Other Phones to Consider
We test a ton of Android phones. We like the ones below, but you’ll be better off with one of the options above. If you haven’t yet done so, check out our Best Cheap Phones and Best Folding Phones guides for more.
Google Pixel 9 for $699: The Pixel 9 (9/10, WIRED Recommends) is a great smartphone, but between the Pixel 9a and the Pixel 9 Pro series, it struggles to stand out. It shares many features with its pricier siblings, but you can get a very similar experience with the Pixel 9a, all while saving hundreds of dollars. If you love the design and want the new smart software features, don’t let me stop you!
Samsung Galaxy S25 Edge for $1,100: Samsung’s latest innovation is to slim down the smartphone to an amazingly thin 5.8 mm. That’s not as impressive as phones from the past, but the Galaxy S25 Edge (6/10, WIRED Recommends) is still impressive when you hold this lightweight 6.7-inch phone in your hand. It maintains several features from the Galaxy S25 Ultra, except there’s no S Pen stylus, no telephoto cameras whatsoever, and battery life is not good at all for a phone of this size and price. I routinely had to keep it topped up throughout the day. But if you’re an average to light user, you may find it sufficient, and maybe you’ll be able to appreciate the thin and light size even more.
%2520and%2520(3a)%2520Pro%2520SOURCE%2520Julian%2520Chokkattu-rear%2520back%2520cameras.jpg)
Photograph: Julian Chokkattu
Nothing Phone (3a) for $379 and Phone (3a) Pro for $459: Here’s another well-rounded smartphone that doesn’t have an exorbitant price. The Nothing Phone (3a) and Phone (3a) Pro (8/10, WIRED Recommends) are sub-$500 Android phones, and they are both fantastic. They’re identical in every way except the cameras, where the Pro model has a slight advantage in zoom and low-light capabilities. I think the Phone (3a) looks nicer and is a better value. Run through the list of specs and you’ll be hard-pressed to find fault with the hardware. The display is wonderfully smooth with its 120-Hz refresh rate, and it’s no struggle to see in the sun. Performance is snappy, battery life is reliable, and the camera quality is decent for the money. There are some drawbacks—these phones are only IP64-rated, so don’t drop them in the pool. There’s no wireless charging, and connectivity isn’t seamless. While it’ll work best on T-Mobile, you’ll only get 4G on Verizon and AT&T until you ask the carriers to whitelist the device for 5G access. That process is sure to be frustrating.
Samsung Galaxy S24 FE for $650: Samsung’s Galaxy S24 FE is a better buy now that the flagship Galaxy S24 series is harder to find for sale. It’s a perfectly capable smartphone with a triple-camera array (including a 3X telephoto camera), and it delivers good performance. It has wireless charging, is IP68 water resistant, and has solid day-long battery life. It’s a shame the design’s a bit drab. Alternatively, you can try to find the flagship Galaxy S24 series on sale: the Galaxy S24, Galaxy S24+, and Galaxy S24 Ultra are still excellent devices, but make sure you don’t spend anywhere near their MSRP.
-Reviewer-Photo-SOURCE-Julian-Chokkattu.jpg)
Motorola Moto G Power 2025 for $300: The new Moto G Power (7/10, WIRED Recommends) isn’t as great as its predecessor, and that comes down to one reason: Due to a lesser chipset, there’s a slight hit in performance, and it feels a bit more sluggish to use. However, the performance is good enough that you won’t feel frustrated. Outside of this, it’s a remarkable $300 phone. The green faux leather back exudes luxury, and it’s nice and slim. The cameras are solid, and the 6.8-inch LCD screen has a 120-Hz screen refresh rate and gets plenty bright. Best of all, the company retained the wireless charging it debuted in last year’s model, making it one of the only sub-$300 phones with this convenience. Another area of improvement? It’s IP68/69-rated, so you won’t have to baby this phone near a pool; it can handle a dip just fine. Motorola has also extended software updates on the Moto G series, promising two Android OS upgrades, with the same 3 years of security updates. There’s a fair amount of bloatware, but you can remove most of these preinstalled apps.
-Reviewer-Photo-SOURCE-Julian-Chokkattu.jpg)
Asus ROG Phone 9 for $1,000: The ROG phone series is for serious gamers. There are two USB-C ports, so you can charge the phone comfortably even while using it in landscape mode for gaming. It has perks like a headphone jack and a bevy of accessories you can attach, like a cooler and a mobile controller, to enhance the gaming experience. Unfortunately, other aspects of this phone struggle to match the high price—the software can feel clunky, and the cameras are not at all what you’d expect at this price level. I also ran into a few annoying bugs while using the Phone 9 Pro.
