Panasonic plasmas sure do.

(Credit: Sarah Tew/CNET)

Initial testing of 3D-compatible HDTVs has revealed that, in the default picture settings, displaying 3D images can indeed draw more power than in standard 2D mode, especially on plasma models.

We tested four televisions, namely Panasonic’s 50-inch TC-P50VT25 and 65-inch TC-P65VT25 plasmas, as well as two LED-based LCD models, the Samsung UN55C8000 and the Sony XBR-52HX909. The results show that the plasmas used 62 and 101 percent more power, respectively, whereas the Samsung used 29 percent more and the Sony, oddly, used more power in 2D than in 3D mode. Check out the measurements below.

The main reason for the extra power draw in 3D, as far as we can tell, is that 3D needs a brighter image. The active LC shutter glasses required to view 3D on these TVs alternately block off each eye very quickly, so it stands to reason that the 3D image needs to be brighter than the 2D version to have similar impact. A quick eyeball observation sans glasses confirms that the 2D image is dimmer than 3D on the Panasonic plasmas. On the other hand, we couldn’t see an obvious brightness difference on the LED models.

In addition, the glasses themselves have a slight tint even when “open” and not blocking an image–Sony’s glasses seem to have the lightest tint and Panasonic’s the heaviest–so the TV must be brighter to overcome it. A Panasonic engineer told us to think of it as “watching TV through sunglasses.”

Naturally the different makers can and will use different default picture settings, and different brightness offsets for 3D, but unfortunately we can’t compensate for those differences in our testing yet. For example, the Sony’s image in 3D (with the glasses on) seemed dimmer than in 2D (glasses off) with the same picture mode, but we can’t say for sure and we can’t properly test it (see below).

Even with 2D material the 50-inch VT25 used more power than the equivalent 2D TV, the 50-inch Panasonic TC-P50G20; we measured about 28 percent more juice (which costs about $14 more per year) after equalizing for light output. Of course, plasma in general uses twice to three times as much power as LCD, especially these LED-based models.

Power use aside, in our opinion the Panasonic is the superior-performing 3D (and 2D) television compared with the other two. It’s also worth mentioning that 2D will likely be used much more frequently than 3D on these TVs for years to come, so the monetary and energy use impact of this increased power use will be minor.

We’ll test other 3D-compatible TVs for power use as part of all future reviews, and include the updates here. For more info, check out CNET’s Quick Guide to TV Power Consumption and 3D TV FAQ.

Test procedure
Unfortunately a rigorous test of 3D power use, with a comparison that specifies equalized light output in both 2D and 3D modes, isn’t in the cards right now. It would require a measurement of light output through a pair of 3D glasses–literally placing the glasses over the lens of our light meter–which introduces variables that are difficult to control. Alternately, we could forget the glasses and just compare the light output of the screen in 2D and 3D mode with the same content, but at the moment we lack the proper 3D test patterns to do so.

In lieu of a test that controls for light output, we’ve elected to simply compare the power consumption in each TV’s default Standard picture mode (with ambient light sensors disabled). We used the first 10 minutes of “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs” because that Blu-ray allows an in-menu choice of 2D or 3D presentation (in 3D mode we skipped past the 3D Blu-ray and Sony promos, which don’t appear in 2D mode, before we began the 10-minuter period). All TVs were tested using the latest firmware versions. We used our standard test procedure, including hour-long warm-up times, for each measurement.

If you’re serious about digital photography, it’s a given that you shoot with a D-SLR or maybe one of the new compact interchangeable-lens cameras. And you shoot a lot of photos. But you haven’t only outgrown your point-and-shoot camera, you’ve also outgrown your consumer photo application. These apps offer rudimentary photo-management and are becoming more and more capable photo editors all the time, but when it comes to importing, rating, tagging, optimizing, and outputting myriad high-resolution image files, they can’t compete with the professional photo workflow programs in this roundup: Apple’s Aperture 3 ($199), Adobe’s Lightroom 3 ($299), and ACDSee Pro 3 ($169.99). These photo-workflow apps take you through the whole import-organize-optimize-output process.

Modal or Non-modal?
Lightroom and ACDSee use a “modal” interfaces, in which you select one mode for importing and organizing (usually with advanced tagging options); another for adjusting images exposure and color; another for output like slideshows; and depending on the program, possibly one for printing and one for web. Apple Aperture departs from this trend, letting you do any of the above at any point in your process, using tabs on its Inspector to get the set of tasks you want. Both Aperture and Lightroom let you tag and apply preset adjustments to photos even as they’re imported, which sets them above ACDSee for users who need to get things organized and tagged on the fly for quick processing.

