Tag: tech

ShipBob vs Flexport: Which Fulfillment Partner Is Right for Your Business?

admin — Tue, 25 Nov 2025 01:53:58 +0000

Trying to pick between ShipBob and Flexport?

I've spent hours digging into both platforms and comparing their services, pricing, tech features, and ideal use cases – and now I've got a clear answer.

ShipBob is the way to go for most ecommerce businesses.

If you're looking to ship products to customers fast and affordably, ShipBob has been built from the ground up for that.

Continue reading ShipBob vs Flexport: Which Fulfillment Partner Is Right for Your Business?

The post ShipBob vs Flexport: Which Fulfillment Partner Is Right for Your Business? appeared first on Ecommerce-Platforms.com.

The best noise-canceling headphones to buy right now

admin — Tue, 25 Nov 2025 01:14:00 +0000

Editor’s note: Black Friday doesn’t officially take place until Friday, November 28th; however, if you want to shop ahead of time, we’ve rounded up the best early Black Friday deals you can already get.

Whether you’re wearing them for the morning commute, while traveling, or if you’re simply trying to find some peace and quiet while working at home, noise-canceling headphones are a more essential piece of kit nowadays than ever before. And you’ve got a slew of great options to pick from; it’s hard to make a bad choice.

There are longtime heavyweights like Bose and Sony to pick from. Apple has quickly carved into the market with the luxurious AirPods Max. And if you’ve got an ear that demands the best audio quality, headphones from Bowers & Wilkins and Sennheiser might appeal to you more than the mainstream contenders.

Not everyone loves the feel of earbuds, and there are scenarios where over-ear and on-ear headphones are just simpler or make more sense than wireless buds — particularly if lengthy battery life matters to you.

No matter how you’re using them, the criteria for picking the best noise-canceling headphones haven’t changed.

The best wireless headphones for most people
The best noise-canceling headphones for travel
The best wireless headphones for iPhone owners
The best-sounding wireless headphones
The noise-canceling headphones with the best battery life

The best wireless headphones for most people Sony WH-1000XM5 With improved comfort, refined sound, and even better active noise cancellation compared to the previous-gen model, Sony’s WH-1000XM5 offer a compelling mix of features for the price. Read our review. Score: 8ProsCons

Even better active noise cancellation
More balanced, tighter sound
Much-improved voice call quality

Design is very plasticky for $400
No major new features over 1000XM4
Bulky, awkward carrying case

Where to Buy:

Battery life: 30 hours / Multipoint: Yes / Audio codecs: LDAC, AAC, SBC / Connectors: USB-C (charging), 3.5mm headphone jack (audio)

Sony’s WH-1000XM5 have a completely different design from their predecessors. The changes result in greater comfort when you wear them on your head for extended periods of time — like on a flight or at the office.

Noise cancellation has been further improved from the already-stellar performance of the WH-1000XM4, putting Sony at the front of the pack compared to all major competitors. Sound quality is more detailed and balanced than the older XM4; the low end is still punchy but tighter and less boomy than before. The XM5 offer excellent voice call performance, and they can connect to two devices simultaneously, so you can stay clued in on what’s happening on your phone when you’re working away on your laptop or tablet.

The headphones come in black and white.

| Photo: Chris Welch / The Verge" data-portal-copyright=" Chris Welch / The Verge" />

Sony’s headphones also include unique features like “speak to chat,” which automatically pauses your music and pipes in ambient audio whenever you start talking. Or you can hold one hand over the right ear cup to activate quick attention mode, which is convenient when grabbing a coffee or listening to airport announcements. And like other high-end headphones, the XM5 can detect when they’ve been removed from your ears for auto-pause.

Earlier this year, Sony introduced the WH-1000XM6, and while they offer incremental improvements over the XM5 in terms of sound and ANC performance, they’re also more expensive at $449.99. The XM5, meanwhile, can regularly be found for $300 or less. Weighing price versus performance, the XM5 are a better value, and it’s why they remain at the top of our list.

Read our full WH-1000XM5 review. The best noise-canceling headphones for travel Bose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones Score: 8ProsCons

Exemplary comfort
Top-tier noise cancellation
Improved transparency mode clarity
Better voice call quality than NCH700

Immersive Audio is sometimes enjoyable but often bad
Immersive Audio drains battery faster
No USB-C audio support
Case has annoying indentations

Where to Buy:

Battery life: 24 hours / Multipoint: Yes / Audio codecs: aptX Adaptive, AAC, SBC / Connectors: USB-C (charging), 2.5mm headphone jack (audio)

Bose’s QuietComfort Ultra Headphones are basically a blend of the company’s prior Noise Canceling Headphones 700 and QuietComfort 45 that borrow the best traits from both — while throwing in a new “immersive audio” listening mode. Like past Bose cans, they’re very light and comfortable on your head, even when worn for long stretches of time. Best of all, unlike the Noise Canceling Headphones 700, these can be folded to make them easier to travel with.

Their 24-hour battery life is more than adequate, and Bose has added support for the aptX Adaptive Bluetooth codec for improved audio fidelity on Android devices.

The immersive audio feature works well on some songs, but less so on others. It’s worth experimenting with, but even if you leave it off entirely, you’re left with best-in-class noise cancellation, pleasing sound, and a helpful “aware” transparency mode.

Read our full Bose QC Ultra Headphones review. The best wireless headphones for iPhone owners AirPods Max (USB-C) Score: 8.5ProsCons

High-luxury design
Terrific, balanced sound quality
Very effective noise cancellation
Dependable and foolproof controls
Spatial audio for immersive entertainment

Heavier than many competitors
No 3.5mm jack
Wired listening requires $35 cable
Case is an abomination
Lacks latest AirPods Pro features

Where to Buy:

Battery life: 20 hours / Multipoint: No / Audio codecs: AAC, SBC / Connectors: Lightning (audio and charging)

There was definitely some sticker shock when Apple introduced a $549 set of noise-canceling headphones in 2020. The AirPods Max cost significantly more money than any of our other recommendations. But Apple’s build quality is on another level: these trade the plastic you’ll find in many noise-canceling headphones for steel and aluminum, and the ear cups are a breathable mesh fabric. They’re hefty headphones, there’s no denying that. But aside from Apple refusing to include a headphone cable in the box, there’s nothing about the AirPods Max that feels cheap. And I appreciate the simplicity of using the digital crown for controls instead of relying on hit-or-miss gestures like taps and swipes.

The most important part is that the AirPods Max deliver audio quality that’s up there with the best high-end Bluetooth headphones. They have an immersive, wide soundstage and fantastic dynamics, and you’ll find yourself hopping around your music library just to hear what they bring out in your favorite songs.

The AirPods Max have a stylish design and very premium build quality. | Photo by Chris Welch / The Verge" data-portal-copyright="Photo by Chris Welch / The Verge" />

Apple’s noise cancellation is on par with Sony and Bose, and no one does transparency mode better; at times, it can make you think you’re not wearing headphones at all. Extra features like Spatial Audio (surround sound for movies and TV shows) and automatic switching between Apple gadgets help make it a bit easier to swallow their daunting price.

But the AirPods Max do have faults. The carrying case is abysmal, battery life is only average for the category, and just like regular AirPods, they’re designed with Apple’s ecosystem in mind. It gets much harder to justify dropping $550 on them if you live outside the iPhone and Mac universe.

Also, it’s worth noting that Apple introduced a new pair of AirPods Max with USB-C charging and five new color options in September. We’re currently testing the latest model, but given just how little they differ from Apple’s existing over-ear headphones, we don’t anticipate markedly different performance. That said, they do support lossless audio and ultra low latency thanks to a recent firmware update, which, technically, isn’t something you’ll find on the Lightning model.

