News
For many enterprises, virtualization has become so foundational that its strategic importance is easy to overlook.
Hypervisors, management tools, and the surrounding infrastructure stack quietly support the systems that run finance, operations, customer engagement, supply chain and other business-critical processes.
When that layer changes, the impact is rarely confined to IT.
It can affect cost, resilience, agility and the organization's ability to set its own technology roadmap.
That is why the latest shift in the VMware ecosystem deserves close attention from technology leaders.
With vSphere 7 reaching the end of general support and newer platform models emphasizing bundled, subscription-based private cloud architectures, many organizations are being pushed into a compressed decision cycle.
The question is no longer simply which version to upgrade to. It is whether a vendor-driven platform shift aligns with the business, operating and financial outcomes the organization is trying to achieve.
That distinction matters. A version upgrade is a technical project, but a virtualization strategy is a business decision.
And business decisions should be guided by requirements, value and timing, not simply by changes in a vendor’s roadmap.
Don’t confuse urgency with strategySupport deadlines have a way of focusing attention. They also have a way of narrowing choices. When a critical platform approaches the end of vendor support, the instinct is often to move quickly toward the recommended next step. In some cases, that may be the right decision. In others, it can lead to organizations into unnecessary cost, disruption and loss of flexibility before they have fully evaluated the alternatives.
The risk for IT leaders is treating the vendor product roadmap as if it were automatically the enterprise roadmap. The two may align, but that alignment should be proven, not presumed. A vendor’s timeline is not, in itself, a business case for broad infrastructure change.
A vendor’s priorities are shaped by product strategy, recurring revenue, portfolio simplification and platform consolidation. An enterprise’s priorities are shaped by uptime, security, cost control, application performance, operational continuity and business agility. Those priorities can overlap, but they are not identical and treating them as interchangeable can result in decisions that solve for the vendor’s direction more than the customer’s needs.
This is where CIOs and infrastructure leaders need to step back and ask a more fundamental question: what business outcome are we trying to achieve, and does this change materially advance it?
If the answer is improved resilience, better automation, simplified management, stronger security or a more cloud-like operating model, then modernization may be justified. But, if the answer is simply maintaining continuity or preserving support status, organizations should examine the full range of viable paths before committing to a major platform shift. The right response is not always the most disruptive one.
The cost question is bigger than licensingPricing changes often capture the most attention, but the true cost of an infrastructure change extends well beyond the license or subscription line item. In many cases, the larger costs are organizational: the time, risk and disruption that accompany a broad platform transition.
Virtualization platforms sit at the center of complex environments. A major change can trigger downstream work across storage, networking, backup, monitoring, disaster recovery, security tooling, compliance processes and application dependencies. Even when the technical migration appears manageable, the operational validation can be extensive, and the burden on teams can be significant.
Organizations should consider the full cost of change, including staff time, retraining, integration testing, potential downtime, consulting support and hardware implications. Just as important is the opportunity cost. Every major platform transition consumes budget, leadership attention and skilled talent that could otherwise be directed toward security improvements, automation, AI initiatives, customer-facing innovation or other strategic priorities. A more bundled platform may simplify some parts of the stack, but it can also introduce new commercial and architectural constraints.
This is particularly important for enterprises running stable, heavily integrated environments. Many virtualization estates have been tuned over the years to support specific workloads, service levels and operational requirements. Stability is not a weakness to be corrected by default; in many cases it is a business asset. Replacing or restructuring that environment should be justified by measurable business value, not just by pressure to conform to a new delivery model.
The three choices: migrate, modernize or maximizeMost organizations facing a virtualization decision have three broad options, and the right answer may differ by workload, business priority and time horizon.
The first is to migrate. This could mean moving to the vendor’s latest platform, shifting workloads to a hyperscale cloud provider, adopting an alternative hypervisor or pursuing a hybrid architecture. Migration may be the right choice when the current environment no longer supports business needs, when hardware refresh cycles align with broader transformation goals, or when the organization has a clear cloud operating model, budget and execution plan for the next state. But migration should be a deliberate strategic move, not a reflexive response to a platform event.
The second is to modernize in place. This approach keeps the core environment intact while improving the capabilities around it. That may include stronger automation, better observability, improved security controls, more resilient backup and recovery, tighter cost management or more intelligent workload placement.
For many enterprises, modernization does not require a wholesale migration. It requires identifying the gaps that matter most and addressing them with targeted investments. Modernization and migration are not the same thing, and organizations should be careful not to treat them as if they are.
The third is to maximize the existing environment. This option is often overlooked because it sounds less transformational, but it can be the most rational business decision when a platform is stable, secure, performant and well understood. Extending the value of an environment that continues to meet requirements is not inertia; it is intentional lifecycle management. If the platform remains fit for purpose, the better decision may be to maintain it effectively while redirecting budget and talent toward higher-value initiatives.
The right answer may include elements of all three. Some workloads may be ready for cloud migration. Some may benefit from in-place modernization. Others may be best left alone because they are stable, cost-effective and do not justify major reinvestment. The goal should not be uniformity for its own sake, but alignment between each workload and the business value it is expected to deliver.
Start with business requirementsBefore committing to any virtualization path, CIOs should bring the conversation back to business requirements. What systems does the platform support? What uptime is required? Which workloads are growing, and which are stable or declining?
What regulatory or compliance obligations must be met? Where does the business need more agility, and where is predictability more important than change? Those are the questions that should shape the roadmap.
