript-looking and don’t have noise-canceling to compete with Sony and Bose, but they do sound fantastic. If you’re looking for a great-sounding pair that won’t get you judged in public, these are a great option for quiet luxury.
Bowers & Wilkins Pi8 Earbuds for $500: Bowers & Wilkins brings its speaker prowess into the world if high-end earbuds. The Pi8 provide a premium and stylish build, excellent sound quality, and solid noise canceling, albeit at a very high price point. Like other earbuds we’ve tested lately, one of the Pi8’s coolest features is the ability to stream audio from wired audio sources via the charging case, which can really come in handy on long flights.
Edifier Stax Spirit S5 for $500: These high-flying headphones lack noise-canceling, but make up for it with fantastically clear sound from their advanced planar magnetic drivers that use specialized magnet tech for vividly clear delivery. If you can afford their high price, they’re a fun investment that digs into the meat of your music like few headphones in their class.
Soundcore Space A40 for $45: Even though they’ve moved off our main list, the Space A40 are still among the best earbuds you’ll find for the money. Their stylish, premium-looking design is bolstered by solid features, clear and detailed sound, and excellent noise canceling for the price.
Sonos Ace for $399: The Sonos Ace are a pricey but impressive first effort from Sonos, with fantastic noise canceling, great sound, and one of the comfiest designs (if not the comfiest) you’ll find in the game. A few initial software bugs hindered their performance upon release, including trouble with the TV Swap feature that lets you pass sound from a Sonos soundbar to the Ace, but that seems to be fixed, making these an excellent choice—especially for those already invested in the Sonos way.
Beats Solo 4 for $150: We like Beats headphones these days, but this pair was just a bit lacking in features for us at its standard $200 price. Now that they’ve come down, we can heartily recommend them to folks who are looking for a pair of wireless headphones that don’t have noise canceling.
Technics EAH-AZ80 for $161: The AZ80 are great earbuds. Their most noteworthy feature is conveniently pairing to three devices at once, but they finish strong with good noise-canceling tech, top-tier sound quality, and seven different ear tip options for a remarkably comfy fit.
Beats Studio Pro for $250: The Studio Pro offer quality performance, including surprisingly clear sound, good noise canceling, and refreshingly natural transparency mode. The design feels a bit cheap, and they skip features like auto-pause, but extras like Hands-Free Siri and head tracking with spatial audio help pad their value—especially since their sale price sometimes drops to around half of the original $350 MSRP.
Sony WH-CH720N for $150: These Sony cans may have a silly name, but their sheer value makes up for it. They’re not as pliable as top options and don’t come with a case, but their sound quality and noise-canceling are excellent for the money. They are also built to last and have battery life that goes on and on, making them a great option for prudent shoppers.
Master & Dynamic MH40 for $399: M&D’s second-gen MH40 pack gorgeous sound into an equally gorgeous design, with luxurious trappings like lambskin leather and metal parts in place of plastic. Their lack of advanced features, excluding even noise canceling, makes them a pricey portal to minimalism, but they’ve got style for days.
Audio Technica ATH-M50xBT for $219: The original ATH-M50X provide balanced sound and great durability, making them ubiquitous in music and film studios. But what if you want to take them with you between takes? Enter the ATH-M50XBT, which partner a wired studio connection with Bluetooth for wireless freedom. They don’t offer noise canceling or other advanced features but they’re great for melding art and play.
Sony Linkbuds Open: The Linkbuds Open have a neat trick: speakers with holes in the middle that let in the world around you for environmental awareness. They’re not so hot for noisy environments, limiting their use cases, but they’re among the best options in the growing open-earbuds trend.
If you’re new to wireless headphones or need a refresher, here are some helpful pointers to know before you buy.
Noise canceling is a technology that employs exterior microphones and digital processing to take in the sounds around you and flip their frequency polarity, essentially canceling them at rapid speeds to create an impression of silence.
Transparency mode, aka “hear-through” or “ambient” sound mode, is the opposite of noise canceling, using your headphones’ exterior microphones to bring in the sound around you. This can keep you aware of your surroundings, especially helpful when working out, walking in high-traffic areas, or just having a quick conversation.