Read our full Apple AirPods Max review. The best-sounding wireless headphones Bowers & Wilkins PX7 S2e ProsCons

Stylish, standout design
Excellent sound quality
Supports wired USB-C audio

No regular headphone input
Doesn’t include LDAC support
Your ears might get sweaty

Where to Buy:

Battery life: 30 hours / Multipoint: Yes / Audio codecs: aptX Adaptive, aptX HD, aptX, AAC, SBC / Connectors: USB-C (audio and charging)

If sound quality is priority number one, then Bowers & Wilkins has you covered with the PX7 S2e headphones. They exhibit superb, detailed sound quality that some people prefer to the AirPods Max. The Bowers & Wilkins cans are true to the company’s legacy and style, with a fine-crafted design that exudes quality. And the newer “e” variant has a revamped digital signal processing that can bring out the best audio quality from streaming music.

I prefer their physical buttons over the tap/swipe ear cup gestures of Sony’s WH-1000XM5. With 30 hours of battery life, they’re more than competitive with mainstream, less expensive picks. And the sound profile is delightfully warm and will bring out the most from your favorite music. The main downside of the PX7 S2e is that there’s no traditional 3.5mm or 2.5mm output for a headphone cable. You can still listen wired over USB-C, however.

Read our full Bowers & Wilkins PX7 S2 review. The noise-canceling headphones with the best battery life Sennheiser Momentum 4 Wireless Score: 7ProsCons

Much-improved comfort
Better noise cancellation than before
Marathon 60-hour battery life

Terribly generic design
No more physical button controls
Headphones can power on unexpectedly

Where to Buy:

Battery life: 60 hours / Multipoint: Yes / Audio codecs: aptX Adaptive, aptX, AAC, SBC / Connectors: USB-C (audio and charging), 2.5mm headphone jack (audio)

Sixty hours. They can last for up to 60 hours on a single charge. That’s really all you need to know about the Sennheiser Momentum 4 headphones if you’re looking for an endurance champ. But they also sound terrific and prove extremely comfortable over long listening periods. This combination doesn’t come cheap, but you can occasionally find some good deals on them.

Sennheiser’s Momentum 4 Wireless headphones edge out Bowers & Wilkins on comfort thanks to their lighter design, and the noise cancellation is slightly better. Next to the Sonys and Bose’s QC Ultra Headphones, it doesn’t get much cozier. These are headphones you can wear for multiple hours without any fatigue or pressure on your ears.

They lack the vintage style of prior Sennheiser cans (like the Momentum 3, left), but the Momentum 4 are far more comfortable. | Photo by Chris Welch / The Verge" data-portal-copyright="Photo by Chris Welch / The Verge" />

Sennheiser’s sound signature is a bit more expressive and puts more emphasis on bass than B&W, but that upper treble range still comes through crystal clear. My only real nitpick with the Sennheisers is that they tend to occasionally power on inside the case and automatically connect to my phone for no apparent reason.

Both the B&W and Sennheiser headphones support multipoint connectivity and a range of Bluetooth codecs, including SBC, AAC, aptX, and aptX Adaptive.

Read our full Sennheiser Momentum 4 Wireless review.

Update, November 24th: Updated to reflect current pricing / availability and reference the newer Sony WH-1000XM6.

Mining Stocks Jump 20% as Amazon’s $50B AI Push Boosts Demand for Power

admin — Tue, 25 Nov 2025 00:24:10 +0000

Crypto mining stocks jumped as much as 20% led by BitMine and Cipher Mining, after Amazon unveiled plans to invest up to $50 billion in AI infrastructure for U.S. government agencies.

This shift comes as Bitcoin miners face declining profitability following the 2024 halving event. Meanwhile, demand for AI compute capacity is soaring. Tech giants now view miners’ established power infrastructure as key to rapid data center growth.

Mining Stocks Post Double-Digit Gains as Focus Shifts to Infrastructure

The crypto mining sector saw a broad rally on Monday, notching a 13.84% sector-wide gain according to SoSoValue data. BitMine soared nearly 20%, while Cipher Mining rose more than 18%.

The rally followed Amazon’s announcement of an investment of up to $50 billion in AI infrastructure for US government agencies. The plan will add 1.3 gigawatts across multiple data centers, with construction set for 2026. Agencies will gain access to AWS tools, Anthropic’s Claude AI, Nvidia chips, and Trainium chips developed by Amazon.

Amazon also announced a $15 billion investment in Northern Indiana for new data center campuses, supporting 1,100 high-skilled jobs and 2.4 gigawatts of data capacity. This expansion underscores the scale of infrastructure required for AI workloads.

Meta has intensified its AI infrastructure efforts, seeking federal approval to trade electricity alongside Microsoft for long-term energy supply. Meta’s Louisiana campus alone is expected to require three new gas-fired plants.

Bitcoin Miners Evolve Into AI Power Players

The substantial stock gains reveal how bitcoin miners are transforming operations. Declining profits after Bitcoin’s April 2024 halving prompted miners to seek new revenue streams. AI data center developers, who now face electricity shortages, see miners’ grid-integrated facilities as strategic partners.

IREN, formerly Iris Energy, signed a $9.7 billion data center deal with Microsoft, granting the tech giant early access to Nvidia GPUs. IREN’s stock has shot up 580% this year since its rebrand. Other miners showed strong performance: Riot Platforms gained 100%, TeraWulf 160%, and Cipher Mining 360%.

The combined 14 gigawatts of power capacity among US miners has become key for tech firms seeking rapid scale. Favorable US policies, including Nvidia export restrictions to China, give domestic miners a competitive edge. In contrast, Chinese miners face more regulation and import barriers.

AI data center developers are now targeting bitcoin miners. These teams are approaching mining operations already running high-capacity, grid-integrated sites. Locations like Childress, Texas, have become major hubs for combined data and mining infrastructure.

Tech Leaders Accelerate Infrastructure Investments

Global tech firms are raising around $100 billion in bond offerings to fuel new AI and cloud capabilities. Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Oracle, and Meta could spend $400 billion this year on AI and data center investments. According to Deutsche Bank, total AI-related investment could reach $4 trillion by 2030.

The move signifies a shift from cash reserves to debt financing. Meta has launched its largest-ever bond sale, totaling $30 billion, for AI infrastructure. Amazon issued a $15 billion US bond, its first in three years, attracting $80 billion in demand. Amazon holds $69.29 billion in debt and $66.92 billion in cash.

Alphabet issued a $17.5 billion US bond and a €6.5 billion European bond, bringing its total debt to $48.78 billion. The aggressive borrowing reflects the immense capital needs for AI infrastructure.

The need for energy to power AI, however, surpasses grid expansion. With slow grid development, tech companies are securing direct energy sources. Apple already has federal approval to trade electricity wholesale, reflecting a trend of tech firms managing their own energy for AI infrastructure.

The merging of crypto mining infrastructure with AI compute demand signals a major strategic shift for both sectors. As bitcoin miners pivot to AI compute, their built-in power capacity and grid-ready sites enable tech giants to deploy quickly and compete in the fast-evolving AI landscape.

The post Mining Stocks Jump 20% as Amazon’s $50B AI Push Boosts Demand for Power appeared first on BeInCrypto.

AI Models Take Over Customer Analysis to Identify Customer Needs

admin — Tue, 25 Nov 2025 00:17:11 +0000

Artificial intelligence (AI) is now better at reading customers and assessing their needs than humans.

A new analysis from MIT Sloan School of Management showed that large language models can identify customer needs with a level of accuracy that exceeds trained human analysts.

The study showed that a fine-tuned model detected 100% of primary customer needs, while human analysts identified 87.5%. The researchers also found that non-expert employees matched expert-level performance when they used the same model, marking a significant shift in how companies can approach customer-needs analysis.

The findings arrive as companies increase their use of AI systems to process customer feedback, summarize interactions and extract signals from large volumes of unstructured data. The expanding use of these tools shows how insight work is moving into day-to-day workflows rather than remaining centralized in research or analytics teams.

AI Enters Product Workflows

For example, Oracle released new AI agents for sales professionals that pull customer intelligence from multilingual data sources, generate account summaries and prepare insight reports before deal conversations. The company positions these agents as part of its broader effort to embed AI into sales workflows.

