Though telecom operators are yet to even start setting up their 5G networks, chipmaker Qualcomm today outlined how it plans to make upcoming smartphones and other gears future proof. Sadly, it won't be until 2018 that we will be able to make any use of this. The company today also announced refreshed processors for entry-level and mid-range smartphones. 

At its 4G/5G Summit in Hong Kong today, Qualcomm announced the Snapdragon X50, the world’s first 5G modem which is capable of supporting download speeds up to 5Gbps. The chipmaker said it will begin shipping samples of this modem to smartphone and other gadget manufacturers next year. It is currently hoping to see devices in the real world powered by this modem in the first half of 2018.

The company explained what makes the Snapdragon X50 special: "The Snapdragon X50 5G modem will initially support operation in millimeter wave (mmWave) spectrum in the 28GHz band.  It will employ Multiple-Input Multiple-Output (MIMO) antenna technology with adaptive beamforming and beam tracking techniques, which facilitates robust and sustained mobile broadband communications in non-line-of-sight (NLOS) environments. With 800MHz bandwidth support, the Snapdragon X50 5G modem is designed to support peak download speeds of up to 5 gigabits per second."

Can't wait that long? The company also plans to make your devices capable of at least 1Gbps starting this year, provided your service provider is capable of delivering those speeds. Today it unveiled the Snapdragon X16 LTE modem, the first consumer end device capable of reaching Gigabit Class LTE download speeds up to 1Gbps. Qualcomm says it has closely worked with network equipment companies Telstra, Ericsson and NETGEAR on what is the world’s first Gigabit Class LTE mobile device. 

More importantly, you will be able to see devices utilizing this modem as soon as by the end of this year.  A mobile hotspot featuring the modem will launch in Australia later this year. Qualcomm reportedly said its upcoming Snapdragon processor — likely the Snapdragon 830 — will support X16 LTE modem, and launch sometime next year.

Qualcomm also announced new processors for entry-level and mid-level devices to make them more useful and capable. The chipmaker unveiled the Snapdragon 427, Snapdragon 626, and Snapdragon 653. The Snapdragon 653 is a "pro" version of the currently available Snapdragon 652 processor. The company says it has raised the frequency of half of the cores of Snapdragon to offer faster performance.

Similarly, the Snapdragon 626 is an improved version of the Snapdragon 625 mobile processor. The new processor also offers support for Bluetooth 4.2 and better network capabilities. The Snapdragon 427 is the company’s new processor for the entry to middle-range smartphones. It offers similar features as the existing Snapdragon 400 series of processors, but offers improved network capability. 

All these processors also support Qualcomm's Quick Charge 3.0 technology that offers fast battery charging and will start showing up in devices in early 2017. 

The Samsung Galaxy Note7 is officially toast. 

Following initial reports of explosions, Samsung responded with a recall and replacement program. But problems persisted, and some replacement devices have reportedly caught fire. Network providers like AT&T and T-Mobile have halted Note7 replacements and offered refunds, and  Mashable officially retracted its recommendation of the device on Tuesday.

If you're in the market for a replacement Android device, we've got you covered. Here are five great choices:

Xiaomi took India by storm when it entered the country with its low-cost and durable smartphones in 2014. In the two years since, it has become one of the largest online smartphone sellers in India. But as it looks at expanding its presence in the country, the Chinese company is increasingly eyeing the good ol’ brick and mortar stores.

Over the weekend, Xiaomi launched a new smartphone called the Redmi 3S+ for the Indian market. Priced at Rs 9,499 ($148), the mid-range Redmi 3S+ is company's first smartphone to be sold exclusively through offline retailers and distributors in India. The phone is available to purchase from more than 7,500 retailers including Poorvika, Sangeetha, BIG C, and LOT mobiles, Xiaomi said.

The move marks a big deviation for the company, which has until recently relied exclusively on online stores for selling its phones in India. But if the company wants to expand its presence in the country, it cannot overlook the offline market. Seven out of 10 phones sold in India are bought at offline retail stores, Tarun Pathak, Senior Analyst at Counterpoint Research told Mashable India.

Xiaomi’s growing focus on offline retailers is also its retaliation against other Chinese players like Huawei and Oppo who use a mix of offline and online channels for selling their smartphones in India. Lenovo, which fights with Xiaomi for the top position among online sellers in the country, also has a deep offline presence in India, for instance.

India has always been a big market for Xiaomi, but it has become especially important with the company struggling to keep up pace in its home market. The company’s phones haven't been selling as fast in China as they used to once. During the period between April and June this year, for instance, Xiaomi sold 38 percent fewer smartphones in China than it did during the same period last year. So naturally, as the company faces new competition in its home market, it is looking at India and other nations where it operates for further growth.

Seven out of 10 smartphones are sold through offline retailers in India.

Its focus to boost its offline efforts also illustrates company’s attempt to fight for the seventy percent of the market that it previously didn’t even cater to. “They need to scale up. For the past few quarters they have been stuck at a million per quarter sales,” Pathak added. “A mix of offline vs online as a channel strategy should be beneficial for Xiaomi. It needs to invest in cities and other areas such as UP, North east, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, where smartphone penetration is picking up.”