Aperture offers a couple more big advantages aside from this simpler user interface—its Face tagging and impressive geotagging options, actually ported up and powered up from its consumer iPhoto app. Face tagging lets photographers find photos containing certain individuals, something particularly useful for those who shoot weddings, portraits, or events. And the geotagging is nifty tool suited for the landscape or travel photographer, showing photo shoots on a zoomable world map. Overall, it’s a must-have application for the Mac-using photographer.

Aperture and Lightroom can both accept external plug-ins, which pros depend on for powerful effects like noise reduction (such as Noise Ninja) or sharpening (such as Nik Sharpener Pro). Another type of plug-in they offer is the export plug-in, which eases uploading to photo sites like SmugMug and Picasa Web Albums. Lightroom also has a large base of community-produced presets to choose from, but Aperture has more for outputting to book format.

Shooting RAW
If you do get a DSLR, I recommend that you shoot in RAW format, as this lets you do more with the photos in one of these software packages (it may require a lot more storage space than JPG, but it is a lossless format that saves all the information the sensor records). Not only do the apps here offer more advanced import and organization options, but they can get the best out of each image by adjusting properties of the camera’s RAW files—exposure, white balance, and sharpening.

I saw a palpable example of this while testing these programs: A shot of an old, white exterior next to a darker interior wall showed cracks and texture when I made adjustments to a RAW file. I could get none of this detail from the same image in JPG format. Sure, your DSLR comes with software that can display and do some editing of raw files (my Canon T1i came with at least a half dozen apps on its installer disk), but the apps in this roundup are far more capable and usable than the software bundled with your camera.

And these programs offer other advantages: They usually will handle those large RAW files far more quickly than consumer products, especially Lightroom, with its graphics hardware acceleration. Note, however, that with any app that has to juggle 20MB image files pixel-by-pixel, you’re still going to need a PC of decent power. And don’t expect your laptop’s battery to last too long when you’re applying adjustments to photos with these apps.

Compensating For Your Camera
The photo workflow software here can also can compensate for physical limitations of lenses—chromatic aberration (discolored fringes on objects edges), vignetting (darkening around an images outer edges), and geometric distortion. Lightroom and ACDSee are the only ones that can do that last one. Lightroom also had the best image noise reduction in my testing, smoothing out those stubbly areas in low light that result from the way light hits the sensor and electronic transmission.

Nondestructive Editing
And with these programs, all the edits you perform can be undone at any time. In fact, the original image file is treated like a negative and never touched. Instead, any edits are saved in a separate database and applied to the image as you view it. You can export the edited image to a new file for an end product with all your changes.

What about Photoshop?
You may be wondering at the absence from this group of a very well-known, high-end photo editor that’s also known for its ability to accept plug-ins—Adobe Photoshop CS5. That $700 app is really a different animal than what we’re looking at here, and indeed, the programs in this roundup can do a lot of what Photoshop does, but they offer more in the way of organization, where Photoshop is more about creativity, using layers and effects. These also let you launch external editors like Photoshop–and Lightroom’s feature for this the slickest, as it shares that app’s parent, Adobe.

When you’re done organizing your digital photos and getting them to look their best, most of these apps make it easy to sharing them online, offer flexible printing options, create polished slideshows, and even will build Web galleries—completing the full workflow. For details on what each of them excels at and which suits your needs best, click the links on the summaries below to read the full reviews.

ACDSee Pro 3

$169
ACDSee gives you nearly everything in Adobe’s Lightroom, though the interface is a bit less polished. It lacks the lens calibrated adjustments, chromatic aberration tools, and excellent noise reduction of Lightroom, but it’s a surprisingly versatile, powerful application for the price.

Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3

$299
Lightroom has been the pro photographer’s choice of digital darkroom, and this version brings increased speed and even finer image rendering. Its image noise correction tops all others in this group; it will even correct lens distortion for popular lenses. Lightroom 3 can’t keep up with Aperture’s much more usable interface, but it’s the best pro photo application for Windows users.

Apple Aperture 3

$199
With face recognition for organizing people pictures, smart geo-tagging, a rich plug-in ecosystem, and all the adjustment and nondestructive versioning and organizational tools you find in Lightroom, Aperture is one of the best photo applications around, and hands-down the best available for Mac users. It’s our Editors’ Choice for photo-management. Of course, if you have a PC, you’ll want to stick with Adobe Lightroom 3.