Clorox also adopted a similar approach inside its consumer products portfolio. As part of a five-year, $580 million digital-transformation plan, Clorox integrated generative-AI tools into product-development and consumer-feedback processes. These tools analyze reviews and customer commentary across brands, including Hidden Valley Ranch, and flag emerging themes for product teams.

Latest analysis of AI customer service deployments found that companies using AI to process customer interactions recorded up to a 45% increase in customer-satisfaction scores and up to a 30% reduction in operational costs. The report attributed these improvements to faster detection of recurring issues, quicker routing of customer requests and more consistent classification of support themes.

Insight Cycles Shift as Companies Use AI for Early-Stage Signal Detection

Companies reported a broad expansion of AI-driven analysis workflows as AI systems began handling the first pass of customer-signal processing across sales, service, marketing and product operations. Gartner’s research showed that service organizations adopted AI systems for assisted-agent tasks, issue classification and automated triage, with teams using these tools to organize large volumes of customer messages and detect repeated issues inside support flows.

Vercel reported that it deployed AI agents trained on its top salesperson to qualify inbound leads, filter messages and route inquiries, consolidating tasks that previously required multiple employees. The company said the agent system produced consistent scoring across inbound messages and maintained response throughput during periods of higher volume.

As more companies shifted early analysis work to AI systems, the pattern extended beyond sales and service workflows and moved directly into product development. Organizations reported that AI tools no longer stopped at classifying customer messages or assembling internal summaries. Instead, these systems processed signals that fed into decisions about ingredients, product formulas and long-term development requirements.

In one example, Barry Callebaut expanded its use of AI when it partnered with NotCo to generate new chocolate formulations. The company said the system analyzed ingredient alternatives, cost pressures and consumer preference data to produce recipe concepts for internal evaluation. Reuters reported that the AI models incorporated rising cocoa price constraints and produced flavor and texture candidates for review.

Other manufacturers reported parallel activity. Johnson & Johnson said that it redirected its AI deployments toward product, commercial and research workflows after assessing its early pilots. The company reported that about 10% to 15% of initial projects delivered most measurable results. These deployments included systems that processed medical device feedback, evaluated commercial signals and supported planning for development cycles.

For all PYMNTS AI coverage, subscribe to the daily AI Newsletter.

The post AI Models Take Over Customer Analysis to Identify Customer Needs appeared first on PYMNTS.com.

Best Free CRMs for Small Business (2025): Why HubSpot Takes the Gold

admin — Tue, 25 Nov 2025 00:06:06 +0000

You’ll get enough to run pipelines, manage contacts, and maybe automate a few tasks, but you’ll still hit ceilings sooner than you think on most.

So I decided to put the top “free CRMs” available right now to the test, to figure out just how much they really offer.

HubSpot CRM quickly became the benchmark all other tools had to reach. Its free version feels like a full suite with training wheels, not a trial countdown. But I did find plenty of reasonably impressive alternatives too.

Best Overall

HubSpot CRM 4.9 ★★★★★ View Pricing Try for Free →

Starts free, upgrades from just $9/month

Fully Free Starter CRM All-in-One Platform Easy to Use, Easy to Grow 2 Monday CRM 4.5 ★★★★★ View Pricing Read Review → Visual & Intuitive Great for Collaboration Light Automation, Just Enough 3 EngageBay 4.3 ★★★★★ View Pricing Read review → Unified Toolkit, Seamlessly CRM + Marketing, In Sync Automation That Stays Simple

The Best Free CRMs: Quick Comparison

CRM PlatformBest ForFree Tier HighlightsStandout FeaturesLimitationsHubSpot CRMBest overall for ecommerce & inbound marketing2 users, 1,000 contacts, and basic automationMarketing, sales & service hubs, Breeze AI Agents, 2,000+ integrationsAdvanced AI in paid tiersMonday CRMProject-based sales & team workflows2 users, limited boardsVisual pipelines, collaboration toolsLight on marketing toolsEngageBayStartups needing all-in-one sales + marketingUp to 250 contactsMarketing automation, landing pagesSlower UI, limited analyticsBitrix24Internal collaboration & multi-tool environmentsUnlimited usersCRM + project management + chatSteep learning curveZoho CRMCost-conscious small teams3 usersZia AI assistant, multichannel toolsLimited integrations on free planCapsule CRMFreelancers & small agencies250 contactsSimple pipeline & task managementNo automation featuresFreshsalesFast-moving startups3 usersFreddy AI lead scoring, phone integrationBasic reports, smaller app storeVtigerDevelopers & open-source usersCommunity editionCustom workflows, full controlTechnical setup required The Best Free CRMs (Tested & Ranked)

After a month buried in dashboards, automations, and support tickets, eight CRMs actually made it through my test bench. Some impressed me with their speed; others with depth. A few, honestly, just reminded me why “free” can be a dangerous promise.

Let’s start with the one that set the benchmark.

1. HubSpot CRM: Best Overall Free CRM

Best for: Ecommerce and B2B teams that want one connected system for everything.

Free tier: Up to 2 users and 1,000 contacts with built-in automation and reporting.

Some tools promise simplicity. HubSpot actually delivers it. It’s the rare free CRM that doesn’t feel like a demo or a data trap, it just works.

HubSpot acts like a running log of your customer relationships. It shows where people found you, what caught their eye, and when they decided to buy. Everything connects into one clean timeline, so you’re not guessing how the pieces fit together.

Connect your store, and it starts pulling the threads together. Orders from Shopify, emails from Gmail, and leads from Meta ads all land in one clear timeline. The Data Hub quietly removes duplicates and keeps everything tidy, so you’re not chasing half-matched contacts or broken fields.

What stands out most is rhythm. The Breeze AI Agents handle repetitive follow-ups, the little nudges that keep leads warm. Reporting stays visual and grounded, HubSpot’s multi-touch attribution makes it obvious which campaigns actually move the needle.

Integrations run deep too, over 2,000 apps plug in without fuss. That means you can grow without outgrowing your system.

Pros

Combines marketing, sales, and support in one view Thoughtful automation that feels human Smooth integrations across ecommerce and ads Clear, useful analytics even in the free plan Scales naturally as you grow

Cons

Advanced AI and permissions locked to paid hubs A short learning curve for brand-new teams 2. Monday CRM: Best for Project-based Sales Teams

Best for: Teams juggling sales deals and delivery workflows

Free tier: Up to 2 users with basic board-based pipelines

Monday CRM feels less like a traditional CRM and more like the operations hub your team didn’t know it needed. Imagine a whiteboard where every deal is a sticky note, every stage is a lane, and motion happens organically. That’s Monday.

Monday has changed a lot recently. The interface feels lighter, less stiff, and a bit more personal. They’ve added AI that helps with small things like drafting a quick message or keeping tone consistent across emails. The calendar tool finally syncs smoothly, which makes it easier to stay on top of calls when you’re running between meetings.

But if your growth mode means tracking dozens of campaigns, marketing channels, or needing heavy analytics you’ll find limitations. Two-user cap on the free plan is tight. And while automations are intuitive, they’re not built for deep marketing operations yet.

Pros

Extremely visual, intuitive workflow layout Good for aligning sales + delivery in one team Production updates in 2025 show investment in features

Cons

Free tier restricts to two users Marketing & analytics depth is weaker than full-scale CRM platforms 3. EngageBay: Best All-in-One CRM for Startups

Best for: Small businesses that want CRM, marketing, and support in one dashboard

Free tier: Up to 250 contacts; core CRM plus basic marketing and service features

EngageBay feels like a tool made by people who’ve worked in small teams. It keeps everything close: your contacts, emails, automations, and even support tickets all sit together on one screen. Getting started takes very little time, and the layout makes sense right away.

You can import contacts, create follow-up sequences, host landing pages and manage new leads, all without switching tools. That means less context switching for you and your team. It’s especially helpful when you’re responding manually to leads, support tickets, and campaign touches in one flow.