Xiaomi realizes that and it has been steadily stitching together the pieces to sell phones in India through offline chains. Over the past year, the company has tied-up with Redington, Innocomm and Just Buy Live offline big chain retailers among others. The company’s recent phones including the Redmi Note 3, Mi 5, and Redmi 3S are available in the offline market through these chains. 

Moving forward, the company tells Mashable India it will make all its future phones available in the offline market as well. The company reaffirmed that it aims for a 70 to 30 ratio for sales through online and offline retailers respectively. "Currently, 90 per cent of our sales in India are online and the remaining is offline. In steady state, in China, it is a 70-30 (online-offline) split," Manu Kumar Jain, head of Xiaomi India had said last year. 

Few would argue Android got off to a slow start. Back in 2008, it was the eagerly anticipated Google mobile platform that was supposed to take on the barely year-old Apple iPhone and venerable RIM (BlackBerry).

The first Android phone, the HTC-built G1, was unusual and distinctive. It even had a dedicated, physical search button (so Google), but it didn’t inspire or sell very well. For a long time, Android appeared to have a failure-to-launch problem. Motorola arguably could be credited with rescuing Android from obscurity. Eventually, the Android mantle was passed from Motorola to Samsung and success built upon success until the platform owned a stunning majority of the global market.

So, yes, Android is a global brand. But that initial announcement was not a shot heard around the world. It was a small seed that grew into the towering tree that is Google’s mobile platform.

Google isn't planting a seed on Tuesday. Its fall hardware unveiling will be more, it hopes, like dropping a Star Trek II-style Genesis Effect bomb on a barren planet: terra-forming it instantly with millions of Google hardware converts. Am I exaggerating? A little. But check out this bold promise:

A memorable day means that Google has to do more than just officially launch all the hardware they introduced last summer. It has to do a hard reset, unveil mobile surprises and brand-new handsets that finally do what the G1 couldn’t do nearly a decade ago: position Google as a handset manufacturer equal to Apple.

It's the right time for Google to do something bold and, maybe, a little crazy. The search giant has, after all, only partial control of the Android narrative. When most people think of a leading Android smartphone they think about Samsung and then LG and then maybe HTC. Motorola is still in there, too, though it doesn’t hold the same position it once did. Heck, now people can include BlackBerry and Android in the same thought.

It's the right time for Google to do something bold and, maybe, a little crazy.

None of these Android partners can be trusted to run 100% stock Android, though they’ve come much closer in recent years. Carrier partners are not much more helpful, stuffing handsets with their own custom software and still delivering Android updates on their own schedules, not Google’s.

Google will, if the steady stream of leaks we’ve been fed for the last few weeks hold true, unveil at least two new smartphones on Tuesday. Which is exactly what Google did last year. It also introduced a new Pixel C tablet.

“The last two were nice phones with solid features and with direct lines to upgraded latest software, but nowhere near an iPhone 6s Plus,” said Patrick Moorhead, president of Moor Insights & Strategy.

The Nexus 6P and 5X were very good phones, but they quickly slipped from the public consciousness, almost as fast as we forgot the Pixel C. A quarter for anyone who can deliver of photo of one of those things in the wild.

Thinking different

Google can’t expect to make waves when it's paddling with the same oars. Delivering yet another set of Nexus phones designed more to influence Android partners than to actually move the market won’t be enough.

It feels like it's time for Google to have its Microsoft Surface moment: blow away (and maybe piss off) partners by designing, building and aggressively selling its own hardware. Some see this as a way forward for Google.

“Making their own hardware is a way to help them gain back control of Android. Although it is a risky move, if they get strong carrier support and more importantly can guarantee that these products will always have the most current OS on them, then it could go a long way toward giving them a better position against Apple and other Android smartphone vendors,” said Tim Bajarin, President of Creative strategies.

Bajarin thinks Google has a big opportunity here. They’re certainly going to have the attention to do something big.

“It is a major hardware event where Google positions themselves as a major player like Microsoft has done with their Surface products,” said Bajarin. 

Google, obviously, does make and sell some of its own hardware. But they’ve been wildly inconsistent. For every Chromecast (a $35 success — relatively — from day one) there’s been a dumped-on-the-road Nexus Q.

However, up until now, Google has never married hardware and software in a way that effectively illustrates the power of their search engine, vast data stores and growing expertise in Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning.

Google Home, the smart speaker and digital assistant, could be that product. In fact, it could be the hardware game-changer Google desperately needs. Moorhead thinks Home represents a strong opportunity.

Imagine “Google Home working spectacularly with their Pixel- or Nexus-brand phone — if they’ve optimized the microphones to work perfectly and it does things that Alexa and Siri can’t do and does it a lot better,” said Moorhead.

However, that kind of integration is difficult to achieve. And Moorhead worries Google may not be able to deliver a flawless and consistent experience from the living room to the Nexus or Pixel Phone.

Who are you?

With Cardboard, Chromecast and even Google-branded Wi-Fi, there could be more than half-a dozen hardware announcements on Tuesday. Some experts, though, still don’t believe hardware is the goal.

“Google is not turning into a hardware business,” said Forrester Research VP and Principal Analyst Thomas Husson. He told me Google simply wants to showcase its information access across a wide variety of connected devices. 