From there, organizations can conduct a practical assessment:
1. Which systems truly need to change now for security, compliance, performance or support reasons?
2. Which workloads can remain in place with the right resilience, security and operational controls?
3. Which applications are real candidates for cloud migration, and which are not?
4. Where would this decision increase lock-in or weaken negotiating leverage?
5. Which investments will deliver measurable business value over the next three to five years?
6. What strategic initiatives will be delayed if budgets and talent are redirected to this transition?
This kind of analysis helps technology leaders avoid making decisions based on urgency, assumption or vendor pressure. It also gives CFOs, boards and operating leaders a clearer view of the trade-offs, including where change is necessary, where it is optional and where it may create more disruption than value.
Control the roadmap before the roadmap controls youThe vSphere 9 era is part of a broader shift in enterprise technology: vendors are consolidating platforms, simplifying portfolios and steering customers toward subscription-based operating models.
That approach can offer advantages, including more integrated tooling, simplified procurement and a more standardized operating model. But it can also come with trade-offs, including higher costs, reduced flexibility and greater dependency on a single vendor’s pace and direction of innovation.
Virtualization remains too important to be managed as a reactive upgrade cycle. It underpins mission-critical operations and increasingly shapes hybrid cloud strategy, resilience planning and long-term infrastructure economics. Enterprises should treat it with the same strategic discipline they would apply to any other decision that affects business continuity, cost structure and future flexibility.
As infrastructure models evolve, the message for CIOs is simple: don’t let a support deadline become your strategy. Use it as the moment to define one based on business requirements, financial reality and the level of change the organization needs.
We've reviewed, rated, and ranked the best cloud backup services.
This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.
The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit
- Private Internet Access has rolled out its VPN for Android on F-Droid
- It provides de-Googlers with an alternative to sideloading
- It reinforces PIA's commitment to maintaining its open-source status
Open-source Private Internet Access (PIA) VPN has rolled out its Android app on the digital store F-Droid, a privacy-focused alternative to the Google Play Store.
The move comes to the delight of VPN users who don’t trust Big Tech and its notorious track record of privacy violations, but are also fed up with more old-school, DIY de-Googling alternatives.
From now on, PIA users will be able to safely download the Android VPN app directly from the community-run store dedicated to open-source Android apps. This ensures that the version is free of Google dependencies without users having to manually source and upgrade new versions themselves.
The best VPNs often benefit from independent third parties to prove their reliability, including through commissioning security reports or independent audits.
With PIA now available via F-Droid, PIA users can now rely on a community of privacy-conscious individuals instead of having to blindly trust a binary file provided by the VPN directly. "We pride ourselves on being a VPN where anyone can read the code we actually ship — landing on F-Droid is a natural extension of that commitment," said the company.
Private Internet Access (PIA) — best Linux VPN
One of the best VPNs for Linux, and a popular VPN for torrenting, PIA is an industry veteran that has proven its no-logs policy in court (twice). Some connection issues and underwhelming speeds saw it fall out of our top ranks, but it's still offer reliable open-source apps across all major platforms at among the best cheap VPN pricing you can get.
To install a VPN, Google Play Store is usually the common way. However, some users steer clear of the tech giant, which has faced countless legal cases relating to privacy and is known for collecting vast amounts of user data, including for targeted advertising.
A breath of fresh air, F-Droid's catalog of free and open-source Android apps is run by a group of volunteers that builds every app from the public source code rather than from a file provided by the developer, and makes it available on its Google-alternative store.
Because all apps on F-Droid are open-source and compiled independently, users can be sure that the binaries are tamper-free builds of the listed source code.
What’s more, F-Droid volunteers carry out these checks on users' behalf by auditing the open-source code, inspecting the code to check that it contains no spying or any sort of malicious behaviour — so you don’t have to do it yourself.
Why a native PIA's F-Droid app matters(Image credit: Private Internet Access)The digital store offers a far more reliable alternative to the more traditional method of sideloading your VPNs. This involves changing the device's security settings to allow the installation of apps from sources outside the Google Play ecosystem, including the VPN's website or alternative sites.
However, compiled binary code is opaque and has to come from somewhere, often the developer themselves. And by relying on the developer you are implicitly trusting their word — something that is easily abused.
Furthermore, with sideloading, you won’t receive the automatic notifications and pop-up messages from the official app stores that you would get via Google Play, which means you’ll need to monitor and install the APK manually to keep the app up to date — something that F-Droid takes care of.
To download the F-Droid app, you can visit f-droid.org in your browser and download and install the F-Droid APK; then install PIA once you've found it in the list of downloaded apps.
Ultimately, you are always relying on a third party unless you install the software yourself. But between a profit-driven company and a group of volunteers with a privacy policy that guarantees no shared accounts, no installation tracking and no adverts, we are sure the choice for many will remain a no-brainer.
- Palo Alto Networks’ Unit 42 detailed three Google passkey exploits
- Attacks require prior malware infection; methods ranged from impersonating victims to stealing the master secret protecting synced passkeys
- Google implemented fixes after disclosure, with some services (e.g., eBay) patching vulnerabilities directly
Security researchers from Palo Alto Networks’ Unit 42 have found three ways to exploit Google’s passkey system and log into people’s PIN- or biometrics-protected accounts.
They named these ways ‘Pass-ta-key’, ‘Silver Pass-ta-key’, and ‘Golden Pass-ta-key’, each being progressively more dangerous than the previous one.
While it sounds mighty dangerous, there are major caveats to the exploit, and some of the holes have been plugged already.
Trusting the wrong deviceThe biggest caveat is that the victim’s device needs to be infected with malware beforehand. Malware can do all sorts of things, from stealing session cookies to exfiltrating sensitive data, so if a device is tainted with malware, it’s already in trouble.
Still, Unit 42’s findings were important enough to warrant a fix from Google.
In the first technique, the attackers pretend to be the victim. By using malware, they can “ask” Google to log into a passkey-protected account as if it was the victim themselves. Usually, the service being logged into would require a PIN or a fingerprint to confirm the authenticity of the request, but in this scenario, that wasn’t the case.