Bluetooth is the wireless format used by all portable wireless headphones to connect to and play sound from devices like a phone, computer, or tablet.
Bluetooth multipoint connection allows Bluetooth headphones to connect to more than one source device (like a phone or computer) at a time. This helpful feature lets you seamlessly switch between your connected devices to do things like take phone or video calls or watch a video on your computer between Spotify sessions on your phone.
Find My is an Apple feature that lets you track down devices like your AirPods from the web. Many non-Apple wireless headphones also have some form of Find My feature, though it’s usually reserved for earbuds due to their small size.
IP ratings are used to certify electronics are dust and water-resistant. Generally, the higher the IP rating a device has, the better the dust and water resistance. You can learn more in our IP-ratings explainer.
EQ stands for equalization, which in the case of wireless headphones, uses digital processing to adjust parameters like bass, midrange, and treble. EQ presets are most common, but multi-band EQs are better for those who want advanced control over each sound register.
Charging cases are included with virtually all fully wireless earbuds, letting you set the buds in the case for recharging on the go. Most charging cases offer two or more charges, and to recharge the case itself, you can usually use a USB-C cable or a wireless charger.
We test headphones and earbuds the way that we live. We take them to the gym, wear them around offices, travel with them, and generally try to use them as we anticipate potential buyers will use them. If a pair advertises dust or water resistance, we test that. We drop test cases, test cables, charging times, and battery life, and note everything we find exceptional to our readers.
While we do not typically use a set playlist of music to test each pair, we aim to test acoustic, rock, hip-hop, pop, country, and a variety of other genres with every pair of headphones, ensuring offer a good perspective on sound signature across genres and volumes. For noise reduction, we test the headphones in real-world environments and note our findings. When possible, we attempt to have headphones worn by a variety of people with different head and ear shapes, to ensure we’re thinking about the widest audience possible.
AI-powered browsers like ChatGPT Atlas aren’t just browsers with little ChatGPT picture-in-picture boxes off to the side answering questions. They also have “agentic capabilities,” meaning they can theoretically carry out tasks like buying airline tickets and making hotel reservations (Atlas hasn’t exactly gotten rave reviews as a travel agent). But what happens when the little web-crawling bot that does these tasks senses danger?
The danger we’re talking about is not to the user, but to the browser’s parent company. According to an investigation by Aisvarya Chandrasekar and Klaudia Jaźwińska of the Columbia Journalism Review, when Atlas is in agent mode, running all over the internet gobbling up information for you, it will take great pains to avoid certain sources of information. Some of that shyness appears to be connected to the fact that those sources of information belong to companies that are suing OpenAI.
These bots have more freedom than normal web crawlers, Chandrasekar and Jaźwińska found. Web crawlers are ancient internet technology, and in ordinary, uncontroversial circumstances, when a crawler encounters instructions to not crawl a page, it simply will not. If you’re using the ChatGPT app, and you ask it to fish specific nuggets of information out of articles that block crawlers, it will most likely obey, and report to you that it can’t do it, because that task relies on crawlers.
Agentic browser modes, however, use the internet under the pretense of being the you the user, and they “appear in site logs as normal Chrome sessions,” according to Chandrasekar and Jaźwińska (because Atlas is built atop the Google-designed open source Chromium browser). This means they generally can crawl pages that otherwise block automated behavior. Skirting the rules and norms of the internet in this way actually makes some sense, because to do otherwise might prevent you from manually accessing a given site in the Atlas browser, which sounds like overkill.
But Chandrasekar and Jaźwińska asked Atlas to summarize articles from PCMag and the New York Times, whose parent companies are in active litigation with OpenAI over alleged copyright violations, and it went way out of its way to accomplish this, carving labyrinthine paths around the internet to deliver some version of the requested information. It was like a rat finding food pellets in a maze, knowing that the locations of certain food pellets are electrified.