That said, the trade-offs show up when your list grows or you demand deeper reporting. Some users note the UI slows with large databases. Reports are functional but not as rich as enterprise platforms. If you hit a volume threshold (say thousands of contacts + complex workflows), you’ll bump into limits.

Pros

Combines CRM, marketing automation, and support features Free tier generous for early-stage teams Easy to set up and get running

Cons

Can lag with large contact volumes Analytics and integrations fewer than top-tier systems 4. Bitrix24 CRM: Best for Teams That Need Everything in One Free Package

Best for: Small or midsize companies combining CRM, project management, and internal communication

Free tier: Unlimited users with full CRM access plus task and project tools

Bitrix24 feels like a shared workspace, not just a CRM. You log in and you’ll see chats, tasks, deals, calendar entries, and maybe even a video call waiting for you. That kind of mix works when your team wears many hats and you need one tool to handle several workflows.

In 2025, Bitrix24’s free plan continues to impress: unlimited users, a full CRM, project and task management baked in.

You can manage leads and deals, track project work, run team chats and files, all without paying. That said, the trade-off shows when you dig deeper. The interface is crowded, the learning curve steeper than tools built only for CRM.

Pros

Truly unlimited users even on free plan Integrates CRM with tasks, communication, team workflow Good value for teams wanting more than just sales tracking

Cons

UI can feel overwhelming for purely sales teams Reporting, analytics and automation depth lag behind top-tier CRMs Setup and training take time 5. Zoho CRM: Best Balanced Free Option with Strong Growth Path

Best for: Small teams that want strong CRM foundations, with room to expand further

Free tier: Supports 3 users, core CRM features included

Zoho CRM strikes a familiar balance: solid features now, upgrade path later. For small teams (3 users or fewer), the free version gives you leads, deals, contacts, tasks, events and multichannel tracking.

Zoho is feature-rich and excellent value. You’ll find good automation, built-in AI (“Zia”), and tight integrations with the other Zoho apps. That means if you’re already using email, invoicing or campaigns under Zoho, the CRM fits naturally.

But there are a few caveats: the free plan is small scale (3 users) and some integrations or advanced workflows require paid upgrades. Multiple users mention the interface can be a bit “cluttered” and the setup takes some learning.

Pros

Good automation and customisation for a low cost Works well across sales and marketing channels Strong growth path into more advanced plans

Cons

Free tier limited in users and advanced features Learning curve for customisation and deeper modules Mobile experience and support quality vary 6. Capsule CRM: Best for Freelancers & Small Agencies

Best for: Solo sellers or very small teams moving off spreadsheets

Free tier: Up to 250 contacts, basic pipeline and task management

Capsule CRM gives you a clean slate without overwhelm. If you’ve been tracking leads in a spreadsheet and want something a little more professional, it’s a smart step up. The interface is minimal, the setup is quick, and you’re into the flow in minutes.

Since 2025, Capsule’s updates have focused on smoother Gmail/Outlook syncing and improved mobile usability – small but useful when you’re working on the go.

You won’t get built-in email campaigns, advanced automations, or deep marketing stacks. But if your focus is “track deals + follow up” instead of “run multi-channel ad campaigns,” Capsule does exactly what you need – cleanly and quietly.

Pros

Simple, intuitive interface for small teams Fast to get started with minimal setup Costs nothing to keep using for small contact lists

Cons

No marketing automation or advanced features in free plan Limited to 250 contacts – growth feels constrained quickly Analytics and integrations are basic 7. Freshsales: Best for Startups That Want Speed

Best for: Small teams who prioritise fast set-up, lead scoring and built-in phone/email tools

Free tier: Up to 3 users, basic deal tracking, Freddy AI lead scoring

Freshsales enters the free CRM space with a focus on speed and simplicity. The “Freddy AI” feature gives you automatic lead scoring and suggestions, which is unusual in free plans. In 2025 user reviews, people highlight how fast they onboard and start seeing value.

It’s especially useful if you’re calling potential customers, emailing frequently and don’t want to flip between apps. Freshsales combines CRM, email/in-app phone logs, and lead scoring into one pane.

That said, if your focus is full-funnel inbound marketing, omni-channel tracking or deep reporting, Freshsales starts to show its limits sooner than platforms like HubSpot.

Pros

Rapid setup and user onboarding Built-in phone/email + lead scoring in free plan Good for small sales-driven teams

Cons

Free tier restricts users and features Fewer integrations and lighter analytics than fuller CRMs Best features start to require paid plans soon Vtiger: Best Open-Source / Customisable Free CRM

Best for: Businesses or teams with tech skills who want full control and custom workflows

Free tier: Community edition (self-hosted) with full workflow builder, core CRM

Vtiger stands apart because it’s open source. That means you can host it yourself, customise it heavily, build custom modules, and essentially make the system your own. If you have IT or dev support, it gives you freedom that cloud-only CRMs don’t.

Vtiger handles unusual workflows well, like layered B2B sales, complex order tracking, or custom quoting chains. The flip side is responsibility. You handle the hosting, setup, and updates yourself. For teams without IT support, that can be a stretch. But if you like having total control and customizing tools to fit your process, Vtiger gives you that freedom.

Pros

Ultimate customisation for tech-savvy teams Free core system with workflow builder included Ideal for niche or custom-process businesses

Cons

Requires technical setup and maintenance Cloud hosting and support may cost extra Interface and user experience lag behind modern SaaS CRMs What to Look For in a Free CRM

After running ecommerce stores and testing CRMs for years, I’ve realized that “best free” doesn’t mean “best fit.” A free CRM software only earns its keep when it actually saves time, organizes chaos, and helps you sell more, not when it just ticks feature boxes.

Ease of Onboarding & Team Adoption: A CRM only works if people actually use it. The best systems make setup feel effortless. HubSpot CRM makes the first steps feel easy. The guided setup takes you through each task, and the drag-and-drop pipelines make organizing deals feel natural. Automation & AI Power: This is where modern CRM software really separates itself. HubSpot’s Breeze AI Agents are amazing, analyzing deal activity and auto-sending follow-ups that actually sounded human. Integration Depth & Ecosystem: Your CRM shouldn’t live in a silo. It needs to talk to your store, your inbox, your ads, and your accounting. HubSpot’s ecosystem includes 2,000+ integrations: Shopify, Gmail, Slack, Xero, Meta Ads, all with real-time sync. Compare that with Zoho’s ~400 or Bitrix24’s ~500 and you’ll understand why HubSpot feels “alive” once it’s connected. Scalability & Upgrade Path: A common mistake with “free” tools is starting over once you grow. Most free plans cap users or contacts just when your business takes off. HubSpot’s free CRM scales gradually, you can add Sales Hub or Marketing Hub features when you’re ready. Reporting & Analytics: Data’s only useful if it tells a story. HubSpot’s multi-touch attribution shows exactly which ads, emails, or pages close deals. Its new AI summaries turn dashboards into insights: “this campaign drove 62% of new revenue last month.” Final Verdict: The CRM That Grows With You

Most free CRMs are great at getting you started, very few can keep up once you gain momentum. Then there’s HubSpot. It feels different, partly because it was built from the start to scale.

You can begin with a single contact list, then add automations, ecommerce tracking, or a full marketing setup when the timing’s right. You never have to jump ship or migrate data just because you grew a little faster than planned.

It’s also one of the few free CRMs that gives you real visibility. You can trace a sale all the way back to the first click, see which campaign sparked it, and understand how that customer moved through your business.

If you’re at the stage where every lead matters and you don’t want to rebuild everything in six months, HubSpot CRM is the one worth starting with.

FAQs: Free CRM Software in 2025 Do free CRMs really work for small businesses?

Yes, as long as your needs are simple. Most free plans are designed for small teams managing a few pipelines or campaigns. You’ll get contact tracking, task reminders, and a basic deal board. The trade-off is usually limits: fewer users, smaller databases, and lighter automation. But for startups or side businesses, that’s often enough.

What features should a good free CRM include?