Apple has addressed the problem in its support area by stating that the iPad may have trouble connecting to third-party, dual-band routers after restarting or waking up from sleep. That could mean trouble for anyone not using one of Apple’s own Airport Extreme or Time Capsule routers. (Unfortunately, there has also been some grumbling about the iPad’s ability to connect to that piece of its own hardware, as well.) I applied Apple’s suggestions to my testing procedure.

Tweak Your Network for the iPad
Apple has suggested several fixes for iPad’s networking issues; these include creating a separate Wi-Fi network name for each band, ensuring both bands have the same security type, and making sure that the router’s firmware is up to date. Still, there’s some wake rippling over the iPad ‘s Wi-Fi connectivity issues, which culminated in the Israeli Communications Ministry banning Apple’s tablet from Israel.

iPad Versus Non-Apple Routers
I tested the iPad’s ability to connect to six mainstream, non-Apple 802.11n wireless consumer routers. The goal was to recreate the issues that some iPad owners were reporting, and perhaps find a solution.

First, each router was updated with its latest firmware (if available). WPA2-personal security was configured on each; it’s the highest security level for wireless routers. When applicable, TKIP+ AES was also set. For the dual-band routers, the iPad’s connectivity was tested on both the 2.4-GHz and 5-GHz band. Each band was assigned a different SSID, as per Apple’s recommendation.

The routers were left to auto-configure to a channel. Meraki’s Wi-Fi Stumbler was the tool we used to confirm what channel was used. Mixed Mode (b/g/n) was supported on all and was used as the default setting.

Before connecting each router to my cable modem, I gave it a hard reset. I tested the iPad for initial connectivity, how well it held the connection during 30 minutes of browsing (at 5 feet and then 10 feet away from the router), and its ability to resume the connection after being rebooted.

The verdict? You’ll have to read on.

Cisco Valet Plus
$129.99-$149.99 Retail
It came as no surprise that the Editors’ Choice winning Cisco Valet Plus worked almost perfectly with the iPad. The router auto-configured to channel 1. The iPad connected to the Cisco Valet Plus within seconds, and browsing was noticeably peppier using this single-band, 2.4-GHz router than with any of its competitors. There were no issues with the initial connection or coming back from Sleep mode. After a reboot, though, the iPad asked for re-authentication to the wireless network. After entering the passphrase, Safari was unable to open any Web pages for about 5 seconds. After that brief hiccup, I was able to browse with ease.

D-Link GamerLounge DGL-4500
$199.99 Retail
This pricey gaming router, which debuted in the Fall of last year, didn’t disappoint. The iPad shook hands with the DGL-4500 when it was set to the 2.4-GHz band on channel 1, and it deftly handled connecting to the 5-GHz band, also on channel 1. Security was configured with WPA2 with TKIP and AES. The iPad successfully connected to a Wi-Fi signal after a reboot.

Netgear WNDR3700 RangeMax Dual Band Wireless-N Gigabit Router
$189.99 Retail
Netgear’s RangeMax routers also passed the test. The iPad connected to at both the 2.4-GHz and 5-GHz bands set on channel 2, without any issues. In fact, after switching from 2.4-GHz to 5-GHz the iPad picked up the new SSID right away, prompting for the passphrase. The iPad picked up the Wi-Fi signal after a reboot.

SMC Networks – Barricade N – Draft 11N Wireless 4 Port GigaBit Broadband Router SMCWGBR14-N
$113.99-$125.15 Retail
The Barricade N (launched in 2008 without 5-GHz support) is somewhat dated, but the iPad connected to the single-band, 2.4 GHz router signal on channel 11 without any hiccups. Security was configured with WPA2-AES. The iPad discovered the Wi-Fi signal after a reboot.

Cisco Linksys E2000 Advanced Wireless-N Router – Selectable Dual-Band
$119.99 Retail
This router is so new that we haven’t had the chance to do a full, hands-on review yet, but the iPad flawlessly hooked up to it on both the 2.4-GHz and 5-GHz bands on channel 1. The E2000 has an additional internal antenna designed to work in larger homes (making for a total of three antennas), which may have assisted in the maintaining a strong signal. The iPad successfully connected to Wi-Fi after rebooting.

TP LINK Wireless-N Router TL-WR941ND
$60.00 Retail
The single-band TL-WR941ND didn’t receive rave reviews when we reviewed it back in 2008, but the iPad picked up its signal and jumped on the Web without error. It was set at the 2.4-GHz band on channel 11. The iPad successfully connected to a Wi-Fi signal after a reboot.