In the case of PCMag, it went to social media and other news sites, finding citations of the article, and tweets containing some of the article’s contents. In the case of the New York Times, it “generated a summary based on reporting from four alternative outlets—the Guardian, the Washington Post, Reuters, and the Associated Press.” All of those except Reuters have content or search-related agreements with OpenAI.
In both cases, Atlas appears to have journeyed far from litigious publications, favoring a safer, more AI-friendly path to the end of its little rat maze.
Porsche has brought the GTS badge to its electric SUV lineup with the first all-electric Macan GTS, and it’s every bit as aggressive as you’d expect. The new Macan GTS has a top speed of 155 mph, soaring from 0 to 62 mph in just 3.8 seconds and delivering up to 420kW (571PS).
Its speed and power are impressive, but also pit it directly against the Tesla Model Y Performance, which still edges it out slightly with a quicker 0 to 60 mph time of 3.3 seconds, around 460bhp, and a much lower starting price of $57,500. The Porsche EV counters with refinement, balance and a sharper sense of driver focus, clearly carried over from its combustion predecessors.
Don’t miss any of our unbiased tech content and lab-based reviews. Add CNET as a preferred Google source.
What the electric Porsche Macan GTS offers
You can tell Porsche wanted this one to feel more alive than the other electric Macans. It’s not just about numbers. The new GTS gets the most powerful rear motor in the lineup, delivering up to 420kW with Launch Control and a maximum torque of 955Nm.
It also borrows heavily from the Macan Turbo’s performance setup, with an electronically controlled rear differential lock, Porsche Torque Vectoring Plus, and a rear-biased 48:52 weight distribution. The sports air suspension is dropped 10mm lower than standard and tuned for sharpness, giving it a proper stance and a level of agility you wouldn’t expect from a 100kWh electric SUV.
There’s a clear focus on the emotional side too. Porsche’s Electric Sport Sound has been given two GTS-specific profiles that change tone depending on whether you’re in Sport or Sport Plus mode. The idea is to make the car feel a little less sterile, even though synthetic sound is never going to replace the roar of an engine. Still, it helps reinforce that this is still meant to be a driver’s car first and foremost.
A dedicated Track Mode, adapted from the Taycan, improves battery cooling to sustain higher performance for longer sessions without power drop-off, which is something Tesla’s Model Y Performance still struggles with under repeated acceleration runs.
The front of the new Porsche Macan GTS looks seriously sporty, which is exactly what you want from the GTS line.
Visually, the GTS looks mean. You get black accents across the front, sides and rear, smoked headlights and taillights, and a distinctive diffuser that gives the back end real presence. It sits on 21-inch wheels as standard, although 22-inch RS Spyder Design alloys are available if you want to push the look even further. Inside, Porsche’s gone all-in on Race-Tex, with the material covering the seats, steering wheel, armrests and dashboard panels. You can match the decorative stitching and seatbelts to the exterior in Carmine Red, Slate Grey Neo or Lugano Blue.
“GTS models are often the sweet spot of a Porsche model’s lineup, offering performance and styling upgrades without a massive extra outlay,” said automotive expert Steve Fowler. “In the case of the Macan Electric GTS, that’s exactly the case — you get the look, feel and performance without the biggest price tag. I love a Porsche GTS model for those exact reasons.”
The Macan GTS gets a combined Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP) range of up to 363 miles, per testing, and supports 270kW DC fast charging, taking it from 10 percent to 80 percent in just 21 minutes. That’s more than enough to make it a genuinely usable everyday EV with a proper sporty edge. While the Tesla Model Y Performance might edge out the Macan GTS on price and speed, Porsche’s option is going to give you a more traditional experience that lasts a lot further on the road.
The World Series is headed to a Game 7 after the Los Angeles Dodgers tied up the series against the Toronto Blue Jays last night, 3-3. The Fall Classic remains on Toronto’s home turf for Game 7 tonight — Saturday, Nov. 1 — at 8PM ET/5PM PT. The World Series odds still favor the Dodgers. The final 2025 MLB World Series game will air on Fox and Fox Deportes.