A strong free CRM should handle the essentials: keeping track of contacts, recording emails, and showing a simple sales pipeline. Clear reports matter too. If the platform also gives you automation, app connections, or a few marketing tools, that’s where it starts to stand out.

Which free CRM is the easiest to learn?

HubSpot leads for ease of learning with guided onboarding, drag-and-drop pipelines, and short Academy videos that make setup feel effortless even for beginners. Capsule and Monday CRM are also beginner-friendly. Capsule is almost impossible to break an upgrade from a spreadsheet without losing simplicity, while Monday uses boards and color-coded stages that help you “see” progress rather than dig for it. All three are quick wins for teams new to CRMs.

Which CRM has the most generous free plan?

Bitrix24 wins on sheer scale, unlimited users and a pile of collaboration tools included. But that freedom comes with complexity. HubSpot offers the best balance between power and usability. The platform lets you grow without switching tools as your needs expand.

Can a free CRM support automation?

Yes.HubSpot, Zoho, and EngageBay include entry-level workflows – things like automatic follow-ups or deal assignment. Monday and Capsule keep automation light. For advanced triggers or AI assistance, you’ll eventually need a paid tier.

Are there truly “forever free” CRMs?

Yes, several. HubSpot, Zoho, Capsule, Bitrix24, and EngageBay all have free tiers with no expiry date. What changes over time isn’t access, it’s how much you need. Free plans stay free, but your business may eventually outgrow them.

The post Best Free CRMs for Small Business (2025): Why HubSpot Takes the Gold appeared first on Ecommerce-Platforms.com.

How Google Dodged the AI Search Collapse

admin — Mon, 24 Nov 2025 23:31:57 +0000

Google Search was supposed to lose ground in the artificial intelligence (AI) era, but Alphabet’s third-quarter 2025 earnings tell a different story. Alphabet said Search-and-other advertising revenue rose about 15% to more than $56 billion in Q3, defying expectations that generative AI systems would erode its core business.

Instead of being replaced by large language model (LLM) chat interfaces and AI browsers, Search stayed robust by embedding its Gemini model in the results page, improving ad performance via AI models, and holding onto the commercial intent that chatbots still struggle to replicate.

Google Embedded AI, Preserving Search Behavior

The prevailing assumption in 2024 was that LLM-powered interfaces such as ChatGPT and Claude would pull queries away from Google. Users were already leaning on them for summarization, drafting, research, and general exploration. Many believed that the search bar would recede in favor of the chat box.

Yet Google, despite stumbling initially with Bard, turned that possibility on its head by integrating Gemini directly into its familiar search environment rather than diverting users to a separate chatbot. As the BBC noted, “Google’s supremacy in search is defined by the habits of billions of users,” habits that did not break once AI summaries appeared on the results page.

The Forbes analysis reinforced that the “AI browser wars” never really materialized because Google had already embedded AI into Chrome and Search before competitors could gain traction. It argued that challengers underestimated how deeply Google’s distribution and default positioning shaped consumer habits.

Bloomberg added a critical dimension: AI didn’t only strengthen Google’s product; it strengthened its legal position. According to Bloomberg, regulators found that AI-enhanced search experiences made it harder to prove that Google was abusing dominance, because consumers could point to AI features as evidence of innovation, not stagnation. Bloomberg reported that these AI upgrades “blurred the line between traditional search and AI-assisted discovery” in ways that reinforced Google’s argument that it was competing vigorously.

Why Advertisers Stayed and Commerce Intent Remained in Search

The second pillar of Google’s resilience is that advertisers did not follow users into AI chat interfaces because those interfaces are yet to produce high-value commercial intent at scale. that Consumers used AI tools for drafting, summarizing and exploration, not fully for shopping, booking or finding local services.

The push to bring commerce into conversational AI interfaces did not produce the results many expected. ChatGPT’s instant-checkout feature delivered a less effective purchasing flow because its responses did not follow the structured steps consumers rely on in standard e-commerce funnels and did not support higher-value shopping decisions.

These tools also launched without functioning ad models, leaving advertisers without targeting, attribution or conversion metrics. The limitations kept the highest-value transactional queries inside Google’s search environment and kept advertiser budgets tied to platforms that continued to deliver measurable commercial outcomes.

Google took advantage of this by applying Gemini to optimize ad matching, bidding and creative rotation. Retail advertisers saw more efficient conversions. Travel advertisers saw stronger performance in dynamic placements. Alphabet said these model-driven tools were responsible for several points of incremental ad growth inside the broader business.

Business Insider noted that efforts by OpenAI, Anthropic and Perplexity to introduce ads struggled because long-form answers were not structured like funnels. Advertisers kept their budgets in Google’s environment where conversions remain predictable, measurable and tied to explicit user intent.

The Forbes reporting supported this, pointing out that because Google fused AI into the browser and search, “default gravity” kept users and therefore advertisers anchored to Google’s ecosystem.

Google also extended its advantage by upgrading vertical search flows. Generative product comparisons pushed users deeper into shopping funnels. AI itinerary builders kept them in Google’s travel ecosystem. Structured troubleshooting kept them from bouncing to third-party forums.

What Could Still Change

Despite the momentum, several threats could shift this trajectory. LLMs and their ways to generate ad revenues are still early, and new models could narrow the gap between brainstorming, discovery and transactional behavior. Consumer habits can adjust quickly if chat interfaces become more action-oriented or if operating systems nudge users toward AI-first assistants.

For all PYMNTS AI coverage, subscribe to the daily AI Newsletter.

The post How Google Dodged the AI Search Collapse appeared first on PYMNTS.com.

Age Verification, Estimation, Assurance, Oh My! A Guide To The Terminology

admin — Mon, 24 Nov 2025 23:26:54 +0000

If you’ve been following the wave of age-gating laws sweeping across the country and the globe, you’ve probably noticed that lawmakers, tech companies, and advocates all seem to be using different terms for what sounds like the same thing. Age verification, age assurance, age estimation, age gating—they get thrown around interchangeably, but they technically mean different things. And those differences matter a lot when we’re talking about your rights, your privacy, your data, and who gets to access information online.

So let’s clear up the confusion. Here’s your guide to the terminology that’s shaping these laws, and why you should care about the distinctions.

Age Gating: “No Kids Allowed”

Age gating refers to age-based restrictions on access to online services. Age gating can be required by law or voluntarily imposed as a corporate decision. Age gating does not necessarily refer to any specific technology or manner of enforcement for estimating or verifying a user’s age. It simply refers to the fact that a restriction exists. Think of it as the concept of “you must be this old to enter” without getting into the details of how they’re checking.

Age Assurance: The Umbrella Term

Think of age assurance as the catch-all category. It covers any method an online service uses to figure out how old you are with some level of confidence. That’s intentionally vague, because age assurance includes everything from the most basic check-the-box systems to full-blown government ID scanning.

Age assurance is the big tent that contains all the other terms we’re about to discuss below. When a company or lawmaker talks about “age assurance,” they’re not being specific about how they’re determining your age—just that they’re trying to. For decades, the internet operated on a “self-attestation” system where you checked a box saying you were 18, and that was it. These new age-verification laws are specifically designed to replace that system. When lawmakers say they want “robust age assurance,” what they really mean is “we don’t trust self-attestation anymore, so now you need to prove your age beyond just swearing to it.”

Age Estimation: Letting the Algorithm Decide

Age estimation is where things start getting creepy. Instead of asking you directly, the system guesses your age based on data it collects about you.

This might include:

Analyzing your face through a video selfie or photo
Examining your voice
Looking at your online behavior—what you watch, what you like, what you post
Checking your existing profile data

Companies like Instagram have partnered with services like Yoti to offer facial age estimation. You submit a video selfie, an algorithm analyzes your face, and spits out an estimated age range. Sounds convenient, right?

Here’s the problem, “estimation” is exactly that: it’s a guess. And it is inherently imprecise. Age estimation is notoriously unreliable, especially for teenagers—the exact group these laws claim to protect. An algorithm might tell a website you’re somewhere between 15 and 19 years old. That’s not helpful when the cutoff is 18, and what’s at stake is a young person’s constitutional rights.