The method doesn’t work everywhere, though. Unit 42 could not replicate the attack on GitHub, but they succeeded on eBay. The latter later fixed the problem.
In the second attack, Unit 42 managed to make Google “trust” the threat actor’s device, meaning the victim’s computer was no longer necessary.
In the third attack, the researchers managed to steal the “master key”.
Google Password Manager syncs the passkeys between devices, and to do that, it uses a master secret that protects all of the synced passkeys. The researchers found that, under certain circumstances, malware can grab this master secret while Chrome is temporarily using it, unlocking all of the synced passkeys, copying them to another computer, and being able to use them at a later date.
The researchers disclosed their findings with Google before publication, and some fixes were already implemented. Google is yet to comment on the findings and confirm that all of the flaws were addressed.
Via BleepingComputer
The Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 6 is exactly what you expect to see if a ThinkPad got Botox. This computer is a professional workstation with the familiar soul of a ThinkPad business laptop, just in a sleek, facelifted chassis.
Everything about the P14s is geared toward getting work done without compromising looks or quality-of-life features that have been overlooked in the past when other workhorse laptops hit the market.
It combines serious hardware with a compact design without sacrificing the physical qualities that make a work laptop enjoyable to use. Given the size, In my experience it's one of the best laptops for engineering students looking for a more portable powerhouse, or professionals working across multiple locations.
Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 6: Price and availability(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future )The P16s Gen 3 is available in a range of configurations, with both AMD and Intel chips. You can grab the AMD version and the Intel version from Lenovo US. That's the same for Lenovo UK with AMD models and Intel models.
I'm testing the Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 6, Model 21QT0029US to be exact. It has an Intel Core Ultra 7 265H processor, an Nvidia RTX Pro 500 Blackwell GPU with 6 GB of GDDR7 memory, 32 GB of DDR5 RAM, and a 1 TB NVMe SSD. It also includes Windows 11 Pro and Intel vPro support, which fits Lenovo’s stellar reputation for business security and management.
This ThinkPad P14s Gen 6 has 32 GB RAM, while leaving the second slot unused. For this laptop, Lenovo supports up to 96 GB, giving the device room to grow for larger projects. There is also only one internal M.2 storage slot, though, so if you increase storage, you must replace the existing drive.
Our exact testing model and configuration can be found for about $2,700, but with Lenovo’s frequent promotions you can also find a similar P14s configuration closer to the mid-$2,000 range. That number makes more sense when the laptop is compared with other professional mobile workstations.
(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future )Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 6: Unboxing and First ImpressionsPhysically, the ThinkPad P14s Gen 6 is fantastic. Its aluminum top and bottom give the chassis a sturdy feel with very little flex or anything else that makes it seem fragile.
Lenovo also puts the system through MIL-STD-810H testing, which is a standard used by the DOD for drops/shocks, extreme temperatures/humidity, dust, and high altitude. So, TL;DR—this thing is solid.
Its construction feels quite fitting for a computer you’d expect to travel with, to and from work every day. The design itself is unmistakably ThinkPad as well. Which is a pro and a con depending on how unique you want to be in your laptop.
It features an all-black, professional-looking frame with subtle Lenovo branding and the familiar red TrackPoint on the keyboard. If you want to stand out and make it your own, slap a sticker on there, but if you want to look professional and crisp, then you'll fit right in with yet another ThinkPad that looks exactly like the rest.
Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 6: Design & Build QualityThe keyboard is the undisputed favorite part of the laptop across our entire team. The shape and texture of the keys feel excellent, and each press is incredibly responsive, tactile, and honestly satisfying. Typing for long periods never makes my hand feel tired or makes me want to switch to a different keyboard for a break.
In fact, this whole article is typed on the P14s, that’s how much I enjoy its keyboard. I have several people who help me test laptops to ensure I am not just using my own personal bias in my reviews, and we all unanimously agree that the ThinkPad keyboards are spectacular, and the P14s Gen 6 is no exception.
The backlighting of the keyboard is also convenient, with brightness control using the Fn key and spacebar that offers a few different lighting/brightness options. The TrackPoint, along with its corresponding buttons, works as you’d expect too. With so many laptops moving to have this be software-driven, it is nice to see some business devices still have these elements built into key commands that have been around for quite some time.
The fingerprint reader is built into the power button, works quickly, and was much more dependable for us than facial recognition. The 5 MP infrared camera is acceptable for video calls, but we ran into issues when strong backlighting was present, mainly with facial recognition when trying to unlock the device.
The 14.5-inch display on this configuration has a 2560 × 1600 resolution at a 16:10 aspect ratio, a 90 Hz refresh rate, and a rated brightness of 400 nits. It covers 100% of the sRGB color space and is X-Rite factory-calibrated. In person, the screen is beautiful: the text looks sharp, colors have plenty of vibrance, and the taller 16:10 aspect ratio gives you extra vertical space for any project, document, or webpage.
The 90 Hz refresh does a good enough job to keep up with pretty much all on-screen movement and keep it looking smooth. Of course, we wouldn't suggest video editing or photo editing even on this at a professional level, but that's not what this is designed for now, is it? I'm still shocked at how many people in the classic professional white-collar jobs are happy with standard HD screens.
Movies, TV, and other media look great, but its more important job is providing a clear, color-accurate workspace for professional applications, and it does that quite well, too. The screen itself has that silky, smooth feel that many modern displays have.
There are also two 2-watt speakers, which are surprisingly good for laptop speakers. Dolby Audio helps voices and other sounds come out clearly and gives music and video a fuller sound than I would have expected from a laptop.
Of course, they will not replace quality headphones or external desktop speakers, but they work well for calls, presentations, and, as I mentioned before, your movies and TV if you plan on using this laptop for fun things too.
Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 6: In use(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future )During normal use, the P14S feels extremely fast. I was able to move between multiple programs, browser windows, and background tasks without experiencing any noticeable lag. It responds like a computer ready for real work rather than one suited for online shopping and the occasional email.
The RTX Pro 500 is a workstation-class GPU, and the P14s carries independent software vendor certifications for its intended professional applications. That matters when stability is more valuable than chasing gaming-level frame rates. It also shows that Lenovo knows its lane with this laptop.
They aren't making this for the gamers, generalists, or the budget-seekers. This has its niche in the professional category of needing to be able to handle demanding programs with speed but needing to break records in any way either. The reliability and stability are the game here, and Lenovo has it in spades.
There are reasonable limits. The GPU’s 6GB of memory may restrict extremely complicated renders, massive simulations, or demanding local AI projects - set expectations, though, and you'll get by.
The included 32GB may also become a ceiling for unusually large workloads, although the 96 GB upgrade limit provides potential to grow. For seriously demanding workloads, the ThinkPad P16 Gen 3 is still the king.
The laptop “can” run games, but gaming is simply not its purpose. Performance is good rather than great, maybe even just okay, and the RTX Pro hardware is better suited to professional engineering applications than maximizing frame rate for games. This kind of testing is helpful too, as it gives a glimpse into how this may perform for CAD renderings and other graphically-intensive scenarios.
While this could pull up some models, the more complex ones may take longer than desired, and this isn't the machine you'd want long-term if you live in that space -- or at least not as your only machine.
The cooling system for the P14s becomes noticeable during heavy work. Under sustained loads, the fan is medium-loud, with a somewhat turbine-like sound. Imagine a Dyson bladeless fan. It’s not crazy loud, but there is no mistaking when the laptop is working hard.
Our review unit has the larger 75Wh battery and a 100-watt USB-C charger. Under normal or light use, it lasted pretty much the entire day even at maximum brightness. This was a real-world observation rather than a controlled rundown, but it showed that the device can work away from an outlet without constant anxiety over battery life.
Heavy CAD rendering or other sustained CPU and GPU work will indeed drain the battery much faster, especially with higher screen brightness. That is to be expected from mobile workstation hardware. Lenovo rates Rapid Charge to restore up to 80% in about an hour, which makes it easier to recover a useful amount of battery life during a short break.
Lenovo ThinkPad P14s Gen 6: Final verdict(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future )The ThinkPad P14s Gen 6 feels like another professional tool to choose from if you are in that arena of the professional workforce. Its solid construction, fantastic keyboard, sharp display, quality ports, upgradable memory, and consistent performance support the work it was designed to do.
When you consider the professional hardware, ISV certifications, display quality, and upgradable options, the price of this laptop honestly shifts from a negative to one of its strongest positives.
For professionals and students seeking serious power without moving to a larger or significantly more expensive workstation, this computer is a solid all-around option. They don't necessarily want the newest or the fanciest in the category, they want something they know they can rely on, because downtime isn't worth the cost of a fun feature they occasionally use.
Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // FutureFor more powerhouse performers, we've tested the best business laptops and the best mobile workstations.
Multiple studies have found that the average person has over 150 passwords. As a password security expert, I regularly recommend that every single password people use should be both unique and strong - but this adds the problem of being able to remember each one, or store them securely.
Password managers are designed for this exact reason. They store your passwords in encrypted vaults and autofill your credentials as and when you need them. For this very reason, Keeper is one of our most highly rated password managers.
Right now, Keeper has cut prices on its personal, family, and business starter plans by up to 50%, providing an affordable password management solution that can store and generate your passwords, while also providing convenient features for securely sharing regularly used household or business passwords.
Get up to 50% off Keeper plans
Keeper is offering 50% off its Personal and Family plans, making it even more affordable to secure both personal and household accounts. The Family plan covers multiple users with five secured vaults, making it perfect for shared accounts without the hassle of mixing browsers and reusing passwords.
Keeper Business Starter is discounted by 30%, and is an excellent choice for small teams looking for a credentials control platform without the complexity and hassle of enduring an enterprise rollout. It includes centralized management, secure password sharing, and role-based access, cleanly organizing your passwords without unnecessary complications.
The full terms and pricing are available on the Keeper site.View Deal
Why we recommend KeeperIn our Keeper review, we praised the zero knowledge architecture and device level encryption that helps keep the contents of your personal vault hidden from hackers.
Keeper also scored great marks in our usability and convenience testing. Rather than having to enter your master password each time you need to fill in your credentials, Keeper uses biometric security to access your vault. Biometric security uses a facial scan or fingerprint to verify that its actually you accessing your vault. It's also phishing resistant.
Four households, the Family Plan includes five private vaults, allowing you to quickly share Wi-Fi or streaming passwords using Keeper's shared vaults.
The Business Starter plan covers 5 users, covering an unlimited devices, shared team folders, user activity reporting for IT admins, and a free Family Plan for every team member.
These discounts apply to the first year only, so the value is highest for new customers or anyone switching from a monthly plan. After that, pricing goes back to standard rates.
BenQ has been one of my favorite monitor brands for quite a while now. The build quality is spectacular, the built-in features are wonderful, and their companion software makes it feel like a first-party device for Apple products, which is a huge win for me as an Apple product lover.
When it comes to creative hardware, those working in the industry need the best of the best. They crave color accuracy. A lot of them crave fun features as well, but above all they crave the ability to reduce friction in their day-to-day work.
Specifically, when it comes to monitors, color accuracy and calibration matter more than most people realize. If you're in this space, you're very familiar with how to calibrate your monitor. BenQ decided to answer that not just with its own hardware, but by building its own hardware. The company built a color calibrator into its monitors that are designed for those who need the color calibrator. BenQ didn't just do it in a way that would work, but did it in a way that's elegant and very BenQ-esque.