Minimal Phone for $399: Having trouble curbing your screen time? Instead of going cold turkey with something like the Light Phone III, try the Minimal Phone (6/10, WIRED Review). This is an e-paper Android phone with a physical keyboard. The goal is to let you access the usual Android apps, but because the screen is ill-suited to videos and most social media, you’ll naturally be able to avoid those distractions. It’s successful in this task, but the constant screen ghosting and plasticky build dampen the experience.
Mobile Accessories You Might Need
-Reviewer-Photo-SOURCE-Julian-Chokkattu.jpg)
Photograph: Julian Chokkattu
We have case recommendations for a few popular devices, like Samsung’s Galaxy S25, Galaxy S24, and Galaxy S23, or Google’s Pixel 9 series. It’s smart to slap a case on these glass sandwiches and even a screen protector to keep the display free of scuffs and scratches. Here are a few other noteworthy accessories, including charging adapters, which many phones don’t include anymore. Read our Best USB-C Cables guide for other recommendations.
Anker 45-Watt Charger for $28: This tiny charger will be enough for most people to charge most smartphones. It’s compact, reliable, and cheap, plus the prongs fold up. More smartphones than ever can go up to 45-watt charging speeds, so take advantage with a 45-watt charger.
%2520Reviewer%2520Photo%2520SOURCE%2520Julian%2520Chokkattu.jpg)
Photograph: Julian Chokkattu
Counterpart Retractable The Charger for $44: It’s not the best value, but this design-forward charger has a retractable 4-foot cable that makes it a fantastic two-in-one—no need to pack a separate charger and cable! It outputs 35 watts, which is plenty to fast-charge most phones and tablets, and the prongs fold in for travel.
Peak Design Samsung and Pixel Everyday Case for $50: If you have a Samsung or Pixel phone and you frequently mount your phone to a bike or scooter, you owe it to yourself to snag this case and Peak Design’s bike mount. The case snaps perfectly into the mount, is dead simple to release, and has yet to fall off after years of riding. Peak Design also sells several other accessories you can attach to the back of these cases, bringing Android into Apple’s MagSafe ecosystem.
Nimble Champ Portable Charger 10,000 mAh for $60: This portable battery is small enough to leave in a bag but has enough power to fully recharge your phone once or twice. There’s a USB-C and USB-A port; it delivers 18 watts of power, so it can recharge your tablet or phone, and it’s housed in 73 percent post-consumer plastic with plastic-free packaging.
Nomad ChargeKey V2 for $25: When your phone dies, it’s almost always when you forget to bring a charger or battery pack. The ChargeKey is a nifty solution—it’s like clipping a tiny USB-C charging cable to your keychain. Just plug one end into your phone and the other into any kind of power source (a friend’s phone or a charging adapter if you manage to find one), and you can top up your phone. Native Union also has a similar item that’s cuter but nearly as capable.
Choose a Wireless Charger: Our guide to the best wireless chargers includes dozens of models in varying colors, shapes, and materials, and even some designed for specific phones. Not every Android phone supports wireless charging, but it’s a luxury you’ll want to take advantage of. Take a gander at our guide for our favorites.
Power up with unlimited access to WIRED. Get best-in-class reporting that’s too important to ignore for just $2.50 $1 per month for 1 year. Includes unlimited digital access and exclusive subscriber-only content. Subscribe Today.
Source link
#Android #Phones #Tested #Reviewed
![Anthropic’s Mythos AI Reportedly Hacked the NSA’s Most Sensitive Systems ‘in Hours’
When Anthropic first disclosed Mythos in April, it sent an anxious shockwave through much of the cybersecurity sector. The new AI model was allegedly so ruthlessly effective at finding and exploiting security vulnerabilities in existing software that the company said it was holding off on a public release and would only grant access to a small group of early testers, including the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). Another wave of fear reverberated this week after the NSA reportedly discovered multiple vulnerabilities within its own cybersecurity systems during its tests with Mythos. If that agency—which supposedly boasts the most impenetrable cyberdefenses in the world—can be hacked by Mythos, what hope does the rest of the world’s cybersecurity infrastructure have? This latest round of panic began with what seems to have been something of a game of telephone: Someone says one thing, which gets repeated by another, and another after that, and along that chain of communication, the original statement is distorted. Last week, The Economist reported that during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said that Mythos had broken into “almost all of [the NSA’s] classified systems, not in weeks, but in hours.” Warner said he’d received that information from the head of the NSA himself, General Joshua Rudd, who also leads the Pentagon’s Cyber Command division. On Monday, a coalition of intelligence agencies—including the NSA and its counterparts in Canada, the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand— issued an unusually public warning that the risk that AI now poses for cybersecurity warrants a “whole-of-society response.”