“Search is increasingly taking place in many more places, via many more devices and through new interfaces — with a growing number of voice and visual requests. To stay relevant for marketers in the long run, the Google Assistant is likely to be the driving force behind Google’s hardware moves.”

What’s in a name

But why would Google introduce so many different pieces of hardware? Do its Android partners really need that much guidance? There are, I think, indications that Google has bigger plans for these gadgets.

A look at the massive Google Pixel phone leak from Monday morning offers an interesting glimpse of how Google may want us all to think about their handsets (and hardware, in general) in the future. The image says “Introducing Pixel, Phone by Google.” "Introducing Pixel" is relatively small and “Phone by Google” is larger and more prominent. Does Google want us to start saying something like “I love my Google Phone?”

There would be few branding moves bigger than introducing “The Google Phone,” though, some are not convinced.

Pixel likely to be the standard bearer for “Google Phones” going forward.

“I don’t know if they want to copy Apple and put their whole company name on it,” said brand expert, CEO and Founder of The Branding Clinic Kathleen Carroll, adding, “Companies use other names to protect themselves in case it doesn’t go well [and] to keep parent’s brand equity very strong.”

Which means Pixel is still the more likely standard bearer for “Google Phones” going forward.

Google first used “Pixel” in 2013 when the company unveiled the Chromebook Pixel. Pixel was then less a brand name than an indication of the laptop’s rather remarkable screen resolution for the time (239 pixels per inch).

If Pixel does become the go-forward brand for its new line of flagship Android phones, the switch makes sense, said Carroll, especially if Google is bringing “revolutionary change.”

In fact, keeping the Nexus brand for technology that leapfrogs the competition would be, Carroll noted, a mistake. “Nexus has been out long enough and enough people are uninterested or are rejectors that [Google does] need a new name to get excitement and interest in category,” she told me.

Google hasn’t built up a lot of faith in its brand-management expertise. With the exception of Android, they still tend to introduce brands and then drop or ignore them. “Look at the Nexus brand,” said Patrick Moorhead. “It started with a certain promise and changed. Not disciplined brand management.”

When I asked Moorhead, Carroll and others about the possibilities of Google taking firmer control of “Android” as a brand name for their handsets, most thought that would be a mistake.

Calling the new phones Google Pixel, though, won’t necessarily solve all of Google’s device branding problems, but it could bring it into line with Google Home, Google Chromecast and Google Pixel C.

Google is Google

So let’s imagine that Google’s Pixel phones manage to raise the bar on photography, battery life, screen resolution and even affordability. They demonstrate a Google ecosystem of mobile and home devices that use the smartly rebranded Google Assistant as connective tissue, which follows you from the office, to the road to the home and back out again. 

It’s finally Google’s moment to prove that, as Bajarin put it to me, its hardware business “is not a hobby.”

In 90 intense and thrilling minutes, Google will finally deliver a unified vision for its software and hardware. It will feel, essentially, like an Apple event.

And more importantly, the excitement of the event will, finally, be matched by some follow-through.

This could happen.

On the other hand, Google’s event track record is terrible. In the last five years, there’s be exactly one break-out moment: When Google co-founder Sergey Brin (an arguably more dynamic figure than the brilliant but dull Google CEO Sundar Picahi) stunned a Google I/O audience by using parachute jumpers to introduced Google Glass (they actually wore the headsets while jumping out of an airplane). Ultimately, this perfectly illustrated everything that’s wrong with Google’s hardware approach. They were building cool gadgets for nerds, instead of useful, beautiful consumer electronics for everyday people. 

That moment probably worked because we were truly surprised. There were no expectations (except for the sky-high ones that existed right after the Google Glass reveal). 

By contrast, less than 24 hours from what could be Google’s most important unveiling in eight years, expectations are high and rising. “[They] set the expectations that they’re going to swing everyone around the room,” said Moorhead. “I feel like Google is setting themselves up for either a colossal failure or disappointment.”

Things just keep getting worse and worse for Samsung.

After weeks of investigating cases of Galaxy Note7 phones catching on fire, destroying people's cars, and even injuring people, Samsung and the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued an official recall for 1 million of the phones sold in the U.S.

As per the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), affected Note7 phones with defective batteries must be turned off and can't be used during flights. Many public transportation agencies like New York City's MTA have also urged riders not to use the Note7.

And then just as safe replacement Note7 shipments started arriving on Wednesday and Samsung announced about 500,000 phones of the 1 million recalled in the U.S. had been exchanged, a Galaxy Note 2 catches on fire during an IndieGo flight from Singapore to Chennai.

India's Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and Samsung are currently investigating why the phone caught on fire in the first place. 

"We are in touch with relevant authorities to gather more information, and are looking into the matter," a spokesperson from Samsung India said in an emailed statement to Mashable India.

A Samsung spokesperson provided the following statement to Mashable over email: “We have been informed about an incident in India involving a Note 2, which uses a replaceable battery and was released in 2012. We are in touch with local authorities to gather more information and investigate whether there were any external factors involved.”

Following the incident, the DGCA has reportedly advised flyers to "exercise caution while flying with Samsung Note devices" according to spokesperson who spoke to The India Times. "They should either keep these devices switched off or not travel with them."