And it gets worse. These systems consistently fail for certain groups:

People of color are routinely misidentified (even Yoti’s own research admits higher error rates for darker skin tones)
Trans and nonbinary people are frequently misclassified
People with disabilities that affect their appearance fall outside the algorithm’s training parameters and anyone who doesn’t fit the algorithmic “norm” gets flagged

When estimation fails (and it often does), users get kicked to the next level: actual verification. Which brings us to…

Age Verification: “Show Me Your Papers”

Age verification is the most invasive option. This is where you have to prove your age to a certain date, rather than, for example, prove that you have crossed some age threshold (like 18 or 21 or 65). EFF generally refers to most age gates and mandates on young people’s access to online information as “age verification,” as most of them typically require you to submit hard identifiers like:

Government-issued ID (driver’s license, passport, state ID)
Credit card information
Utility bills or other documents
Biometric data

This is what a lot of new state laws are actually requiring, even when they use softer language like “age assurance.” Age verification doesn’t just confirm you’re over 18, it reveals your full identity. Your name, address, date of birth, photo—everything.

Here’s the critical thing to understand: age verification is really identity verification. You’re not just proving you’re old enough—you’re proving exactly who you are. And that data has to be stored, transmitted, and protected by every website that collects it.

We already know how that story ends. Data breaches are inevitable. And when a database containing your government ID tied to your adult content browsing history gets hacked—and it will—the consequences can be devastating.

Why This Confusion Matters

Politicians and tech companies love using these terms interchangeably because it obscures what they’re actually proposing. A law that requires “age assurance” sounds reasonable and moderate. But if that law defines age assurance as requiring government ID verification, it’s not moderate at all—it’s mass surveillance. Similarly, when Instagram says it’s using “age estimation” to protect teens, that sounds privacy-friendly. But when their estimation fails and forces you to upload your driver’s license instead, the privacy promise evaporates.

Here’s the uncomfortable truth: most lawmakers writing these bills have no idea how any of this technology actually works. They don’t know that age estimation systems routinely fail for people of color, trans individuals, and people with disabilities. They don’t know that verification systems have error rates. They don’t even seem to understand that the terms they’re using mean different things. The fact that their terminology is all over the place—using “age assurance,” “age verification,” and “age estimation” interchangeably—makes this ignorance painfully clear, and leaves the onus on platforms to choose whichever option best insulates them from liability.

Language matters because it shapes how we think about these systems. “Assurance” sounds gentle. “Verification” sounds official. “Estimation” sounds technical and impersonal, and also admits its inherent imprecision. But they all involve collecting your data and create a metaphysical age gate to the internet. The terminology is deliberately confusing, but the stakes are clear: it’s your privacy, your data, and your ability to access the internet without constant identity checks. Don’t let fuzzy language disguise what these systems really do.

Republished from EFF’s Deeplinks blog.

Meta’s new wearables trade-in program gives you Ray-Ban and Oakley discounts

admin — Mon, 24 Nov 2025 22:32:58 +0000

For the first time, Meta is offering trade-in discounts for its smart glasses with a pilot program that’s only running through December 31st. According to a legal page on Meta’s website, trade-in discounts can be applied to the Ray-Ban Meta Gen 1, Ray-Ban Meta Gen 2, Oakley Meta HSTN, and Oakley Meta Vanguard. Notably, the Meta Ray-Ban Display didn’t make that list. Limited edition and refurbished glasses also aren’t eligible for the discount.

You can trade in your current pair of first-gen Ray-Ban Meta glasses if you’re looking to upgrade, but Meta is also surprisingly offering trade-in credit for certain pairs of earbuds. Here’s Meta’s full list of eligible ones:

Apple Airpods Pro 2
Apple Airpods Pro
Apple Airpods Pro 4
Beats Powerbeats Pro 2
Beats Studio Buds +
Beats Fit Pro
Samsung Galaxy Buds3
Samsung Galaxy Buds3 Pro
Samsung Galaxy Buds3 FE

It’s worth noting that there isn’t currently a pair of “Apple AirPods Pro 4,” so it’s unclear if Meta was referring to the AirPods 4 or the AirPods Pro 3.

To get the trade-in discount, you have to purchase your glasses directly from Meta. Add a pair of eligible glasses to your cart, and you should hopefully see a box with the trade-in offer right above it in the cart. Some Reddit users reported having to try different browsers before finally getting the trade-in offer, so maybe try swapping your browser if you don’t see it at first.

Discounts vary based on your device and the condition it’s in, but Meta seems to be offering up to $113 off. That’s a decent dent in the usual $379 price tag on the Ray-Ban Meta Gen 2, which offer twice as much battery life as the previous generation along with a moderate camera improvement. It’s worth noting that the first-gen Ray-Ban Meta glasses are on sale right now, so if you don’t need all-day battery or don’t have another wearable to trade in, your best bet might be going with that less expensive option.

Nvidia’s ‘I’m Not Enron’ memo has people asking a lot of questions already answered by that memo

admin — Mon, 24 Nov 2025 21:18:57 +0000

Big brain hours

Christ. Fine. So over the weekend, a strange Substack post from what appears to be a CEO of a pet relocation company went very viral. This post — which to be clear, is bullshit — alleges that Nvidia is engaged in what “may become the largest accounting fraud in technology history.” That’s a load-bearing “may,” in the sense that there’s no credible reason to believe Nvidia is engaged in fraud at all.

If and when the AI bubble pops, everything that inflated it will have been obvious the entire time

Apparently this spooked Nvidia, which — as first reported by Barron’s — has sent a note to analysts clarifying that it is not, in fact, Enron. That note, which The Verge has seen, addresses the specific allegations in that Substack, as well as claims by famed short-seller Michael Burry that Nvidia’s accounting of stock-based compensation didn’t make sense. (According to Nvidia, Burry seems to have incorrectly added taxes on restricted stock units to get his numbers.)

Now, naturally, this caught my attention because I’ve recently used Enron as an analogy for what Nvidia is up to with the neocloud companies it funds:

“There is no neocloud that exists without [Nvidia CEO] Jensen [Huang],” says Saari. That makes neoclouds, in effect, extensions of Nvidia, he says. And none of them make money, so to expand, they must take on debt.

If we look at these as being, metaphorically, Nvidia’s special purpose vehicles, then it doesn’t really matter if the companies are any good or will survive in the long term. Their job is to boost Nvidia’s sales. Even OpenAI, also an Nvidia investment, kind of falls into this category — because the massive data center buildout that OpenAI wants the government to backstop sure involves an awful lot of Nvidia chips.

If you are old enough, or possessed of a certain kind of disposition, you may be thinking, Wait a minute, aren’t you describing Enron? And uh, in some sense, yes! Enron’s whole thing was special purpose vehicles with extremely speculative valuations that were used to take on debt, Luria notes. But Enron lied about what it was doing, and that’s fraud and illegal. (It also got up to other illegal stuff besides.) Nvidia’s relationship with CoreWeave is all happening in plain sight. So are all the relationships with the other neocloud companies. It kind of seems like the tech company version of the GameStop open pump-and-dump.

“It’s not good behavior, and it’s not healthy behavior,” Luria says. “But it’s legal. Any investor can see this. Many are just choosing not to.”

Since Nvidia has clarified, I’d like to add a clarification of my own: The problem is that Nvidia’s behavior is perfectly legal. In its note, Nvidia says it does not use special purpose entities to hide debt and inflate revenue. This is true! Every single neocloud Nvidia has invested in is its own company. Any debts those companies may have are on their own balance sheets. It’s not Nvidia’s debt. That’s one of the reasons why neoclouds are so convenient for Nvidia — as the company itself informs analysts, Nvidia doesn’t control those companies, and doesn’t provide the financing for them, either. They’re just very useful sin-eaters. In the case of CoreWeave, Nvidia is propping it up by investing in the company, including to make sure its IPO actually happened, and serving as a customer.