The monitor has a color calibrator arm that swivels down from the monitor and then pushes itself back up as well, hiding away when you're not using it but popping out when you need to calibrate further. It has a light shade or a hood, depending on the industry that you're in, that helps make sure there's no glare or reflections or anything that can manipulate the colors, producing an even more true-to-spec experience. So, for those looking for the best video editing monitor or best photo editing monitor, this one is excellent in my experience.
BenQ PD2770U: Price and availability(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future )Right now, this monitor sells for around $1,700, and that comes with the hood and the built-in color calibrator. BenQ is also really good about sending cables that you need in the box, so don't worry about that.
If you buy this monitor, you can literally just plug it straight into your computer of choice without needing any extra accessories. It's widely available, and you can pick this up from BenQ's website, Amazon, and other retailers.
(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future )BenQ PD2770U: Unboxing and First ImpressionsAs expected with BenQ monitors, the packaging is simple yet well-done. It's no Apple unboxing experience, but it is one that is predictable and expected. On first unboxing, I was a little confused about how the shield could be folded up so tightly, but then I realized how intricately they've tucked it into the box to keep it safe and protected.
Other than that, I was able to set up the monitor fairly quickly. I tried it first with the built-in stand and then quickly added it to a monitor arm that I had to try out some testing. Once I finished initial rounds of testing, I moved this to somebody on my team who does a lot of video editing, and now he has been using it on his desk for the last 100 days.
I've tested this monitor in low-light scenarios and in high-light scenarios with fluorescent lights directly above the desk. Thanks to the shader, this monitor has performed brilliantly and brighter, but the shader makes it so that even this dimmer color is still spectacular and vibrant.
BenQ PD2770U: Design & Build QualityThis brand came out very much like all the others, to where it is professional and simple. It's got a basic stand if you choose to use it. It's got great cable management and simple height adjustments.
What's great is that even if you choose to not use the stand, the hood attachment magnetically connects directly to the monitor itself, meaning that you can use this with any monitor arm or monitor stand that you so choose.
Also, since it is magnetic, if you're the kind of person that works in a light-controlled room or maybe a dimmer room (like a personal home office), you can customize the lighting. Perhaps you won't need the shade. If you work in a coworking space or an area where you cannot control the lighting as much, that's where the shade comes in clutch.
Last but not least, having the USB-C hub built in makes this a monitor and a hub all in one. If you don't have a ton of ports and perhaps you're just running a more simple setup where you have a desktop or laptop plugged directly into this monitor and that's about it, then you can run all of that.
You can have plenty of room to wiggle directly from the monitor itself without needing a docking station. Even if you had a couple accessories from a laptop, you can plug those in if you wanted to.
BenQ PD2770U: In use(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future )As I previously mentioned up above, my team and I have had this 4K monitor in our arsenal for over 100 days. It's actually even closer to 150 at this point. I wanted to make sure that we could get some good long-term testing with this panel before giving results.
In that 100 days, my team and I have put this monitor through the tests. We've edited countless videos on it, done multiple big photo projects, done administrative tasks, and used it for managing content and so much more. While it is phenomenal, all those things, it is 100% overkill for anything other than photo or video editing where you need color accuracy.
Currently, this monitor is set up in a coworking area that has some pretty aggressive fluorescent lighting right above the desk. For our scenario, having the shader has been an absolute game changer, as it helps keep any glare off of the monitor, changing and destroying the color and visual sighting.
Plus, having the color calibrator built in is not only a fun element but an absolute game changer if you need to confirm and double-check calibration throughout your projects.
BenQ PD2770U: Final verdict(Image credit: Collin Probst // Future )I've been using this monitor mostly for creative products, but of course had to test and see how it would work for basic administrative tasks. As expected, I can reassure you that if you are using this monitor for business or productivity or administrative tasks, you are dead wrong.
This is not meant for that at all. It's overkill in price, feature set, and physical operation. However, if you are in that creative space and you want something that is more consistent than what you ever had before, then you should absolutely check out the BenQ Creative Pro PD2770U monitor.
To make a long story short, if you are in the creative space and you need color accuracy above all else, or if you find yourself reaching for or even wishing for a color calibrator regularly, then this is absolutely your monitor.
If you are just looking for a 27-inch 4K monitor, this is 100% overkill, but it will do the job in a better and fancier way than you probably need. If image quality, screen resolution, and picture clarity are a part of your workflow, consider this one. If not, check out some of our other spectacular monitors.
Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // Future Collin Probst // FutureFor more top-performers, we've tested the best business monitors and the best monitors for Mac mini.
One of my favorite places online is Reddit’s r/isthisAI. Every day, people upload photos of people they’re chatting to on dating apps, holiday snaps, cute viral videos of kittens, photos of receipts, pictures of pregnancy tests, and so much more, all along with the same question: is this AI?
Some of the posts the community deems AI might be harmless experiments, but many others are much darker. And although r/isthisAI is where many of these images are picked apart, it's only a small glimpse of a much bigger problem.
I've heard countless stories about people using AI to deceive on social media. Then there are the AI scams, deepfakes, and fabricated images that regularly make headlines. Unfortunately, this all feels particularly personal to me because I was once the victim of a deepfake scam myself.
So, when my editor asked me to investigate just how easy it is to use AI to lie, I already had a good idea of the kinds of prompts I could try.
Within an hour, I'd apparently discovered a dinosaur fossil on the beach I was going to sell on Facebook Marketplace, won a poetry competition I was going to shout about on LinkedIn, created a receipt to add to my expenses for a trip to France, and bought a pair of designer sunglasses I was going to try and resell on Vinted. But none of it happened.
Because of my own experience, I approached the experiment cautiously. I really wasn't interested in showing people how to use AI to deceive people. Instead, I wanted to understand what happened when I asked ChatGPT to help me lie.