The last thing Samsung needs is another disaster that paints the company in more bad light.

Note (excuse the pun) the wording and how it urges against using essentially all Samsung Galaxy Note phones during flights. That includes any Note produced since the original device launched in 2011.

It's basically a declaration that SAMSUNG PHONES ARE DANGEROUS.

Talk about terrible timing.

The last thing Samsung needs is another disaster that paints the company in a worse light. It's especially tough at a time when the company's doing everything it can to prevent further tarnishing of its brand. It's also trying to reassure consumers that it has the Note7 situation under control and that new devices are safe to use.

What Samsung doesn't need right now is people scrutinizing the quality of all of the phones it produces. 

But alas, you can't control public perception. People are going to point fingers — even if the Note 2 incident is pure coincidence — at Samsung and demand answers.

And that's what sucks the most for Samsung. The Note7 issue may blow over quickly if it's able to successfully recall even 95 percent of the defective phones, but the brand damage will probably take a lot longer to repair.

Consumers, as loyal as some of us are, really aren't that loyal. We vote with our money and if a company can't assure that its products are safe to use, we'll leave in a heartbeat. Trust is not something easy to regain after major disasters.

Still, if you're a Samsung Galaxy Note user, I wouldn't worry at all.

While we won't know the real cause of the Note 2 incident until the official investigations are completed, it seems highly unlikely the fire is related to the Note7 defects, which prompted the global recall.

As eagle-eyed techies know, the Note 2 was released in 2012 and Samsung no longer sells the phone. And based on the image of the damaged phone that was made public, it looks like the removable battery expanded, which caused it to catch on fire. 

The cause could very likely be a third-party battery and not an official one. While some third-party batteries meet very strict quality control requirements, there are many that don't and those are the ones that are more likely to catch on fire.

Scary as a phone catching on fire on a flight is, it's happened before. Last year, an iPhone 6 inexplicably burst into flames aboard a flight going to Hawaii. And in 2014, there were two reported cases of iPhones catching on fire in people's pockets. Do a Google search and you'll find many more that happen every year.

It's unfortunate, but like I said earlier after the Note7 explosions started rolling in: Any phone could explode. There's no such thing as an explosion-proof phone. 

In fact, any device with a battery could potentially explode or catch on fire. Companies do their best to create controllers that monitor and regulate a battery to prevent it from overcharging and overheating, but defective batteries can happen (as was the case with the Note7) and people can (and do) push their phones beyond their advertised limits.

Generally, most phones go through their lifespans without any issues. If you're using an old Note or Samsung phone with removable batteries, we highly recommend using official batteries and not cheap knockoffs; the lower prices are tempting, but not worth potential risk and injury.

It's just really, really too bad for poor Samsung. The company just can't catch a break.

Things just keep getting worse and worse for Samsung.

After weeks of investigating cases of Galaxy Note7 phones catching on fire, destroying people's cars, and even injuring people, Samsung and the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) issued an official recall for 1 million of the phones sold in the U.S.

As per the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), affected Note7 phones with defective batteries must be turned off and can't be used during flights. Many public transportation agencies like New York City's MTA have also urged riders not to use the Note7.

And then just as safe replacement Note7 shipments started arriving on Wednesday and Samsung announced about 500,000 phones of the 1 million recalled in the U.S. had been exchanged, a Galaxy Note 2 catches on fire during an IndieGo flight from Singapore to Chennai.

India's Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) and Samsung are currently investigating why the phone caught on fire in the first place. 

"We are in touch with relevant authorities to gather more information, and are looking into the matter," a spokesperson from Samsung India said in an emailed statement to Mashable India.

Following the incident, the DGCA has reportedly advised flyers to "exercise caution while flying with Samsung Note devices" according to spokesperson who spoke to The India Times. "They should either keep these devices switched off or not travel with them."

The last thing Samsung needs is another disaster that paints the company in more bad light.

Note (excuse the pun) the wording and how it urges against using essentially all Samsung Galaxy Note phones during flights. That includes any Note produced since the original device launched in 2011.

It's basically a declaration that SAMSUNG PHONES ARE DANGEROUS.

Talk about terrible timing.

The last thing Samsung needs is another disaster that paints the company in a worse light. It's especially tough at a time when the company's doing everything it can to prevent further tarnishing of its brand. It's also trying to reassure consumers that it has the Note7 situation under control and that new devices are safe to use.

What Samsung doesn't need right now is people scrutinizing the quality of all of the phones it produces. 

But alas, you can't control public perception. People are going to point fingers — even if the Note 2 incident is pure coincidence — at Samsung and demand answers.

And that's what sucks the most for Samsung. The Note7 issue may blow over quickly if it's able to successfully recall even 95 percent of the defective phones, but the brand damage will probably take a lot longer to repair.

Consumers, as loyal as some of us are, really aren't that loyal. We vote with our money and if a company can't assure that its products are safe to use, we'll leave in a heartbeat. Trust is not something easy to regain after major disasters.

Still, if you're a Samsung Galaxy Note user, I wouldn't worry at all.