Of course, Fox is a “free” over-the-air channel, so any affordable digital antenna will pull in the game if you live close enough to a local affiliate. But if that’s not an option, here’s a full rundown of how to watch the Dodgers vs. Blue Jays World Series, even without cable.
How to watch the L.A. Dodgers vs. Toronto Blue Jays, Game 7
You can stream Fox on any live TV streaming service that airs Fox local stations, including DirecTV, Fubo and Hulu + Live TV. MLB World Series games will also be available on Fox’s new streaming platform, Fox One.
DirecTV gets you access to Fox, plus the CW, ABC, CBS, Fox, ACC Network, Big Ten Network, SEC Network and plenty more local regional sports networks.
DirecTV also offers unlimited Cloud DVR storage and access to ESPN+’s new streaming tier, ESPN Unlimited. That’s all part of why we named it the best cable TV alternative without a contract.
The best part is that you can try all this out for free for five days. So if you’re interested in a live TV streaming service but aren’t ready to commit, we recommend starting with DirecTV.
We named Fubo the best live TV streaming service for sports, and it’s not just because it’s a great place to watch the World Series. Fubo TV gives you access to 100-plus live channels, including Fox and FS1. The cheapest plan starts at $85/month, making the live TV streaming service a significant investment. However, the inclusion of ESPN Unlimited, a $30/month value, is a great deal if you watch sports year-round. Fubo subscribers also get access to unlimited cloud DVR storage.
Currently, the platform is offering a free trial, allowing you to explore everything it has to offer risk-free.
Hulu’s live TV tier includes access to live TV channels like Fox, Fox Deportes, ESPN, ABC, NBC, and more. That means you can watch this year’s World Series live as it happens, and enjoy over 95 other channels — not to mention take advantage of all the great shows streaming on Hulu, Disney+ and ESPN Select, all of which are included at no extra charge.
You’ll also enjoy access to unlimited DVR storage, the ability to stream on multiple devices and more. Right now, you can get your first three months of Hulu + Live TV for $65/month. This special rate ends at 6PM ET/3PM PT on November 5.
Hulu + Live TV starts at $90/month after this deal ends.
Fox One is exactly what it sounds like — a one-stop streaming destination for the entire universe of Fox content, including a ton of sports (Fox Sports, Fox FS1, FS2, Fox Deportes, Big Ten Network), news and opinion (Fox News, Fox Business, Fox Weather) and local Fox stations, too. That means you can watch every World Series game in one place.
Fox One offers live programming, as well as shows and movies on demand. At launch, the base price for Fox One costs $20 a month, or you can save with an annual subscription for $200. You can also bundle Fox One with ESPN’s newly revamped streaming service for $40/month.
If you have $1,000 to spend on a soundbar, there are compelling options to choose from. Since its late 2024 release, the Sonos Arc Ultra has been at the top of the heap in this price range, but there are new competitors that give Sonos a run for its money. The Marshall Heston 120, for example, offers a unique design, cool features, and comes at the exact same price as the Sonos Arc Ultra.
While Sonos sticks to the design status quo with sleek, modern elements, Marshall challenges the norm with bold, distinct design language. Sonos offers options for the tech-savvy, digital ecosystem fan, while Marshall keeps its focus on providing a wide range of wired, analog choices for music enthusiasts.
However, despite their striking differences, both soundbars deliver an exceptional audio experience. So, is one better than the other? I’ve extensively used both the Marshall Heston 120 and the Sonos Arc Ultra, outlining their pros and cons to help you make an informed decision.