The Economist’s report was seen by some as evidence that the worst fears about Mythos were true, a reaction that was undoubtedly fueled also by the aura of power and mystery that has coalesced around the model in recent months. That aura has arguably been a boon for Anthropic, which recently usurped OpenAI as the most valuable startup in the world and is preparing for what’s expected to be a historic IPO.
But it’s also been a contributing factor in its latest skirmish with the Trump administration, which ordered the company earlier this month to restrict access for all foreign nationals to Fable 5, a “Mythos-class” model that had recently been made publicly available and which was built with safeguards that to some users were annoyingly stringent. Citing national security concerns, the administration invoked an obscure piece of export control legislation, a move that, according to some legal experts, is spurious. Many cybersecurity experts, meanwhile, argued that the ban would hamstring U.S. cybersecurity defenses and give adversaries like China the upper hand. That argument was seemingly vindicated by a Tuesday report from the New York Times which said that Trump’s ban—which also targeted another model called Mythos 5, which had only been made available to a small group of organizations—had put the kibosh on the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos, and that the administration was now working with Anthropic to reinstate the agency’s access for limited purposes related to national security. The NSA did not immediately respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment.
That same report from the Times also clarified that the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos were less apocalyptic than online rumors might suggest. According to federal officials cited in the report, the tests were carried out in a digital environment so robustly controlled that it’s very unlikely any hacker or foreign intelligence agency could replicate them. The officials also told the Times that even though Mythos was able to identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities, it didn’t actually exploit them. The author of the report in The Economist—the one that had been the initial cause of all the worry—has also admitted that his portrayal of the NSA’s tests with Mythos had been misleading. The tests “surely [involved] using Mythos alongside other tools under very particular conditions,” he wrote in a X post on Sunday. “I quoted [Senator Warner] to give a sense of Mythos’ potency. But it was a mistake not to have added caveats.” #Anthropics #Mythos #Reportedly #Hacked #NSAs #Sensitive #Systems #HoursAI,Anthropic,Mythos,NSA,Trump,White House](https://i1.wp.com/gizmodo.com/app/uploads/2026/06/GeneralJoshuaRudd-1280x853.jpg?ssl=1 "Anthropic’s Mythos AI Reportedly Hacked the NSA’s Most Sensitive Systems ‘in Hours’
When Anthropic first disclosed Mythos in April, it sent an anxious shockwave through much of the cybersecurity sector. The new AI model was allegedly so ruthlessly effective at finding and exploiting security vulnerabilities in existing software that the company said it was holding off on a public release and would only grant access to a small group of early testers, including the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). Another wave of fear reverberated this week after the NSA reportedly discovered multiple vulnerabilities within its own cybersecurity systems during its tests with Mythos. If that agency—which supposedly boasts the most impenetrable cyberdefenses in the world—can be hacked by Mythos, what hope does the rest of the world’s cybersecurity infrastructure have? This latest round of panic began with what seems to have been something of a game of telephone: Someone says one thing, which gets repeated by another, and another after that, and along that chain of communication, the original statement is distorted. Last week, The Economist reported that during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said that Mythos had broken into “almost all of [the NSA’s] classified systems, not in weeks, but in hours.” Warner said he’d received that information from the head of the NSA himself, General Joshua Rudd, who also leads the Pentagon’s Cyber Command division. On Monday, a coalition of intelligence agencies—including the NSA and its counterparts in Canada, the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand— issued an unusually public warning that the risk that AI now poses for cybersecurity warrants a “whole-of-society response.”
The Economist’s report was seen by some as evidence that the worst fears about Mythos were true, a reaction that was undoubtedly fueled also by the aura of power and mystery that has coalesced around the model in recent months. That aura has arguably been a boon for Anthropic, which recently usurped OpenAI as the most valuable startup in the world and is preparing for what’s expected to be a historic IPO.