While we won't know the real cause of the Note 2 incident until the official investigations are completed, it seems highly unlikely the fire is related to the Note7 defects, which prompted the global recall.

As eagle-eyed techies know, the Note 2 was released in 2012 and Samsung no longer sells the phone. And based on the image of the damaged phone that was made public, it looks like the removable battery expanded, which caused it to catch on fire. 

The cause could very likely be a third-party battery and not an official one. While some third-party batteries meet very strict quality control requirements, there are many that don't and those are the ones that are more likely to catch on fire.

Scary as a phone catching on fire on a flight is, it's happened before. Last year, an iPhone 6 inexplicably burst into flames aboard a flight going to Hawaii. And in 2014, there were two reported cases of iPhones catching on fire in people's pockets. Do a Google search and you'll find many more that happen every year.

It's unfortunate, but like I said earlier after the Note7 explosions started rolling in: Any phone could explode. There's no such thing as an explosion-proof phone. 

In fact, any device with a battery could potentially explode or catch on fire. Companies do their best to create controllers that monitor and regulate a battery to prevent it from overcharging and overheating, but defective batteries can happen (as was the case with the Note7) and people can (and do) push their phones beyond their advertised limits.

Generally, most phones go through their lifespans without any issues. If you're using an old Note or Samsung phone with removable batteries, we highly recommend using official batteries and not cheap knockoffs; the lower prices are tempting, but not worth potential risk and injury.

It's just really, really too bad for poor Samsung. The company just can't catch a break.

For the next 48 hours, Amazon will be hosting a sale event with crazy deals on a number of unlocked smartphones. The key word here: unlocked.

There are several benefits to purchasing an unlocked smartphone. The major one is the flexibility and freedom customers have across carriers and distances. Unlocked phones are not tied to any provider and recognize SIM cards from all networks, which allows for international calling free of roaming charges.

Most smartphones today are purchased "locked," meaning they are limited and only work with a specific mobile carrier's SIM card. Plus, locked phones often have complicated payment plans. With unlocked phones, you usually pay the whole cost upfront — meaning that once you pay the Amazon sale price below, there is no need to fork over additional payments in the future (aside from your phone bill, of course).

So which smartphone should you buy? Here are our top five picks. 

1. Nextbit Robin $199.00 (Save $100)

The best thing about the Nextbit Robin is that it uses cloud services and automatically deletes content when it detects you're running low on storage space. 

2. LG G5 $479.00 (Save $120)

The LG G5 is a rare breed in that it's a modular phone; in other words, when you hit a button on the side, the whole phone comes apart. Then you can pop on accessories, like bigger batteries, more powerful cameras and speakers.  

3. Zenfone Zoom $299.00 (Save $100)

The Zenfone Zoom by Asus has a long battery life and camera features like macro focusing and enhanced optical zoom.

4. Alcatel Idol3 $99.99 (Save $40)

The Alcatel Idol3 has been coined "a Nexus by another name." The Idol3 has great processing ability and the option to be completely reversible when turned upside down. In other words, the screen automatically flips and adjusts depending on how you are holding the phone.

5. Honor 8 by Huawei $395.00 

The Honor 8's dual cameras, fingerprint scanner, and full HD LCD screen make it one of the best values on the market. 

Like Samsung, LG releases its flagship line of phones in the spring and a weirder, but still high-end, phone in the fall. The second model acts as a kind of testing ground for more cutting-edge tech.

Last year, LG set up this pattern with the V10. That phone had a signature feature akin to a secondary screen that sits along the top of the main screen. It's kind of like the edge panel on the original Galaxy Note Edge... except, well, lamer.

This year, on cue, we have the LG V20. LG claims the V20 is the world's first smartphone to ship with Android 7.0 Nougat pre-installed. That's not exactly a differentiator — more phones will certainly ship with that same OS very soon — but it's notable.

The V20 also brings back the secondary screen, this time with slightly better brightness, plus a new "signature" feature. Like the original Galaxy Note, the screen can show a word or phrase when not in use, and you can even use the first letter of it to create a wallpaper theme. Cute.

That's just the beginning of the upgrades from the V10. Certainly, there are the specs: it boasts a flagship-worthy Snapdragon 820 processor, 4GB of RAM and a Quad HD (2,560 x 1,440) display. But it also has a couple of features that are, dare I say, experimental?

The camera tech is a good example. The rear camera is 16 megapixels while the front is 5 megapixels, which is pretty much standard these days, but both cameras also include a wide-angle button front and center, letting you get a lot more in the shot. Shooting in wide angle will reduce the resolution (to 8 or 1.9 megapixels, depending on the camera), but fans of groufies will love the feature.

The phone also has improved electronic image stabilization, which will try to stabilize all that camera shake when you run alongside your friend as they finish their latest 5K. LG has also included a hybrid autofocus — using laser and phase detection as well as contrast — for lightning-fast image capture.

Audio is also a big deal for LG, and it says the V20 is the first smartphone with a 32-bit Hi-Fi Quad DAC (digital-to-analog converter). It supports all kinds of lossless formats, including FLAC, AIFF and Apple Lossless. There's also an HD audio recorder that's said to capture "studio quality audio" from three ultra-sensitive mics built into the phone.