CoreWeave’s CEO has even bragged about the close relationship, saying, “I’m not bashful about reaching out” to Huang.

Personally, I think accusing Nvidia of accounting fraud is effectively taking one’s eye off the ball. It doesn’t have to commit fraud to have a very cozy arrangement with a whole network of companies that juice its earnings and may be inflating an AI bubble — all while its own executive sell shares to lock in their status as millionaires and billionaires. Nvidia has created seven new billionaires, in fact!

If and when the AI bubble pops, everything that inflated it will have been obvious the entire time. (That’s very in keeping with the times, isn’t it?) After all, I reported my CoreWeave story from the company’s public filings, following its “Risk Factors” section closely. Should the AI bubble burst, anything that accelerated Nvidia’s growth is likely to accelerate its losses; it will have to mark down its investments in the companies it propped up, for instance. Should those companies go under, that will mean a glut of Nvidia chips on the market as debt holders try to recoup their money, meaning Nvidia will effectively be competing with its own used product at fire-sale prices. It’s all very stupid, but as far as I can tell, not actually illegal.

I tested a bunch of Switch 2 screen protectors, and these are the best

admin — Mon, 24 Nov 2025 20:01:47 +0000

This is what a Switch 2 looks like with a glossy glass protector attached to its screen. | Image: Cameron Faulkner/The Verge

A glass screen protector is one of a few essential accessories that every Switch 2 owner should make, along with a select few others. In fact, it should be a priority to stick one onto the console’s screen as soon as possible to avoid accidental scratches.

To test the candidates below, I installed and removed Switch 2 screen protectors on my console at an alarming rate, more than any sane person should, and here are the most important takeaways:

Do not buy a flimsy plastic screen protector. They won’t protect your Switch 2 enough.
It’s impossible to tell different brands’ protectors apart once they’re on your screen; product packaging and the installation process are the biggest differences (as well as the key factors that increase cost).
Some protectors are glossy and some are anti-reflective, each with its own tradeoffs. For my money, glossy is the way to go. The matte finish looks good, but it reduces the screen’s vivid quality and its viewing angles.

Of the options below, it’s easiest to recommend amFilm’s three-pack of glossy screen protectors. Not only is the pack affordable ($6.11 from Amazon), but the tray also allows for perfect alignment of the glass protector for easy, bubble-free installation. I’ve used this company’s screen protectors on various gadgets for years, and I particularly like its glossy option over the matte finish, since it lets the Switch 2’s screen fully shine through.

amFilm three-pack of glossy screen protectors My go-to screen protector brand for years has been amFilm. Three glossy tempered glass sheets come in the box, and the tools make installation fairly simple. JSAUX’s model is just as good based on my testing, and just as affordable. Where to Buy:

$8.65 $6.11 at Amazon

amFilm OneTouch two-pack of glossy screen protectors In keeping up with some brands that offer faster installations, amFilm offers a two-pack of glossy protectors that includes a “OneTouch” tray. Remove the protector’s bottom film, attach the tray to your device, and then press gently on the protector until it’s fully applied. Where to Buy:

$9.99 $6.47 at Amazon

Dbrand Prism 2.0 two-pack of glossy screen protectors Dbrand’s Prism 2.0 includes two glass protectors for the Switch 2, each nestled into plastic cases that fit perfectly around the edges of the console (with the Joy-Con 2 removed). $34.99 is expensive for two protectors, but if simplicity and elegant packaging trump value, then this is a good option. Where to Buy:

Genki Aegis Shield two-pack of glossy screen protectors Genki offers a cheaper alternative to Dbrand with the Aegis Shield. It includes two protectors, and the installation process is nearly identical: just align the plastic frame with the console, pull the tab, and run your finger across the exposed section of the frame. Spigen makes a similar product that costs $24.99 for a two-pack. Where to Buy:

amFilm two-pack of matte screen protectors Let’s start with one of the most affordable options if you want to go the matte-textured route. AmFilm sells a two-pack of protectors at Amazon for $8.99. The set includes a plastic frame that serves as a guide to align the protector just right. JSAUX makes a similar product that’s the same price. Where to Buy:

$12.99 $7.99 at Amazon

amFilm OneTouch two-pack of matte screen protectors AmFilm also sells a two-pack with a OneTouch frame for easier installation. Again, keep in mind that opting for matte over glossy will reduce glare, but at the cost of viewing angles as well as the full vivid quality of the Switch 2’s screen. That’ll be an acceptable tradeoff for some, but not all people. Where to Buy:

$15.99 $12.14 at Amazon

Update, November 24th: Adjusted prices as needed, and added a link to recent coverage of the best Switch 2 controllers.

If Your Antitrust Case Depends On Pretending TikTok Doesn’t Exist, It’s Going To Fail

admin — Mon, 24 Nov 2025 19:55:54 +0000

Last week’s dismissal of the FTC’s antitrust case against Meta—combined with the earlier limited remedies in the Google search case—demonstrates something that should be obvious by now: antitrust is a pathetically weak tool for increasing competition in digital markets.

This isn’t an argument against competition. Competition in digital markets matters, desperately. But antitrust enforcement is slow, cumbersome, and nearly blind to how fast these markets actually move. It takes years to litigate, offers limited effective remedies, and by the time courts rule, the competitive threats have often shifted entirely. The whole apparatus works fine for more slow-moving industries (which have real competition problems!) but consistently fails when applied to more dynamic markets where the landscape changes every few years.

Over the last decade, figures like Lina Khan and Tim Wu have pushed a more aggressive vision of antitrust—variously called “hipster antitrust” or “neo-Brandeisian antitrust”—that promises to ignore these limitations and wield antitrust as a more punitive tool against large companies. The theory goes that punishing big companies will magically result in greater competition, a kind of antitrust trickle-down economics. The results of the Meta and Google cases suggest that if we want more competition in the digital space, there are much better policy levers than antitrust.

Both cases—originally brought by Trump’s AG Bill Barr as part of a 2020 campaign stunt to show that Trump was “taking on” the hated “Big Tech” were then pursued by the Biden FTC, with amended complaints trying to fix the original weaknesses. But both cases ended up demonstrating the same fundamental problem. Last week’s dismissal of the Meta case was particularly instructive.

As Judge Boasberg noted in his long and thorough opinion, the FTC’s bizarre attempt to define the market Meta was supposedly a monopolist in didn’t pass the laugh test. Notably, the FTC insisted that Meta’s market was just for “personal social networking” among friends and family, in an attempt to avoid the continued growing success of TikTok and YouTube as competitors. Thus, the FTC said the competition for Facebook and Instagram was just the much smaller Snapchat and the barely existing MeWe.

As Boasberg noted, the FTC had to show that Meta continues to have a monopoly in the marketplace to win the case, and the only way the FTC could win that argument was if TikTok and YouTube were excluded from the market definition. But that is laughable:

The FTC contends that Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat form a distinct market that can be identified by those apps’ unique features. While those apps certainly show some distinct markings, they mostly resemble two other social-media apps that the FTC insists must be excluded: TikTok and YouTube. Their dominant features are identical, people mostly use all four to watch unconnected content that they can send in direct messages, industry participants agree that the apps belong in the same competitive market, they use similar resources and technologies, and they charge the same price to the same customers.

Even when considering only qualitative evidence, the Court finds that Meta’s apps are reasonably interchangeable with TikTok and YouTube…. Taking all the evidence together, it shows that personal social networking is not a separate product market. Instead, Meta competes in the market for social media, and that market includes — at minimum — TikTok and YouTube as well.

The opinion repeatedly demonstrates that Meta was terrified of the growing success of TikTok (and, to a lesser extent, YouTube) and kept adjusting its products (hello “Reels”) to be more like those other apps.

The court also demolished the FTC’s claim that Meta was harming consumers by making its products worse. Quite the opposite according to the actual evidence:

So the FTC instead argues that Meta has degraded these apps’ quality. By offering a worse product for the same price, the agency reasons, Meta has imposed the equivalent of a price increase.