The Verdict
Aside from the very brief time it took for the iPad to reconnect to the Cisco Valet Plus, I experienced no connection issues with any of the tested routers. So the question must be asked: why didn’t I experience the same issues that many iPad owners are complaining about on Apple’s Support Forum?

The problem may lie in a faulty batch of iPads. It seems plausible considering that I could not recreate the very real issues iPad users are having, and the recommended fixes seem to help some users and not others. It’s also possible that the problems stem from router incompatibilities, but in my combing through the forums, I was unable to find a commonality among router hardware in the complaints. It would be immensely helpful if Apple culled information from every iPad user who has logged a support ticket, or paid a visit to an Apple Genius, in order to find any possible commonalities. We’ll keep investigating, but in the meanwhile, please share your iPad networking experiences in the comments section.

Every six months or so, Flip Video–slated to be absorbed by Cisco by the end of the year–puts out a new model or two of its popular YouTube-friendly point-and-shoot mini camcorders. Late last year it was the MinoHD. Now, for spring 2009, the company brings us two updated versions of the Ultra: a higher-end model, the UltraHD, which shoots 720p (1,280×720) high-definition video, and a less expensive Ultra, which shoots 640×480 VGA video.

On the outside at least, not much has changed from Flip’s first-generation Ultra. But there are a couple of notable differences. For starters, the transflective LCD on the back is bigger, measuring 2 inches, compared with 1.5 inches. The buttons are also bigger and the UltraHD, which comes in black or white, has a sort of rubberized, matte finish that allows you to grip the device a bit more easily.

Most importantly, this model comes with a set of AA-size NiMH rechargeable batteries you can charge in the unit by simply connecting the camcorder (via its trademark flip-out USB connector) to the USB port on your computer. Alternatively, you can swap in a pair of standard AA alkaline batteries if you don’t have time to charge. That standard battery backup option is a nice convenience, but there’s a drawback: the batteries are bulkier and heavier than the slim lithium ion type built into the MinoHD. So by default you’re getting a bigger, heavier camcorder–the UltraHD weighs 6.1 ounces versus 3.3 ounces for the MinoHD. That said, the UltraHD is still pocket-friendly, just not as pocket-friendly as the MinoHD.

One thing we don’t like about the new design is the chrome plastic trim on the sides of the unit. It looks good but you’ll find your self continually wiping off fingerprint smudges with the soft, velvety pouch that ships with the product. We would have preferred some sort of brushed metal, or a brushed-metal look. Another minor ding: there’s an HDMI output on the side for HDTV connections, but no bundled cable. That’s not a huge deal, but Kodak, for instance, includes an HDMI cable with the Zx1, which retails for about $50 less.

Like the MinoHD, the UltraHD shoots 720p video at 30fps, H.264 compressed, and encoded as MPEG-4. The unit lacks a memory card slot, which is too bad, but its 8GB of internal memory allows you to record 2 hours of video. That should be ample recording capacity for most folks, but if you’re on a vacation and shoot a lot of video, it would help to have a laptop along for the ride to offload your video as you run out of memory.

Page 2

The process of shooting and transferring videos to your computer or uploading them to YouTube and other video-file-sharing sites remains a breeze. Flip has generally nailed the whole simplicity thing. You hit the big red button to record and the play button to play back videos. There is a 2x digital zoom onboard (you don’t want to use it), but nothing in the way of manual or advanced settings, or even a still-capture mode. However, you can pull stills from your video using the software package that’s built into the unit.

For the type of audience these budget camcorders are targeted at, having few choices and menus to toggle through is a good thing. It’s also good that Flip’s software supports both Windows and Mac. It offers basic editing features, but you can always import your video into another video-editing package, including Apple’s iMovie.

As for video, the Ultra has some of the best we’ve seen to date from one of these cheap, Web-friendly camcorders; that is, it’s relatively sharp and saturated in outdoor shots and adequately bright without being overly noisy or blurry in low light, and the audio is clear and loud. It still can’t compare with the video produced by a real HD camcorder that costs a few hundred more–and you do have to keep the device absolutely motionless while shooting for the best results–but the video’s been incrementally improved over that of Flip’s more compact MinoHD. Overall, the video just seemed a bit sharper and smoother, the colors slightly more accurate, and the lowlight performance appeared a tad improved with a shade less noise in dimly lit shots. To be clear, we’re talking about very small improvements, but they are noticeable.