But it’s also been a contributing factor in its latest skirmish with the Trump administration, which ordered the company earlier this month to restrict access for all foreign nationals to Fable 5, a “Mythos-class” model that had recently been made publicly available and which was built with safeguards that to some users were annoyingly stringent. Citing national security concerns, the administration invoked an obscure piece of export control legislation, a move that, according to some legal experts, is spurious. Many cybersecurity experts, meanwhile, argued that the ban would hamstring U.S. cybersecurity defenses and give adversaries like China the upper hand. That argument was seemingly vindicated by a Tuesday report from the New York Times which said that Trump’s ban—which also targeted another model called Mythos 5, which had only been made available to a small group of organizations—had put the kibosh on the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos, and that the administration was now working with Anthropic to reinstate the agency’s access for limited purposes related to national security. The NSA did not immediately respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment.
That same report from the Times also clarified that the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos were less apocalyptic than online rumors might suggest. According to federal officials cited in the report, the tests were carried out in a digital environment so robustly controlled that it’s very unlikely any hacker or foreign intelligence agency could replicate them. The officials also told the Times that even though Mythos was able to identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities, it didn’t actually exploit them. The author of the report in The Economist—the one that had been the initial cause of all the worry—has also admitted that his portrayal of the NSA’s tests with Mythos had been misleading. The tests “surely [involved] using Mythos alongside other tools under very particular conditions,” he wrote in a X post on Sunday. “I quoted [Senator Warner] to give a sense of Mythos’ potency. But it was a mistake not to have added caveats.” #Anthropics #Mythos #Reportedly #Hacked #NSAs #Sensitive #Systems #HoursAI,Anthropic,Mythos,NSA,Trump,White House")
![Anthropic’s Mythos AI Reportedly Hacked the NSA’s Most Sensitive Systems ‘in Hours’
When Anthropic first disclosed Mythos in April, it sent an anxious shockwave through much of the cybersecurity sector. The new AI model was allegedly so ruthlessly effective at finding and exploiting security vulnerabilities in existing software that the company said it was holding off on a public release and would only grant access to a small group of early testers, including the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). Another wave of fear reverberated this week after the NSA reportedly discovered multiple vulnerabilities within its own cybersecurity systems during its tests with Mythos. If that agency—which supposedly boasts the most impenetrable cyberdefenses in the world—can be hacked by Mythos, what hope does the rest of the world’s cybersecurity infrastructure have? This latest round of panic began with what seems to have been something of a game of telephone: Someone says one thing, which gets repeated by another, and another after that, and along that chain of communication, the original statement is distorted. Last week, The Economist reported that during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said that Mythos had broken into “almost all of [the NSA’s] classified systems, not in weeks, but in hours.” Warner said he’d received that information from the head of the NSA himself, General Joshua Rudd, who also leads the Pentagon’s Cyber Command division. On Monday, a coalition of intelligence agencies—including the NSA and its counterparts in Canada, the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand— issued an unusually public warning that the risk that AI now poses for cybersecurity warrants a “whole-of-society response.”
The Economist’s report was seen by some as evidence that the worst fears about Mythos were true, a reaction that was undoubtedly fueled also by the aura of power and mystery that has coalesced around the model in recent months. That aura has arguably been a boon for Anthropic, which recently usurped OpenAI as the most valuable startup in the world and is preparing for what’s expected to be a historic IPO.
But it’s also been a contributing factor in its latest skirmish with the Trump administration, which ordered the company earlier this month to restrict access for all foreign nationals to Fable 5, a “Mythos-class” model that had recently been made publicly available and which was built with safeguards that to some users were annoyingly stringent. Citing national security concerns, the administration invoked an obscure piece of export control legislation, a move that, according to some legal experts, is spurious. Many cybersecurity experts, meanwhile, argued that the ban would hamstring U.S. cybersecurity defenses and give adversaries like China the upper hand. That argument was seemingly vindicated by a Tuesday report from the New York Times which said that Trump’s ban—which also targeted another model called Mythos 5, which had only been made available to a small group of organizations—had put the kibosh on the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos, and that the administration was now working with Anthropic to reinstate the agency’s access for limited purposes related to national security. The NSA did not immediately respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment.