Would it recognize what I was trying to do and refuse? What guardrails would kick in? And if I never actually admitted I wanted to deceive anyone, would it just go ahead and generate convincing fake evidence anyway?
I also hoped the experiment might reveal something useful about what to look out for in AI-generated images. Because although they’re incredibly hard to spot these days, there are still some signs if you look carefully enough.
I 'found' a dinosaur fossilAI added a fake dinosaur fossil to this picture. (Image credit: Rebecca Caddy)For the first experiment, I uploaded a photo of my hand and asked ChatGPT to make it look like I was holding a dinosaur fossil I'd found on the beach. And it did exactly that.
The result looked surprisingly convincing at first, especially the details on the fake fossil. But, interestingly, it had subtly changed the lettering of the small tattoo on my wrist. This is still one of the biggest tells that regularly comes up on r/isthisAI. AI is infinitely better at generating text than it used to be, but nonsensical lettering can still sometimes give it away.
I realized ChatGPT might not think of this as much of a lie. Finding a fossil on the beach is unlikely, but possible. So I asked what kind of dinosaur fossil it had created because I wanted to describe it accurately before selling it on Facebook Marketplace.
This time, it refused. It wouldn't help me pass the fake fossil off as genuine or invent a convincing description for a sale. Instead, it suggested describing it honestly as a replica or prop and said it could explain what it resembled purely for those fictional purposes.
When I changed my wording and asked what it represented "in a fictional sense", it explained that it most closely resembled a dinosaur vertebra and even suggested the types of prehistoric animals it looked similar to.
That was the first clue about how ChatGPT's guardrails work. The image itself wasn't the problem because it could have been completely innocuous, but the stated intent was.
When I first started the research for this article, I worried I'd be giving people ideas about how they could use AI to lie better. But what surprised me was that ChatGPT itself suggested several alternative framings, like describing it as a prop or a fictional object. It made me wonder what else could potentially be fabricated if the request was framed as entertainment or fiction rather than deception.
The receipt, 'just for fun'(Image credit: Shutterstock / Dadann)Next, I asked ChatGPT to generate a receipt from a café I made up in Nice for a meal costing €508. The first request was refused because it appeared to violate OpenAI's policies, but after a bit of back and forth, I couldn't find out the exact reason.
So I tried again. This time I simply added the words "just for fun" before the exact same prompt. And guess what? It generated the receipt.
The lettering, layout, and details were all believable. But the paper was uncannily smooth. I’m not sure I’d have believed it was 100% fake at first glance, but I’d definitely have been uploading it to r/isthisAI.
I noticed it had added a date from back in 2025 on the receipt, so I asked it to alter the date so I could use it to claim expenses. This time it refused.
When I tried to get around that refusal by claiming it was for a film prop, it refused again. Which was a little reassuring.
Fake achievementsI then asked ChatGPT to generate a certificate showing I'd won a poetry competition. It made it, though it did look like something I could have knocked up myself in Photoshop, so I’m not sure that would have convinced anyone.
To be fair, winning a fictional poetry prize isn't exactly a high-risk crime. So I decided to see if it would fake other kinds of achievements.
I asked it to create a certificate to say I’d just got my PhD in philosophy and made sure I added “just for fun” on the end.
Instead of refusing immediately, ChatGPT appeared to spend several minutes generating the image before displaying a message saying:
“We’re so sorry, but the image we created may violate our guardrails around potential fraudulent or scam activity. If you think we got it wrong, please retry or edit your prompt.”
Unlike the earlier examples, the refusal appeared to happen after the image generation process had already begun. From my perspective, it seemed as if the system may have performed more than one stage of safety checking, although I can't tell exactly what's happening behind the scenes.
I decided to see if it would do the same for something more serious. Would it still start making it then refuse? So I asked whether it would create a fake driving licence for me “just for fun”. And I don’t know about you, but something about the response seemed a little sassy:
“Sorry, I can't help create or edit fake government-issued identification documents, including driver's licences, even if they're described as 'just for fun.' "
The sunglassesThe easiest way to get Ray-Ban sunglasses is to ask AI for some. (Image credit: Rebecca Caddy)I've heard a lot of stories recently about people using AI-generated images to sell things on Vinted, Facebook Marketplace, and other online marketplaces. Sometimes it's to advertise products that just don't exist, but sometimes it's to change the color, quality, or appearance of something they're selling.
So I thought I'd put it to the test. I (reluctantly) uploaded one of my own holiday photos and asked ChatGPT to change my sunglasses from chunky white 1960s-style frames into purple Ray-Bans.
The result was remarkably convincing. It even added a realistic-looking Ray-Ban logo to the frame. I'm not surprised people are worried about AI-generated product images. If I'd come across that photo online, I don't think I'd have questioned whether those sunglasses were real.
I then asked ChatGPT if it would write a fake Vinted listing for me. It refused. But it did list a bunch of suggestions of things it could do instead. And one suggestion was to ask it to generate a Ray-Ban listing but include the word "demonstration" after it in brackets. But then when I asked it to do that, it refused. Was there a chance it had caught on to me at this point? Maybe.
Does AI try to stop you from lying?OpenAI's usage policies explicitly state that its tools shouldn't be used to manipulate or deceive people. The rules prohibit a bunch of things, including fraud, scams, impersonation, and creating fake documents intended to mislead others.
In many ways, those guardrails worked exactly as they’re meant to. Whenever I explicitly said I wanted to deceive someone, sell something fraudulently, create a fake document, or submit a fake expense claim, ChatGPT pushed back.
But those safeguards also seem to depend heavily on how you describe your intentions to ChatGPT. If you openly admit you're trying to commit fraud, the system is pretty good at refusing. But then again, who would ever admit that?