We should note that this model has the same optics and image sensor as the MinoHD, but Flip has managed to refine the video processing to improve the image quality. It’s still not great–and your video can appear jittery if you don’t hold the camcorder very steady–but comparatively speaking, it’s quite decent, especially for a camcorder this small. (For a comparison of the various Flip models, the company provides a comparison chart.)

The UltraHD may not be the sexiest-looking HD mini camcorder out there. Or the cheapest, at around $200. But it does offer relatively good video quality and Flip camcorders are probably at the top of the class in terms of ease of use. If you’ve got it, the extra $50 or so the UltraHD costs over the Ultra is certainly worth it–you’ll probably make it up in batteries over the course of a year, anyway. And we like the new battery setup, even though it adds some weight to the camcorder over the original MinoHD. So it’s your best bet unless you’re really after the smallest, lightweight mini camcorder, in which case the MinoHD and Creative’s Vado HD remain better choices–for now, anyway.

Most often cited is the iPad’s speed, and it indeed feels very quick and responsive, and generally comes off as a powerful tool compared with a standard Netbook, which can feel sluggish even when performing the most basic tasks.

Yet under the hood, it’s obvious that a typical $299 Netbook has much more powerful hardware. It’s Atom N450 CPU runs at 1.66GHz, it has 1GB of RAM (nearly four times as much as an iPad), and even Windows 7 Starter Edition is a much more capable operating system than the iPhone OS.

But specs on paper are one thing, real-world performance is something entirely different. To see which machine was actually faster, we decided to pit a Netbook (in this case an Asus Eee PC 1001P) against an iPad in head-to-head competition.

Some may call this an apples to oranges comparison, others would say it’s more like oranges to tangerines. In either case, our standard Windows 7/OSX/Linux benchmarks won’t run on the iPad (as it’s a walled garden of App Store software), so we will instead rely on a series of hand-timed anecdotal tests. Keep in mind these are significantly less scientific than the typical benchmarking we do on laptop and desktop PCs, and the results are meant only to provide a general overview.

With those admonitions in mind, we ran a boot-up time test, a Web page rendering test, and a browser-based JavaScript test on both devices. The tests were repeated several times to ensure consistency, and the boot-up and Web page rendering tests were hand-timed with a stopwatch.

You can see a time-condensed version of the testing in the video above.

As expected, the iPad’s boot-up time was much faster than the Netbook’s. After all, the iPad is booting up a slim OS, specifically designed for low-power systems. The Netbook, on the other hand, is running effectively the same Windows 7 (although in this case it’s the slightly stripped-down Starter Edition) as full-size multicore laptops do.

When it comes to fully rendering a Web page (our CNET home page, in this case) the two systems were exactly tied. But it’s difficult to read too much into a Web-page-loading test, as many other factors can influence it (we used the Safari Web browser on our Netbook, and cleared the cache on both devices between tests).

It’s only when we got to our JavaScript test that the Netbook showed its real advantage. When it comes to performing tasks not specifically designed for its hardware and operating system, the iPad is no match for even a $299 entry-level Netbook.

As we mentioned before, these were extremely anecdotal tests, and should not be considered on par with the typical highly controlled benchmarking we do for laptops and desktops. The results are only intended to give you a broad overview of how a Netbook and the iPad compare in head-to-head competition.

The server performed excellently in our tests, and we loved its robust Web interface that helps users navigate through its large amount of features and functions. The server’s few shortcomings include the fact that it supports only one IP camera out of the box and requires more licenses for additional cameras; its lack of dual Ethernet option that would help maintain the high-throughput even during heavy loads. Finally its storage scalability isn’t practical.

If you’re looking for an advanced NAS server that offer all you might expect from a product of its type, for around $570 (no storage included) or around $860 (with 2TB), the Disk Station DS710+ will make a good investment. If you want something similar that can support two IP cameras out of the box and has dual Ethernet, we’d recommend the QNAP TS259 Pro .

Design and setup
The Disk Station DS710+ is Synology’s first 3.5-inch hard drive-based NAS server that offers easy access to its storage. Unlike the DS209+, which requires you to open the device’s cover to access the hard drives, the DS710+’s two drive bays are easily accessible from the back. This makes installing and replacing the hard drives a much quicker task.