As a high-end phone, the V20 also looks the part. It has a smooth metal exterior as well as metal buttons (including LG's trademark rear home button). Surprisingly, the metal back of the phone pops off so you can swap out the battery easily. It's not quite as gimmicky as the LG G5's modular design, but it's still rare to see a metal phone with a removable back. It pops off when you press a dedicated button on the side. Nothing could go wrong with that, I'm sure.

After hearing about all the interesting features of the LG V20, I was excited to check it out, but after I actually held it, I wasn't as impressed. This is clearly a bit of a Frankenstein's monster of a phone — LG is throwing spaghetti against the wall with it. I came away admiring certain features (the cameras, the finish), shrugging with some (HD audio recording, wide-angle shows) and rolling my eyes at others (that tiny second screen, tho).

Still, considering all the tech, LG has made an flagship-worthy smartphone here... if you can find it under all the gimmicks.

BERLIN — Can you blame Sony for not wanting to just throw in the towel for its ailing smartphone business?

As disappointing as the new Xperia X series is, Sony's pushing forward with the new Xperia XZ and X Compact, which it unveiled at IFA 2016. The XZ will launch in the U.S. on Oct. 23 and the X Compact is coming Oct. 25. (Pricing will be set later by carriers.)

Sony says the XZ merges the company's previous flagship Z-series with the recent X-series into one. 

The XZ, which comes in three attractive colors including a deep metallic blue. As the company's new flagship phone, it at least ticks off the processor box with Qualcomm's Snapdragon 820 processor and 3GB of RAM and 32GB of storage (expandable via microSD). Sure, it's 1GB less than rival Android phones, but Android Marshmallow seemed to run fine in my brief time with it.

The 5.2-inch screen is a more manageable and pocketable size and the 1080p resolution screen is fine. Of course, it's not as impressive as a Quad HD screen everyone — even the Chinese phones from Xiaomi, Huawei and ZTE — is rocking these days.

There's a 23-megapixel camera on the back with what Sony calls "triple image sensing" technology, which is supposed to autofocus quickly, predict where you want to autofocus, improve low-light photography and reduce blurry photos with its 5-axis SteadyShot stabilization system. The front comes with a 13-megapixel camera.

When pressed about any extra-long battery ratings — like the three-day battery life on previous Xperia phones — Sony wouldn't commit to any final figures for the XZ's 2,900 milliamp-hour (mAh) battery, saying they were still finalizing ratings. At least there's a USB-C port now.

Perhaps the most disappointing thing about the XZ is that it doesn't have a fingerprint sensor. It was  inexcusable on the Xperia X series and it's even more unforgivable when $200 phones like the Moto G4 have a fingerprint sensor. 

The little brother

The other new Sony phone is the X Compact. As its name suggests, it's a smaller device. There's no metal on this phone, just plastic designed with a ceramic-like finish to give it a touch of class.

But unlike previous Compacts, Sony didn't give it flagship specs; it's stuck with a midrange Snapdragon 652 processor. It does, however, come with 3GB of RAM and 32GB of internal storage expandable via microSD.

The 4.6-inch 720p HD screen is not groundbreaking. It has the same 23-megapixel camera on the back as the XZ with the new triple image sensing tech. The front is a lower 5-megapixel shooter.

Battery life is a surprisingly capable 2,700 mAh (for a phone of this size).

Of course, the X Compact also disappointingly lacks a fingerprint sensor as well, putting it in a tough spot held up against its competitors.

The Honor 8, Huawei's dual-camera smartphone with solid specs and a price far lower than its dual-camera brother, the Huawei P9, is now available in the U.S. 

It's a 5.2-inch device with a full HD LCD screen, Huawei's Kiring 950 chip, 4GB of RAM, 32/64GB of storage (further expandable via a microSD card) and a 3,000mAh battery. 

It also has a fingerprint scanner (which doubles as a programmable button), a USB Type C jack, a headphone jack (yes, that needs to be highlighted these days), an 8-megapixel selfie cam and a set of dual 12-megapixel cameras on the back, one for color and one for monochrome photos, with the combined result (hopefully) resulting in crisper, sharper images. Though Leica is not mentioned anywhere on the device's web page, the setup is very similar to the Leica-branded setup of the Huawei P9 — see our in-depth look at that phone's cameras here. 

As far as design goes, Honor 8 looks like a shinier, more uniform version of the P9, replacing the metallic back side with glass. It also looks a lot like some of the alleged spy shots of Apple's upcoming iPhone 7, which is rumored to also have a dual-camera setup on the back. 

The Honor 8's most important feature, however, is the price. It starts at $399 (that's for the 32GB version; the 64GB variant costs $449), and for the money it offers basically the same set of specs as the Huawei P9, which starts at $621 (but it's not available in the U.S.). 

The Honor 8 launches in the U.S. in three colors: Black, white and blue. Pre-orders start Aug. 17, and regular sale starts Aug. 26 on Amazon, Best Buy, Newegg and Huawei's own site. 

The controversial Snapchat filter called out as "yellowface" by many earlier this week has thrust the popular app's face morphing filters into the spotlight again, with some wondering if the app may be impacting how we see ourselves and others. 