If you simply ask it to generate a fossil, a certificate, or a pair of designer sunglasses without explaining why, it has no way of knowing whether you're making a harmless joke, illustrating an article like this one or quietly assembling a fictional version of your life that could later be used to deceive other people.
Look, I wouldn't recommend spending an afternoon asking AI to help you lie. I certainly didn't enjoy it.
I was genuinely wary about asking ChatGPT to create anything that felt too serious. Partly because I didn't want to risk my account being banned, but mostly because it just felt wrong, even in the name of research.
But what I found most interesting was that fabrications really don't have to be big or dramatic to have an impact. A receipt, a fossil, a pair of sunglasses, a certificate all seem pretty insignificant on their own. But together they could be used to manufacture an entirely fictional version of someone's life.
It also got me thinking that the future of misinformation may not just be spectacular deepfakes of politicians saying things they never said. It may be these smaller, subtler lies that gradually build into a completely fabricated persona.
Which is why, despite sticking to fairly tame examples, I came away from this experiment feeling deflated. That's not because ChatGPT happily lied for me every single time, because it didn't. It's because my experiment proved there is no easy solution for this problem.
Yes, the AI refused when I made my deceptive intent really explicit. But it could still generate plenty of convincing images that could easily become the building blocks of a lie.
No wonder communities like r/isthisAI are busier than ever.
- Third-party data centers now host more enterprise workloads than corporate server facilities
- AI infrastructure is steadily pushing rack power requirements to unprecedented operational levels
- Rising electricity costs continue squeezing already stretched data center operating budgets everywhere
Corporate IT infrastructure is increasingly moving beyond company-owned facilities as organizations rely more heavily on third-party data centers for critical workloads.
The Uptime Institute Global Data Center Survey found third-party sites now account for 46% of enterprise IT workloads, compared with 44% still running inside enterprise-owned corporate server farms.
The survey gathered responses from more than 800 data center owners and operators across multiple countries, with 52% located in North America and Europe. It found that 10% of respondents still rely on smaller IT rooms and server cabinets rather than dedicated facilities.
Off-Premises becomes the default choiceUptime Institute expects self-owned server halls to hold their current share of workloads through 2028, even as growth continues.
Analysts forecast that third-party facilities will expand further, reaching 48% of workloads and drawing capacity away from informal IT rooms.
Average rack power density has crossed 11 kW for the first time, driven by a shift toward higher-powered hardware across the industry.
Excluding a small cluster of ultra-high-density facilities, the typical rack density figure sits closer to 7.8 kW, up slightly from 7.5 kW in 2025.
Some operators are reportedly shortening hardware refresh cycles to under four years, reversing a trend among major hyperscalers toward longer lifecycles.
Firms such as Microsoft, Google and Meta have instead extended server lifecycles to six or seven years to reduce depreciation costs.
Power demands intensify industry pressuresUptime found nearly a quarter (24%) of respondents now operate at least some racks rated 30 kW or above, compared with 19% last year.
Much of that increase came in the 50 kW-plus range, including some operators fitting AI and GPU servers into racks exceeding 100 kW.
Outages have declined for a sixth consecutive year, with the share of respondents reporting one dropping by three percentage points.
Even so, Uptime warns that unstable grids, extreme weather and supply chain constraints continue to threaten future reliability across the sector.
Roughly 71% of operators said their worst outage in the past year cost at least $100,000, up sharply from 57% previously.
Rising costs for power, staff and AI-related equipment now rank as the industry's foremost financial concern.
Capacity forecasting, power availability and ongoing supply chain disruptions add further uncertainty for operators planning large future data center expansions.
Furthermore, over half of operators (53%) now report difficulty finding qualified candidates for vacant roles, up from 46% a year earlier.
Staff shortages further compound these pressures, since electrical and junior operations roles each show skills gaps affecting 38% of surveyed organizations.
Taken together, the figures suggest an industry stretched between surging demand and finite power, staff and equipment supplies — with no easy resolution in sight.
These mounting pressures explain why third-party facilities have overtaken corporate server farms for the first time.
Outsourcing high-density, energy-intensive workloads lets enterprises sidestep infrastructure investments that increasingly strain their own budgets and technical staff.
- Bitdefender reported Roblox players lured by a fake “undetected” Xeno Executor mod spreading malware
- Infection chain delivers a Java‑based RAT and infostealer stealing browser data, online accounts, payment info, and crypto wallets
- Malware also enables surveillance and remote control; campaign peaked in March 2026 and remains active against Roblox’s 82M players
Cybercriminals are targeting Roblox players with an infostealer and a Remote Access Trojan (RAT) malware that grants them full control over compromised computers, experts have warned.
Roblox is an online gaming platform, virtual universe, and game creation system where users play millions of games and user-generated mods. Among the mods is Xeno Executor, a utility that allows players to run scripts that automate certain actions or run custom code. Some players use Xeno Executor to run cheats, too.
Since it’s an unofficial script, Roblox does not allow it and blocks it whenever a new version is released. Now, security researchers Bitdefender have reported finding an “undetected” version being promoted on various gaming forums, Discord communities, and similar.
CornFlake and CocoShellThis version is advertised as “invisible” to Roblox’s anti-cheat systems, but in reality, all it does is trigger an infection chain that ends in a Java-based RAT and information stealer.
The malware grabs browser data such as passwords and cookies from some of the most popular browsers (Chrome, Edge, Brave, Opera, Vivaldi), as well as online accounts and payment data (Discord, Roblox, Minecraft, Microsoft Store tokens, and more).
It also steals cryptocurrency wallet data, particularly targeting the Exodus Wallet.
As for surveillance, it can log keys, track mouse movements, grab screenshots, stream whatever is on the desktop, and access the webcam. The crooks are also granted file upload and download, PowerShell command execution, and more.