The server can work alone as a dual-bay NAS or couple with the DX510 expansion enclosure unit, which costs another $500, to support up to seven hard drives. The DX510 isn’t available as of this review posting, but according to Synology, it’ll be connected to the DS710+ via its eSATA port on the back. Add to that the fact that the DX510 is about 2.5 times the size of the DS710+–regardless how many hard drives it contains–and the solution starts to seem more clunky than practical. It would be better if somehow the server could accept more hard drives and still remain a single unit. We believe the DS710+ would work best just by itself as a dual-bay NAS server.

Apart from the eSATA port, the Disk Station DS710+ also comes with three USB ports, two on the back and one on the front. These ports can be used to host more external storage devices or printers. The front USB port can also be used to quickly back up the entire contents of a USB storage device, such as a thumb drive. This is a popular feature found in many new NAS servers.

The Disk Station DS710+ ships both with and without storage. Our review unit comes with two 1TB hard drives that can be set up in either RAID 0 or RAID 1 configuration. When coupled with the DX510, Synology claims, the DS710+ can support other RAID configurations, including Synology’s proprietary Hybrid RAID, which allows the use of hard drives of different capacities.

Like other NAS servers from Synology, the DS710+ won’t pose any problem for savvy users when it comes to setup. Not so much for home users. The NAS server comes with a desktop application called “Synology Assistant” to help users with the initial setup. Apart from detecting the NAS and launching the Web interface, the software doesn’t provide enough information on what it does and may seem confusing and intimidating for those with little computer knowledge.

Nonetheless, we had no problem getting the server up and running. In our trial, the server took only about 30 minutes to switch from one RAID configuration to another. This is significantly shorter than most NAS servers that take hours to get the same job done. This is because the DS710+ allows you to skip the hard-drive check during a RAID build. This reduces the build time, but would pose potential problem if the hard drives contain bad sectors. When a disk check was included, the DS710+’s RAID build time took about as long as any other NAS servers.

Unlike the desktop setup application, the server’s Web interface is one of the best. Once launched via a Web browser, all features and functions of the DS710+ are listed in a well-organized menu on the left of the interface. Most of the setup sections are wizard-based and walk you through step by step. For example, when we clicked on “Share Folder” and then clicked “Create,” a wizard launched to walk us through all the steps involved in making a new share folder and assigning user access to that folder.

Features
Running Synology Disk Station Manager 2.2 firmware, the DS710+ shares a similar feature set to most other NAS servers from Synology that we’ve reviewed, such as the DS209+ or the DS410Slim. The NAS server has all the basic features you’d find in any NAS server, such as FTP/HTTP server, media streaming servers, user account, and support for external hard drives and printer.

On top of that, the DS710+ also has advanced features, including support for Windows Active Directory Services, which allows it to work seamlessly with a centralized domain server. It also supports iSCSI, which allows you to facilitate data transfers and manage the storage over long distances through the network. The server also offers excellent support for file sharing across multiple platforms including Windows, Mac, and Linux. It also has support for Apple’s Time Machine backup solution in addition to many other features. However, what we like the most about the DS710+ are its application stations, including Surveillance Station, Download Station, File Station, and Photo Station. All of these stations can be accessed via the local network or over the Internet.

The DS710+’s Surveillance Station supports up to 16 IP cameras. Unfortunately, only one camera license is included and for additional camera licenses, you’ll have to pay $49 per license. Of all NAS servers that have support for IP cameras, Synology NAS servers, including the DS710+, have the most comprehensive surveillance features. You can view live images and record them based on scheduling or motion detection. When multiple cameras are used, you can even synchronize the playback to see what happens on different cameras at a given time. The server supports a long list of the IP cameras on the market and is able to detect those connected to the local network to help facilitate the setup process. We tried the server out with an Axis 213 PTZ and a Panasonic BL-C1A IP cameras and were very happy with the results. So far, among NAS servers, Synology has been offering the best solution when it comes to surveillance. We wish, however, that this feature didn’t require additional licenses purchases to support multiple cameras.

The server’s Download Station allows the server to download files from the Internet by itself and is able to download files from Web sites that require authentication (such as RapidShare). It also supports eMule and BitTorrent file-sharing services. You can manage your download anytime from anywhere via the local network or the Internet. This is an excellent feature for those who want to download large files, as no other computer needs to be running other than the NAS sever itself during the downloads.

The DS710+ comes with Photo Station 3, which allows you to easily organize photos into albums. Once activated, a share folder called “photo” will be created. Photos stored in this share folder will be automatically placed into a well-organized, customizable album. You can then browse the album via a Web browser and in Google’s Picasa Web Album and very easily add captions and comments to each photo/album.