Aside from racially insensitive filters, there's also the matter of Snapchat's "beauty" filter and how it may reveal a bias toward a certain kind of look. Specifically, a look that hews more toward western mainstream social norms as opposed to accentuating the true, diverse beauty of the many different kinds of faces seen around the world. 

Earlier this week, one Snapchat user decided to open up about her use of the beauty filter and how it's affected her view of herself.  

"Snapchat’s popular 'beauty' filter makes my face slimmer, my eyes bigger AND my nose narrower … And I was starting to prefer my face with a nose job!" wrote Nicole Williams, a blogger on Medium. "Even my Twitter profile has a version of my face using this Snapchat filter. I have been unintentionally communicating a photoshopped version of my own face for months. And I had no idea. But I had started really hating my nose."

The only photos I liked were ones through Snapchat, using the beauty filter. I started defaulting to Snapchat for every selfie.

And while Williams' digital transformation was gradual and not initially intentional, she admits, "The only photos I liked were ones through Snapchat, using the beauty filter. I started defaulting to Snapchat for every selfie."

But the filter-powered makeover doesn't stop at Snapchat. Many users have also been employing the powers of smartphone camera filters with automatic "beautifying" effects to change their looks, a practice Williams also pointed out regarding her own image. 

"It's taken awhile to notice, but my smartphone is making me prettier, according to a Westernised algorithm," writes Williams. "My Samsung S7 comes with editing tools that along with removing red eyes, can slim my face or make my eyes bigger."

Of course, users have been using the beauty mode option on Samsung smartphones for several years now to enhance their looks for a slightly (and in some cases, drastically) different look. 

But what Williams points out is how this may be subtly enforcing beauty standards that don't take into account all the different kinds of beauty common to people of different backgrounds. 

"The really insidious problem with photo filters," says Williams, is that, "they are programmed to Western beauty ideals. They tell Polynesian and African American girls that their noses are too wide. They tell Asian women their eyes are too small. And it tells every woman that their face should be skinnier."

However, despite these very valid points, a quick look on Instagram, Snapchat and Twitter quickly reveals that a large number of men and women are happily using these filters to change how they're viewed by the world. 

That fact alone means that western-beauty-focused filters will likely be difficult to walk back now that they're out in the wild. 

But as Williams' personal story, as well as the recent missteps by Snapchat, indicate, more and more users will likely begin to demand that app makers look beyond their narrow views and work on creating filters that enhance all types of beauty without putting anyone in a cultural box. 

The controversial Snapchat filter called out as "yellowface" by many earlier this week has thrust the popular app's face morphing filters into the spotlight again, with some wondering if the app may be impacting how we see ourselves and others. 

Aside from racially insensitive filters, there's also the matter of Snapchat's "beauty" filter and how it may reveal a bias toward a certain kind of look. Specifically, a look that hews more toward western mainstream social norms as opposed to accentuating the true, diverse beauty of the many different kinds of faces seen around the world. 

Earlier this week, one Snapchat user decided to open up about her use of the beauty filter and how it's affected her view of herself.  

"Snapchat’s popular 'beauty' filter makes my face slimmer, my eyes bigger AND my nose narrower … And I was starting to prefer my face with a nose job!" wrote Nicole Williams, a blogger on Medium. "Even my Twitter profile has a version of my face using this Snapchat filter. I have been unintentionally communicating a photoshopped version of my own face for months. And I had no idea. But I had started really hating my nose."

The only photos I liked were ones through Snapchat, using the beauty filter. I started defaulting to Snapchat for every selfie.

And while Williams' digital transformation was gradual and not initially intentional, she admits, "The only photos I liked were ones through Snapchat, using the beauty filter. I started defaulting to Snapchat for every selfie."

But the filter-powered makeover doesn't stop at Snapchat. Many users have also been employing the powers of smartphone camera filters with automatic "beautifying" effects to change their looks, a practice Williams also pointed out regarding her own image. 

"It's taken awhile to notice, but my smartphone is making me prettier, according to a Westernised algorithm," writes Williams. "My Samsung S7 comes with editing tools that along with removing red eyes, can slim my face or make my eyes bigger."

Of course, users have been using the beauty mode option on Samsung smartphones for several years now to enhance their looks for a slightly (and in some cases, drastically) different look. 

But what Williams points out is how this may be subtly enforcing beauty standards that don't take into account all the different kinds of beauty common to people of different backgrounds. 

"The really insidious problem with photo filters," says Williams, is that, "they are programmed to Western beauty ideals. They tell Polynesian and African American girls that their noses are too wide. They tell Asian women their eyes are too small. And it tells every woman that their face should be skinnier."

However, despite these very valid points, a quick look on Instagram, Snapchat and Twitter quickly reveals that a large number of men and women are happily using these filters to change how they're viewed by the world. 

That fact alone means that western-beauty-focused filters will likely be difficult to walk back now that they're out in the wild. 

But as Williams' personal story, as well as the recent missteps by Snapchat, indicate, more and more users will likely begin to demand that app makers look beyond their narrow views and work on creating filters that enhance all types of beauty without putting anyone in a cultural box. 

The controversial Snapchat filter called out as "yellowface" by many earlier this week has thrust the popular app's face morphing filters into the spotlight again, with some wondering if the app may be impacting how we see ourselves and others. 