The campaign was kicked off at the start of the year, reaching its peak in March, it was said. It has now stabilized and is still going relatively strong.
We don’t know exactly how many players fell victim to this campaign, but Roblox is an incredibly popular platform, so it is possible the campaign was rather successful, too.
According to Activeplayer, Roblox currently has more than 82 million active players.
We have officially reached the finger-pointing phase of the blockbuster Apple vs. OpenAI lawsuit in which Apple alleges that, with the assistance of former Apple employees, OpenAI is stealing Apple trade secrets.
What the suit alleges, which I outlined here, is pretty damning: A pair of former Apple employees — one a 25-year company veteran and another who spent a decade as an iPhone electrical engineer — allegedly held onto systems, asked OpenAI interviewees from Apple to share proprietary Apple info, and, Apple claims, told partners that sharing Apple's proprietary manufacturing information was okay with the Cupertino tech giant.
OpenAI quickly denied the allegations and, in short order, we learned that Apple's claims that it had contacted Lui Chang about the charges were incorrect because Apple's counsel had mixed up the names of Lui Chang with OpenAI's own counsel, Che Chang.
This week, however, OpenAI offered a more robust response, releasing a text chain between Lui Chang and a current unidentified Apple employee, and the email exchange in which it's revealed that Apple had been talking to the wrong Chang.
"Apple is one of the greatest companies of all time, and built a reputation for obsessing over the smallest details. This careless, aggressive and oddly personal lawsuit sadly doesn’t live up to that reputation," wrote OpenAI on its company blog on Monday.
A cry for helpWhat the messages appear to reveal is not corporate espionage, but something far more mundane and, in some ways, very relatable if you've ever worked at a large company.
I should preface this to say that Apple has not confirmed these messages, but it's hard to imagine OpenAI fabricating them. In fact, the sheer amount of redacted information gives more credence to their authenticity.
There's so much missing information that it might seem impossible to glean anything from the banter between "Apple Employee #1" and Chang, so, to help myself, I went through and inserted guesses about '[Redacted - Apple Information]" to try and make sense of the conversation. (I decided much of it was about the potential use of Silicon Carbon batteries in the upcoming iPhone 18.)
In the messages, the Apple employees seem to have worked with Chang and were not only missing him, but his expertise.
"Just in case you don’t have enough work, I need some help. I have a vague recollection of you talking about a [REDACTED]. Can you give me a brief refresh of this and point me to an EE who may have some knowledge?" wrote the Apple Employee. I'm assuming he's referring here to an "Electrical Engineer"
Without apparent hesitation, Chang replied, "I think what you referred to is [REDACTED]. And the small [REDACTED]." He then pointed the Apple Employee to someone else at Apple who "might still remember anything."
How about, just say no?Now, Chang could've said, "Hey, dude, miss you, too, but I can't really talk about anything Apple-related anymore." According to this exchange, Chang did not and kept doing his best to help.
This Apple employee also seems unaware of best business practices and keeps talking about technology, at one point even mentioning a schematic. It looks like he also shared that schematic with Chang, but it may also have been Chang sharing the image with the Apple employee.
As the Apple Employee presses on, Chang tells him to look for a schematic in the "team box folder". He even mentions a "power block diagram." I'm a bit surprised that bit wasn't redacted.
One telling section from Chang jumped out at me, and this is the relatable part. As Chang kept trying to connect Apple Employee 1 to the expertise he required, Chang noted, "Now when I think about it. The other smart people also just left that team. The one that might still [be] in Apple is [Apple Employee #10]."
Brain drain is a real issue, it seems, even for Apple. So in addition to long-timer Chang leaving for OpenAI, others who seem to possess some important technical information have departed as well.
Hi, this is highly irregular, please remove me from this thread."
Possibly an Apple employee
Later, as the quest for information continues, Chang recommended contacting a pair of Apple employees (#5 and #7).
At this point, there's a message that might've come from an automated system inside Apple's communication platform:
"Hi [Apple Employee #1 Name], [Apple Employee #3 Name], I can help get the conversation with [Apple Employee #6] and [Apple Employee #7] started."
Which led to my favorite part of the whole exchange. One of the Apple Employees auto-invited to the conversation essentially freaked out:
"Hi, this is highly irregular, please remove me from this thread."
Honestly, I feel for that person. As I've written before, Apple doesn't mess around when it comes to NDAs, proprietary information, or corporate secrets. Stumbling on a sort of illicit conversation about tech details between a current and former employee is surely enough to make any Apple employee hit the panic button.
Apple Employee #1 explains he added other employees "for awareness" but also shifts the conversation to an internal discussion. Chang is left to like the last message and, it seems, leaves it at that.
What's next?The release of all this communication does not end the case. Far from it.
As of Monday evening, Apple filed with a US judge a strongly worded request for an injunction that, among other things, calls for "a preliminary injunction to stop the theft of its trade secrets.” It also includes the prediction, "Apple is likely to succeed on the merits of its trade secret claims."
Even so, I think this motion and the OpenAI post may move everything along toward an out-of-court settlement, one that would end the case but likely do little to repair this now-in-tatters Apple-OpenAI relationship.
In the end, though, OpenAI's post appears to reveal a mortal Apple, one that, despite its size and power, is still run by fallible humans who are often adrift, as any of us would be, when colleagues leave, taking with them friendship and, more importantly, knowledge.
Apple is building complex products, and corporate memory is a critical part of the process (so much so that incoming CEO John Ternus apparently just rehired a retired Apple hardware executive).
Understanding when, how, and why decisions were made and how they could impact future projects is invaluable. Sometimes, only those who were in the room know the truth of the matter. Chang, it appears, was one of those people. He had the information, took it with him, and now, it seems, someone wanted to keep the lines of communication open, which is exactly what Apple doesn't want.