Any local computers can access the DS710+’s storage via its share folder, just like the way you would browse for shared data between computers, but if you want to access the NAS server’s storage via the Internet, you’ll need to use its File Station. To do this, you’ll need to know how to set up a dynamic domain name system (DDNS) connection or access the Internet via a static IP. This whole process requires some understanding about networking, such as the capability to forward certain ports to certain IP addresses. Once set up, the File Station allows for accessing data from the NAS server’s share folder over the Internet. You can download a single file or a whole folder to the remote computer at a time and can also upload files to the NAS sever. Multiple users can use this feature at a time, and from different locations.

The DS710+ has built-in backup options that are focused on backing up its content onto an external storage device or a network location. For backing files on your computer to DS710+, Synology bundles it with its Data Replicator 3 desktop software.

The Data Replicator 3 is a simple straightforward backup application that allows you to quickly copy data, much like copying and pasting using Windows Explorer, from your computer to the DS710+. The software, however, does have a nice feature that helps you find and quickly back up e-mail archives, which generally are buried deep in layers of subfolders within a user’s profile. In addition, it also allows for scheduling and keeping track of the backup process via e-mail notification.

Performance
We tested the DS710+ in both RAID 0 and RAID 1 configurations and were happy with how it performed.

In RAID 1, which is the setup that focuses on data protection at the expense of storage space, the NAS server scored 321.8Mbps for write speed and 322.7Mbps for read speed. These numbers are among the fastest of dual-bay NAS servers. For comparison, the QNAP TS 259Pro scored 268.1Mbps and 350.6Mbps for Write and Read test, respectively.

In RAID 0, the setup that gives you the most of storage space and performance at the expense of data protection, the DS710 scored noticeably higher at 409.7Mbps for the Write test, which is the fastest for now. Its Read speed, however, was slower at only 323.8Mbps, compared with the 361.5Mbps of the QNAP TS259 Pro.

Overall, the DS710+’s performance is among the highest of dual-bay NAS servers. It was interesting, however, to see that its read speed seemed to be the same or slower than its write speeds. In most NAS servers we’ve tested, this pattern tends to be reversed.

The NAS also performed quietly in our test and remained cool and quiet even during heavy loads.

CNET Labs NAS performance scores
(Via wired Gigabit Ethernet connection)
(Shorter bars indicate better performance)

Read

Write

Synology DiskStation DS710+ (RAID 0)

323.8

409.7

Synology DiskStation DS710+ (RAID 1)

322.7

321.8

QNAP TS-259 Pro (RAID 0)

361.5

299.2

QNAP TS-259 Pro (RAID 1)

350.6

268.1

Synology DS209+ (RAID 0)

375

256.3

Synology DS209+ (RAID 1)

322.3

240

QNAP TS-239 Pro (RAID 0)

373.9

223.9

QNAP TS-239 Pro (RAID 1)

292.9

176.6

Patriot Valkyrie Dual-Bay (RAID 0)

80.2

70.7

Patriot Valkyrie Dual-Bay (RAID 1)

60.9

48.1

Service and support
As with other NAS servers it has released, Synology also backs the DS710+ with a two-year warranty from the date of purchase. Phone tech support is available Monday through Friday 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. PST. At its Web site, you can find Synology’s forum, download software, and the latest firmware, and get more information about its products from its Wiki page.

The good: The Synology Disk Station DS710+ offers excellent throughput speed, a vast amount of features, and a state-of-the-art Web interface. It also has the option to expand the internal storage up to seven hard drives.

The bad: The Synology Disk Station DS710+ doesn’t have dual Ethernet and requires licenses to support more than one IP camera. Its setup application is rather confusing, and only savvy tech users can take advantage of its advanced features. It’s also expensive, and the hard-drive expansion solution is clunky.

The bottom line: For those who possess decent networking know-how, the Synology Disk Station DS710+ makes an excellent NAS server for any environment. It’s best suited for home office and small-business applications.

Over the past few months, we’ve seen a lot of great smartphones that are coming out soon in the U.S. Some are entirely new devices; others are older albeit top-notch phones, like the HTC HD2, that are finally getting official carrier support, so people will be able to buy them for reasonable prices.

We’re restricting this list of phones to watch for to phones we think are coming out in the U.S. soon. That means leaving out the amazing Intel-powered LG GW990, because LG said it’s only for Korea. Ditto for the Samsung Beam, a slender and powerful phone that, unfortunately, Samsung won’t commit to launching in the U.S. And, I realize that BlackBerry fans may feel left out in the cold on this list, but RIM doesn’t show off phones in advance. We know new BlackBerrys are coming soon, just not which ones or when.