Specifications
Marshall Heston 120
Sonos Arc Ultra
Dimensions
43.3 x 5.7 x 3.0 inches
46.4 x 4.4 x 3.0 inches
Colors
Black
Black, Cream
Channels
5.1.2
9.1.4
Drivers
Two 2 x 5-inch subwoofers, two 3-inch mid-woofers, two 0.8-inch tweeters, five 2-inch full-range drivers
One woofer, six mid drivers, seven tweeters
Ports
HDMI 2.1 eARC, HDMI input, USB-C (power only), Ethernet, RCA L/R, sub out
HDMI eARC, Ethernet
Wireless connectivity
Wi-Fi 6, Bluetooth 5.3
Wi-Fi 6, Bluetooth 5.3
Wireless compatibility
AirPlay 2, Google Cast, Spotify Connect, Tidal Connect
1. You want a design that complements your furniture
The Sonos Arc Ultra is a sleek and stylish soundbar, but if you want a design that’s cool, then the Marshall Heston 120 is the way to go. A great design is actually kind of important in a soundbar – it’s something that’s going to live out in the open, in your living room, for all to see. Sure, I care more about audio quality than design, but I want something that’s going to make a statement without being over the top.
The Heston 120 walks that line perfectly. It leans on Marshall’s signature aesthetic, with a great-looking faux leather on its sides, and a textile mesh covering on the front and top. It’s adorned with the Marshall logo and knobs on the top for its controls. It looks awesome and unique without looking silly.
2. You like physical controls
Physical controls probably aren’t the most important controls for a soundbar, as you’ll use your remote more. But if you like using physical controls when you’re listening to music on your soundbar, then the Heston 120 is the way to go. It has knobs on the top, like its amplifiers, and they look and feel great. To be clear, the Sonos Arc Ultra has physical controls too, and they work perfectly fine. But they’re not as satisfying to use as those on the Heston 120.
3. You want lots of wireless features
Sonos is known for integrating with smart homes, and it does so well — but it doesn’t connect to as many audio ecosystems as the Marshall Heston 120. Both have Apple AirPlay 2 support and Spotify Connect support, so if you’re in those ecosystems, you’ll get what you need with both. However, the Heston 120 builds on that with additional services.
With the Heston 120, you’ll get support for Google Cast, which helps if you’re in the Google ecosystem. You’ll also get Tidal Connect, so if you’re a Tidal user, you’ll be able to listen to music easily.
You should buy the Sonos Arc Ultra if…
Christian de Looper/ZDNET
1. You want better spatial audio
Both soundbars offer excellent audio and can deliver deep and powerful bass with solid response in the high end. But the Sonos Arc Ultra definitely has the edge. Its audio response is a little more detailed, and its bass gets slightly deeper than Marshall’s.
In addition to the slightly better frequency response, the Sonos Arc Ultra offers a more immersive audio experience. Both soundbars can deliver solid immersion, utilizing drivers that utilize reflections to simulate surround sound. However, Sonos has more experience with this type of smart audio technology, and it is evident in the Arc Ultra, which, on its own, can produce a relatively immersive experience when playing content that supports Dolby Atmos and surround sound.
2. You want to expand your system
Maybe you don’t want to use your soundbar alone — in which case, the Sonos Arc Ultra is easily the better choice. The Marshall Heston 120 supports wired subwoofers, and Marshall offers one in-house-made sub, but that’s it.
The Sonos Arc Ultra can connect to other Sonos speakers wirelessly, and you have more options. There are two Sonos subwoofers you can choose from, along with a number of different speakers you could use as surround speakers — like the Sonos Era 100 or Sonos Era 300. Sonos even sells bundles with these speakers, allowing you to get a full surround sound system right out of the box.
The Sonos Ace headphones have a private listening feature built for Sonos soundbars, further expanding the Sonos device ecosystem. I have used a Sonos Arc Ultra with two Sonos Era 300 speakers and a Sonos Sub 4 for some time, and I have to say, it’s a pretty awesome setup.
3. You have other Sonos speakers
Even if you don’t plan on directly connecting other Sonos speakers to your Sonos Arc Ultra, the ecosystem effect can still play a role if you have other Sonos speakers. Being able to manage all of your wireless speakers in one ecosystem makes it easier to stream audio across them, especially if you use the Sonos app to do so. It also means that you can connect them together down the line if you so choose.
For example, you could use two Sonos Era 100 speakers in different rooms but then link them together to form a stereo pair for more immersive audio. Alternatively, in the case of the Arc Ultra, you could relocate to a larger home and decide to utilize those speakers as surround speakers in your living room.