That same report from the Times also clarified that the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos were less apocalyptic than online rumors might suggest. According to federal officials cited in the report, the tests were carried out in a digital environment so robustly controlled that it’s very unlikely any hacker or foreign intelligence agency could replicate them. The officials also told the Times that even though Mythos was able to identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities, it didn’t actually exploit them. The author of the report in The Economist—the one that had been the initial cause of all the worry—has also admitted that his portrayal of the NSA’s tests with Mythos had been misleading. The tests “surely [involved] using Mythos alongside other tools under very particular conditions,” he wrote in a X post on Sunday. “I quoted [Senator Warner] to give a sense of Mythos’ potency. But it was a mistake not to have added caveats.” #Anthropics #Mythos #Reportedly #Hacked #NSAs #Sensitive #Systems #HoursAI,Anthropic,Mythos,NSA,Trump,White House](https://gizmodo.com/app/uploads/2026/06/GeneralJoshuaRudd-1280x853.jpg "Anthropic’s Mythos AI Reportedly Hacked the NSA’s Most Sensitive Systems ‘in Hours’
When Anthropic first disclosed Mythos in April, it sent an anxious shockwave through much of the cybersecurity sector. The new AI model was allegedly so ruthlessly effective at finding and exploiting security vulnerabilities in existing software that the company said it was holding off on a public release and would only grant access to a small group of early testers, including the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). Another wave of fear reverberated this week after the NSA reportedly discovered multiple vulnerabilities within its own cybersecurity systems during its tests with Mythos. If that agency—which supposedly boasts the most impenetrable cyberdefenses in the world—can be hacked by Mythos, what hope does the rest of the world’s cybersecurity infrastructure have? This latest round of panic began with what seems to have been something of a game of telephone: Someone says one thing, which gets repeated by another, and another after that, and along that chain of communication, the original statement is distorted. Last week, The Economist reported that during a June 11 hearing before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia said that Mythos had broken into “almost all of [the NSA’s] classified systems, not in weeks, but in hours.” Warner said he’d received that information from the head of the NSA himself, General Joshua Rudd, who also leads the Pentagon’s Cyber Command division. On Monday, a coalition of intelligence agencies—including the NSA and its counterparts in Canada, the U.K., Australia, and New Zealand— issued an unusually public warning that the risk that AI now poses for cybersecurity warrants a “whole-of-society response.”
The Economist’s report was seen by some as evidence that the worst fears about Mythos were true, a reaction that was undoubtedly fueled also by the aura of power and mystery that has coalesced around the model in recent months. That aura has arguably been a boon for Anthropic, which recently usurped OpenAI as the most valuable startup in the world and is preparing for what’s expected to be a historic IPO.
But it’s also been a contributing factor in its latest skirmish with the Trump administration, which ordered the company earlier this month to restrict access for all foreign nationals to Fable 5, a “Mythos-class” model that had recently been made publicly available and which was built with safeguards that to some users were annoyingly stringent. Citing national security concerns, the administration invoked an obscure piece of export control legislation, a move that, according to some legal experts, is spurious. Many cybersecurity experts, meanwhile, argued that the ban would hamstring U.S. cybersecurity defenses and give adversaries like China the upper hand. That argument was seemingly vindicated by a Tuesday report from the New York Times which said that Trump’s ban—which also targeted another model called Mythos 5, which had only been made available to a small group of organizations—had put the kibosh on the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos, and that the administration was now working with Anthropic to reinstate the agency’s access for limited purposes related to national security. The NSA did not immediately respond to Gizmodo’s request for comment.
That same report from the Times also clarified that the NSA’s internal tests with Mythos were less apocalyptic than online rumors might suggest. According to federal officials cited in the report, the tests were carried out in a digital environment so robustly controlled that it’s very unlikely any hacker or foreign intelligence agency could replicate them. The officials also told the Times that even though Mythos was able to identify cybersecurity vulnerabilities, it didn’t actually exploit them. The author of the report in The Economist—the one that had been the initial cause of all the worry—has also admitted that his portrayal of the NSA’s tests with Mythos had been misleading. The tests “surely [involved] using Mythos alongside other tools under very particular conditions,” he wrote in a X post on Sunday. “I quoted [Senator Warner] to give a sense of Mythos’ potency. But it was a mistake not to have added caveats.” #Anthropics #Mythos #Reportedly #Hacked #NSAs #Sensitive #Systems #HoursAI,Anthropic,Mythos,NSA,Trump,White House")
Post Comment