Here are five phones that are getting official U.S. releases within the next few months. If you’re in the market, they may be worth waiting for.

Dell Mini 5
Dell’s 5-inch, Android-based tablet is fascinating to a lot of people. When it comes out on AT&T, it may be Google’s answer to the iPad—or it may be an uncomfortable “middle thing” stuck between being a phone and being a mini-PC. We won’t be sure until we get our hands on one later this year.

HTC Desire
The Google Nexus One is a great piece of hardware, but Google got the software, service, and support all wrong. So, imagine a Nexus One—slim, fast, and powerful—with HTC’s excellent Sense UI overlay and full support from your wireless carrier. That’s the Desire. HTC has a very good track record for bringing its phones to the U.S., so we expect to see this one here later this year.

HTC Legend
If the Desire is HTC’s powerhouse, the Legend is HTC’s fashion plate. Introduced at Mobile World Congress this year, the Legend is a cool, smooth slab of aluminum, with an optical touchpad and HTC’s terrific Sense UI, which could make a great mid-range Android choice. Think of it as a potential replacement for Sprint’s HTC Hero phone.

iPhone 4
You know it’s coming. I know it’s coming. We both know it’s coming this summer, because there’s a new iPhone every summer. What will Apple do to change the game this year? Your guess is as good as mine, but I know we’re both waiting to find out.

Windows Phone 7
Microsoft’s reboot of its mobile OS looks amazing, bringing together elements of the Zune HD, XBox Live, Microsoft Office, and strong social networking and contact integration. Unfortunately, we’re going to have to wait until “the holidays” for it to surface.

AVG Free provides the bare necessities when it comes to security, but that should be enough for savvy Windows users. You’ll get a combined antivirus and antimalware engine, LinkScanner, and e-mail scanning. AVG Free 9 introduces a few new features, with improvements focused on performance, including claims of faster scan and boot times. One new feature is the Identity Theft Recovery Unit. Only for users in the United States, ITRU is a business partnership with Identity Guard which provides “consumer identity theft solutions,” accessible only from the AVG toolbar in Firefox and Internet Explorer.

Download AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition 9.0.730 (2.03 MB)

The interface is nearly unchanged from the last version, and generally it’s easy to use. From the main window, though, you must double-click to get further information on any feature, whether virus scanning, LinkScanner settings, or updating. Streamlining this to one click would be helpful. A scheduling utility automates both scans and updates, while the upgrade ad at the screen’s bottom can be easily hidden using the Hide Notification button. When starting a scan, a slider makes it easy to jump between Slow, Automatic, and Fast scans: the faster the scan, the less comprehensive it is, so users should take advantage of the scan optimization that is recommended during installation to speed up that first scan. A progress meter for regular scans would’ve been useful, though. Should a virus create serious problems, AVG creates a rescue disk to scan your computer in MS-DOS mode.

The LinkScanner feature protects you from third-party code exploits before they load in your browser and for ranking search results. Annoyingly, when you install its optional toolbar, it commandeers your new-tab page, decidedly inappropriate behavior. The program doesn’t obviously tax your system when scanning or when running in the background, although CNET Labs determined that it will significantly slow down your system’s boot time, and slightly delay shutting down. AVG also detected some image files as threats, when two other scans decided they weren’t–we decided these were false positives. AVG might not be the fastest or the most effective free security option, but it still gets the job done and you’re better off with it.

Watch the CNET video review of AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition:

Publisher’s description

AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition is an anti-virus protection tool available free of charge to home users. Rapid virus database updates are available for the lifetime of the product, thereby providing the high level of detection capability.
The new 9.0 edition is faster, safer and easier to use. AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition gives you free rock solid protection for your basic security needs. The combined anti-virus/anti-spyware scanner in AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition runs up to 50% faster than earlier versions and doesn’t get in your way. AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition also delivers new anti-phishing detection techniques, which can quickly and accurately determine whether or not a web page is hosting a phishing attack. Additionally, version 9.0 comes with basic anti-rootkit protection to ensure protection against sophisticated hidden threats.

CNET Editor’s Note:

The Download Now link will download a small installer file to your desktop. Remain online and double-click the installer to proceed with the actual download.

To learn more about AVG products and to ask questions and receive answers from AVG company representatives, please visit CNET’s dedicated AVG Forum.

Fast, Powerful and Highly Rated