The record, however, shows the opposite: Meta’s apps have continuously improved. The company has added scores of new features to Facebook and Instagram, from Stories to Reels to Marketplace…. The Court simply does not find it credible that users would prefer the Facebook and Instagram apps that existed ten years ago to the versions that exist today

The court points to plenty of natural experiments (bans, downtime, etc.) that show that many users consider the Instagram/Facebook Reels effectively interchangeable with TikTok and YouTube Shorts.

The broader problem here is that by the time the case reached trial, the competitive landscape had already shifted dramatically. Meta’s supposed monopoly was being actively challenged by TikTok’s explosive growth, forcing Meta to completely overhaul its products. The FTC’s case depended on freezing the market in time and pretending this competition didn’t exist.

And, really, this all shows how terrible a tool antitrust is to deal with these markets.

The Google case—which the DOJ technically won—suffered from a similar dynamic. Judge Amit Mehta recognized that the market had shifted quite a bit on its own, with Google’s search dominance being challenged by AI tools like ChatGPT. The remedies he imposed came up far short of what the government requested, precisely because the competitive threats were already emerging without court intervention.

This is not to say that antitrust never makes sense or that we don’t need more competitive markets. But the fact that the FTC has been converted, under both administrations, to be more focused on punishing companies, rather than actually pursuing policies that increase competition is a problem.

Tim Wu wrote an angry response to Boasberg’s decision in the NY Times, and in doing so, accidentally revealed the core problem with the neo-Brandeisian approach. When you strip away the legal arguments, it all comes down to vibes:

Does anyone seriously doubt that Meta is the kind of company that antitrust laws were designed to restrain?

That right there gives away the game. If your antitrust case is built on “doesn’t this company feel bad?” you’re going to take shortcuts, ignore inconvenient facts like the existence of TikTok, and then fail in court.

Wu’s piece is instructive because it shows how the FTC arrived at its laughable market definition. He claims Boasberg dismissed the case “in the face of strong evidence to the contrary, not to mention common sense,” but the “common sense” he’s appealing to is just the intuition that Meta seems big and powerful. The actual evidence—the stuff Boasberg spent pages analyzing—showed robust competition forcing Meta to completely overhaul its products.

Wu even complains that recognizing TikTok and YouTube as competitors represents “strained legal thinking” because they’re “adjacent markets.” But the whole point of antitrust law is to stop companies from abusing monopoly power to prevent competition. Showing that competition exists and is forcing the alleged monopolist to adapt its products is not a technicality—it’s proof that the market is working.

There are ways to bring good antitrust cases, but they have to involve showing that there’s an actual monopoly under the law, that the monopoly is being abused by the monopolist in order to limit further competition and/or make products worse for consumers.

When you start from “Meta feels like a monopoly” and work backward, you end up failing to make the case the law actually requires, and that doesn’t actually help enable a more competitive marketplace. The FTC was so focused on the vibes and how Meta looked bad that it failed to make the actual case it needed to make.

If we want actual competition in the marketplace, maybe stop focusing so much on antitrust laws and look at the issues that keep holding back actual competition: clean up broken copyright and patent laws that restrict competition, fix the CFAA which has been used repeatedly by big tech companies to stifle competition, and stop trying to pass laws that would make it impossible for smaller startups to exist because of the compliance costs.

Those would actually enable much greater competition, but no one wants to do the hard work on those to ensure actual competition exists.

I’ve spent the year testing sleep trackers — I’m still wearing the Oura Ring now and it's $100 off this Black Friday

admin — Mon, 24 Nov 2025 19:00:00 +0000

My favorite Black Friday sleep tech deal so far? The latest and greatest silver Oura Ring for under $250

I found the top 35 best Black Friday tech deals under $50: check out the best savings on Apple, Ring and more

admin — Mon, 24 Nov 2025 18:09:44 +0000

These Black Friday tech deals will make your life easier this holiday season — and they all come in at under $50.

Macroeconomic Pressures and Legislative Slowdown Drive Decline in Price of Bitcoin

admin — Mon, 24 Nov 2025 18:01:03 +0000

Macroeconomic pressures and a lack of progress in regulation are among the factors that led to the recent decline in the price of Bitcoin, CoinDesk reported Monday (Nov. 24), citing analysts from Deutsche Bank.

Bitcoin ended last week with a Nov. 21 price of about $80,000, which was about 35% lower than the peak it reached in early October, according to the report. At the time CoinBase posted its report, the price was about $86,000.

Last week’s drop was driven by several factors, including investor caution, expectations that interests rates will remain higher despite a recent rate cut, a slowdown in progress toward regulation in the form of the CLARITY Act, a decline in institutional inflows and profit-taking from long-term holders Bitcoin, according to the report.

Bitcoin’s drop came at a time when stocks also fell because of fiscal concerns in the United States, tensions between the U.S. and China, and high artificial intelligence (AI) valuations, the report said.

Deutsche Bank analysts said, per the report, that Bitcoin’s long-term prospects remain intact and that regulatory clarity and greater adoption of the cryptocurrency by institutions could support it in the future.

PYMNTS reported Monday that observers are wondering whether the fall of the price of Bitcoin is a health consolidation or whether it marks “peak Bitcoin” for this cycle.

The report said that while the price of Bitcoin has seen drawdowns that were larger in percentage terms in the past, the current decline feels more consequential because the cryptocurrency is now embedded in balance sheets, exchange-traded fund (ETF) products and policy debates.

It was reported Tuesday (Nov. 18), when the price of Bitcoin had fallen to $89,000, that the cryptocurrency’s gains year to date had been wiped out despite earlier progress toward institutional adoption and regulation.

That report said factors contributing to the decline included investors’ concerns about interest rates, the steep valuations of tech companies involved in the AI boom, and a surprise tariff announcement in October that led to historic levels of liquidation across the crypto market.

It was reported on Oct. 22 that the government shutdown that was happening at the time had delayed potential policy changes, including bills having to do with the regulation of crypto markets.

The post Macroeconomic Pressures and Legislative Slowdown Drive Decline in Price of Bitcoin appeared first on PYMNTS.com.

You can grab a year of Disney Plus and Hulu for just $5 a month for Black Friday

admin — Mon, 24 Nov 2025 17:21:11 +0000

Disney Plus is home to exclusive Star Wars movies and TV shows, including both seasons of Andor.

If you’re looking for a way to entertain parents and kids this holiday season, look no further than a subscription to Hulu and Disney Plus. Now through December 1st, new and returning subscribers can snag an annual ad-supported subscription to both streaming services for just $4.99 a month ($8 off). The Black Friday deal saves you nearly $100 on the bundle over 12 months, letting you enjoy Pixar movies, classic Disney titles, and the adorable Bluey for less. The plan will automatically renew at its then-current price once your subscription period is over, that is, unless you cancel ahead of time.

Disney Plus, Hulu Bundle (with ads) Where to Buy:

$12.99 $4.99 at Disney Plus

The attractive bundle provides access to thousands of movies and TV shows from Disney, Pixar, Marvel, Star Wars, National Geographic, and more. If you’ve ever wanted to see why people are raving about Andor, Disney Plus is the only place you can watch it. And seeing as the holidays are just around the corner, Disney is the only streaming service you can catch classics like Home Alone, The Santa Clause, and The Polar Express. A Hulu sub, on the other hand, gives you access to Hulu originals like The Handmaid’s Tale, adult animation like Bob’s Burgers and The Simpsons, and shows like Gilmore Girls, Modern Family, Alien Earth, and The Bear.

The ongoing Black Friday promo can help mitigate the recent price hike that hit Disney Plus last month. We also can’t ignore the fact that Disney may be trying to make up for lost subscribers after briefly taking Jimmy Kimmel off the air. Considering how expensive this time of year can be between travel, gifts, and meals, any amount saved is welcome. But remember to set a reminder on your calendar if you do snag a subscription, so you can weigh whether you want to continue paying at full price.