Aside from racially insensitive filters, there's also the matter of Snapchat's "beauty" filter and how it may reveal a bias toward a certain kind of look. Specifically, a look that hews more toward western mainstream social norms as opposed to accentuating the true, diverse beauty of the many different kinds of faces seen around the world. 

Earlier this week, one Snapchat user decided to open up about her use of the beauty filter and how it's affected her view of herself.  

"Snapchat’s popular 'beauty' filter makes my face slimmer, my eyes bigger AND my nose narrower … And I was starting to prefer my face with a nose job!" wrote Nicole Williams, a blogger on Medium. "Even my Twitter profile has a version of my face using this Snapchat filter. I have been unintentionally communicating a photoshopped version of my own face for months. And I had no idea. But I had started really hating my nose."

The only photos I liked were ones through Snapchat, using the beauty filter. I started defaulting to Snapchat for every selfie.

And while Williams' digital transformation was gradual and not initially intentional, she admits, "The only photos I liked were ones through Snapchat, using the beauty filter. I started defaulting to Snapchat for every selfie."

But the filter-powered makeover doesn't stop at Snapchat. Many users have also been employing the powers of smartphone camera filters with automatic "beautifying" effects to change their looks, a practice Williams also pointed out regarding her own image. 

"It's taken awhile to notice, but my smartphone is making me prettier, according to a Westernised algorithm," writes Williams. "My Samsung S7 comes with editing tools that along with removing red eyes, can slim my face or make my eyes bigger."

Of course, users have been using the beauty mode option on Samsung smartphones for several years now to enhance their looks for a slightly (and in some cases, drastically) different look. 

But what Williams points out is how this may be subtly enforcing beauty standards that don't take into account all the different kinds of beauty common to people of different backgrounds. 

"The really insidious problem with photo filters," says Williams, is that, "they are programmed to Western beauty ideals. They tell Polynesian and African American girls that their noses are too wide. They tell Asian women their eyes are too small. And it tells every woman that their face should be skinnier."

However, despite these very valid points, a quick look on Instagram, Snapchat and Twitter quickly reveals that a large number of men and women are happily using these filters to change how they're viewed by the world. 

That fact alone means that western-beauty-focused filters will likely be difficult to walk back now that they're out in the wild. 

But as Williams' personal story, as well as the recent missteps by Snapchat, indicate, more and more users will likely begin to demand that app makers look beyond their narrow views and work on creating filters that enhance all types of beauty without putting anyone in a cultural box. 

The controversial Snapchat filter called out as "yellowface" by many earlier this week has thrust the popular app's face morphing filters into the spotlight again, with some wondering if the app may be impacting how we see ourselves and others. 

Aside from racially insensitive filters, there's also the matter of Snapchat's "beauty" filter and how it may reveal a bias toward a certain kind of look. Specifically, a look that hews more toward western mainstream social norms as opposed to accentuating the true, diverse beauty of the many different kinds of faces seen around the world. 

Earlier this week, one Snapchat user decided to open up about her use of the beauty filter and how it's affected her view of herself.  

"Snapchat’s popular 'beauty' filter makes my face slimmer, my eyes bigger AND my nose narrower … And I was starting to prefer my face with a nose job!" wrote Nicole Williams, a blogger on Medium. "Even my Twitter profile has a version of my face using this Snapchat filter. I have been unintentionally communicating a photoshopped version of my own face for months. And I had no idea. But I had started really hating my nose."

The only photos I liked were ones through Snapchat, using the beauty filter. I started defaulting to Snapchat for every selfie.

And while Williams' digital transformation was gradual and not initially intentional, she admits, "The only photos I liked were ones through Snapchat, using the beauty filter. I started defaulting to Snapchat for every selfie."

But the filter-powered makeover doesn't stop at Snapchat. Many users have also been employing the powers of smartphone camera filters with automatic "beautifying" effects to change their looks, a practice Williams also pointed out regarding her own image. 

"It's taken awhile to notice, but my smartphone is making me prettier, according to a Westernised algorithm," writes Williams. "My Samsung S7 comes with editing tools that along with removing red eyes, can slim my face or make my eyes bigger."

Of course, users have been using the beauty mode option on Samsung smartphones for several years now to enhance their looks for a slightly (and in some cases, drastically) different look. 

But what Williams points out is how this may be subtly enforcing beauty standards that don't take into account all the different kinds of beauty common to people of different backgrounds. 

"The really insidious problem with photo filters," says Williams, is that, "they are programmed to Western beauty ideals. They tell Polynesian and African American girls that their noses are too wide. They tell Asian women their eyes are too small. And it tells every woman that their face should be skinnier."

However, despite these very valid points, a quick look on Instagram, Snapchat and Twitter quickly reveals that a large number of men and women are happily using these filters to change how they're viewed by the world. 

That fact alone means that western-beauty-focused filters will likely be difficult to walk back now that they're out in the wild. 

But as Williams' personal story, as well as the recent missteps by Snapchat, indicate, more and more users will likely begin to demand that app makers look beyond their narrow views and work on creating filters that enhance all types of beauty without putting anyone in a cultural box.