New Nothing Earbuds: Competing with Giants through ChatGPT Integration and Advanced Features

Both earbuds offer noise cancellation and hi-res audio.
London-based mobile company Nothing released new wireless earbuds: Nothing Ear and Nothing Ear (a).
New feature: pinch-to-speak access to ChatGPT, an advanced AI service for more complex tasks.
Nothing Ear (a) designed for daily use, available in vibrant yellow and offers advanced adaptive ANC.
Nothing Ear lasts 8.5 hours on a single charge and up to 40.5 hours with charging case.
Nothing Ear targets audiophiles with LHDC and LDAC Bluetooth codecs, delivering up to 24-bit/192kHz hi-res audio.
New Nothing Earbuds: Competing with Giants through ChatGPT Integration and Advanced Features

In the world of technology, London-based mobile company Nothing continues to make waves with its latest releases: the Nothing Ear and Nothing Ear (a). These wireless earbuds aim to compete with industry giants like Apple, Google, and Amazon. Let's delve into what sets these new earbuds apart from their competitors.

Firstly, both the Nothing Ear and Nothing Ear (a) offer noise cancellation and hi-res audio. However, they also provide a unique feature: pinch-to-speak access to ChatGPT, an advanced AI service that can handle more sophisticated tasks than Siri, Google Assistant, or Alexa.

ChatGPT integration is a full-frontal assault on the dominant voice assistants in the smartphone market. It offers more complex tasks and turn-based conversations. This feature requires a smartphone running Nothing OS and could usher in a new era of convenience.

Moving on to specifications, the Nothing Ear is targeted at audiophiles with its support for both LHDC and LDAC Bluetooth codecs. These can offer up to 24-bit/96kHz (LDAC) or 24-bit/192kHz (LHDC) hi-res audio if your Bluetooth connection is strong enough and if your phone supports these codecs.

The Nothing Ear comes with a new set of 11mm drivers and an improved acoustic design, delivering clearer sound than its predecessor. It also boasts advanced equalizer settings and personalized listening profiles within the Nothing X app. The earbuds offer active noise cancellation (ANC) that adapts to your surroundings, canceling almost twice as much noise as the Ear's predecessors.

The Nothing Ear lasts for 8.5 hours on a single charge with ANC turned off and up to 40.5 hours with the charging case, which supports fast wireless charging. Additional improvements include low-latency mode for gamers and Bluetooth Multipoint to connect to two devices simultaneously.

The Nothing Ear (a) is designed for those seeking a good set of daily-wear wireless earbuds. It comes in vibrant yellow, apart from the usual white and black options. The earbuds support hi-res audio via the LDAC codec and offer advanced adaptive ANC like its pricier sibling.

The Nothing Ear (a) lasts for 9.5 hours on a single charge with ANC turned off and up to 42.5 hours with the charging case, which only offers wired charging.

Both models are available for preorder starting April 18 and will be generally available on April 22.


Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image

Confidence

100%

No Doubts Found At Time Of Publication

Sources

97%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

ChatGPT is a squeeze away with Nothing’s upgraded earbuds

TechCrunch Brian Heater Thursday, 18 April 2024 10:45
  • Unique Points
    • Nothing integrated ChatGPT into their new earbuds for question-answering functionality
    • Users can access ChatGPT with a pinch of the headphones' stem on a connected handset
    • ChatGPT integration will be available exclusively for both new earbuds models
  • Accuracy
    No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
  • Deception (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Fallacies (85%)
    The article contains a few informal fallacies and an example of inflammatory rhetoric. It also uses a somewhat dichotomous depiction.
    • . . . the London-based mobile company seems to have skipped a step by integrating the tech into their new earbuds.
    • As the “AI smartphones” of the world are battling with devices like Humane’s Ai Pin and the Rabbit R1 for mindshare,
    • The Ear (a) also brings noise-canceling improvements, but what Nothing really seems to be pushing is the bright yellow colorway.
  • Bias (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication
  • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
    None Found At Time Of Publication

91%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Nothing’s new earbuds prove that it can (mostly) hang with the heavyweights

The Verge Chris Welch Thursday, 18 April 2024 10:45
  • Unique Points
    • Nothing has introduced two new earbuds, the Nothing Ear and Nothing Ear (a), priced at $149 and $99 respectively.
    • The flagship Nothing Ear buds have improved sound profile, extended battery life by 25%, and a new Bass Enhance setting.
    • The Nothing Ear (a) is the company’s first product available in a color other than black or white.
  • Accuracy
    No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
  • Deception (70%)
    The article contains editorializing and selective reporting. The author states 'But from an audio quality perspective, they're going toe to toe with earbuds from companies with far more resources.' This is a comparison between Nothing's earbuds and those of larger companies, implying that Nothing's earbuds are just as good despite the smaller company having fewer resources. However, no evidence or data is provided to support this claim. Additionally, the author only mentions improvements in battery life and noise cancellation for the new earbud models but fails to mention any potential issues or drawbacks. This selective reporting presents a biased view of the products.
    • However, no evidence or data is provided to support this claim.
    • But from an audio quality perspective, they're going toe to toe with earbuds from companies with far more resources.
  • Fallacies (90%)
    The author makes several comparisons between the new Nothing earbuds and previous models, implying that there are not significant differences between them. This is an example of the Red Herring fallacy as it diverts attention away from the main issue by focusing on insignificant details. The author also uses inflammatory language when describing the design of the earbuds as 'oddly named' and 'adorable Playdate'. This is an example of Ad Hominem fallacy as it attacks the name or character of someone rather than addressing the argument itself.
    • And guess what? Yep, they still look pretty much exactly the same.
    • But it's not easy to tell the $149 Nothing Ear (left) apart from the $99 Ear (a).
  • Bias (95%)
    The author expresses a neutral tone towards the product and provides an objective analysis of its features and improvements. However, there is a slight bias towards the affordability of the earbuds and their value for money.
    • And you’re still getting multipoint, Fast Pair (for Android), Microsoft Swift Pair, and a low-latency gaming mode in the cheaper buds[
      • Battery life has also been totally sufficient, lasting for over five hours on both buds with ANC enabled or well over eight hours if you can go without it[
        • But in terms of feel, I prefer the more compact Ear (a) case[
          • So far, I’ve been very satisfied by how the Nothing Ears sound. The Ear 2 were already on the mark, so these aren’t too different[
            • ]the more affordable Nothing Ear (a)[
            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication

            85%

            The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
            (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

            A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

            Nothing’s new earbuds upstage Apple, Google, and Amazon by embedding ChatGPT

            Entertainment Variety Tv Site: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/tv-site/ Simon Cohen Thursday, 18 April 2024 18:10
            • Unique Points
              • Nothing has released two new sets of wireless earbuds, the Nothing Ear and Nothing Ear (a), which aim to compete with Apple’s AirPods Pro.
              • A unique feature of the earbuds is their pinch-to-speak access to ChatGPT, a popular AI service that can handle more sophisticated tasks than Siri, Google Assistant, and Alexa.
            • Accuracy
              No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
            • Deception (30%)
              The article does not disclose any sources and contains some editorializing. However, it does make a few deceptive omissions.
              • Niche smartphone company Nothing has two new sets of wireless earbuds that go after Apple’s AirPods Pro in more ways than one.
            • Fallacies (95%)
              The author makes several statements in the article that are not fallacious. However, there is one instance of an appeal to authority when the author states 'That's a full-frontal assault on the three major voice assistants that currently dominate on smartphones: Siri, Google Assistant, and Alexa.' This statement implies that ChatGPT is superior to these voice assistants based on its ability to offer more sophisticated tasks and turn-based conversations. While this may be true, it does not provide any evidence or reasoning to support this claim. Therefore, I am deducting 5 points from the score.
              • That's a full-frontal assault on the three major voice assistants that currently dominate on smartphones: Siri, Google Assistant, and Alexa.
            • Bias (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication

            95%

            The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
            (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

            A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

            Nothing’s New Ear and Ear (a) Are Great Affordable Earbuds

            Wired Magazine Condé Nast Thursday, 18 April 2024 18:11
            • Unique Points
              • Nothing's latest earbuds, the Nothing Ear and Nothing Ear (a), are mature products with competitive sound, pricing, and user experience.
              • The biggest physical difference between the two models is the size of the earbuds. The pricier model includes wireless charging support in its carrying case.
              • Both wireless earbuds come with three sizes of ear tips, but the Ear (a) has a longer battery life and uses traditional polymers for its drivers instead of ceramic like the Ear.
              • The Nothing Ear (a) is smaller and less feature-rich than the pricier model, but it comes with fun bright yellow accents on the case and headphones.
              • The earbuds fit comfortably in most ears, with the Ear (a) being a better choice for those seeking long-term comfort due to its smaller size.
            • Accuracy
              No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
            • Deception (80%)
              The article contains editorializing and selective reporting. The author expresses their opinion that the earbuds are 'mature products' and 'great wireless earbuds to consider.' They also state that the earbuds will 'more than satisfy just about anyone,' implying that they believe these statements to be facts. However, these are subjective opinions and not facts. Additionally, the author selectively reports on certain features of the earbuds while omitting others, such as the lack of water resistance in both models and the absence of active noise canceling in the Nothing Ear (a) when using a wired connection.
              • They work well and look great; what more can you ask for?
              • These are some great wireless earbuds to consider if you’re hunting for a pair under $150.
            • Fallacies (95%)
              The author makes several comparisons between the Nothing Ear and Nothing Ear (a), implying that they are similar products. This is an example of Equivocation fallacy as the author fails to clarify that while they may be similar in some ways, they are not exactly the same product. The author also uses hyperbole when stating 'what more can you ask for?' which is an example of Exaggeration fallacy.
              • They'll more than satisfy just about anyone.
              • What's the Difference? The Nothing Ear costs $150 and the Nothing Ear (a) is $100...The biggest physical difference between the Nothing Ear and the Nothing Ear (a) is the size of the earbuds, and the pricier model includes wireless charging support in its carrying case...Both wireless earbuds come with three sizes of ear tips, with the medium installed as standard.
              • They fit me just fine for my extremely average ear size, with the Ear feeling a bit snugger and probably less suited for anyone with smaller ears. The Ear (a) reached Goldilocks' porridge territory in size, stability, and long-term comfort...I don't dislike wearing the larger, more feature-rich Ear, but if I had to choose based on comfort alone, the Ear (a) would get my money.
              • Inside the Ear (a) you get a less powerful chipset, but the earbuds still boast the same level of noise canceling, the same driver, and the same number of microphones for better calls as the Ear...The weaker chipset does have one benefit – longer battery life. The Ear (a) can hit up to 5.5 hours with active noise canceling turned on, whereas the pricier Ear lasts 5.2 hours.
              • Nothing Ear Photograph: Parker Hall
              • Nothing Ear (a) Photograph: Parker Hall
            • Bias (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication

            93%

            The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
            (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

            A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

            Nothing Ear (a) review: cheaper, smaller, longer-lasting earbuds

            theguardian.com Article URL: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/13/ pakistan-·coalition-·agrees-to-form-government Samuel Gibbs Thursday, 18 April 2024 10:45
            • Unique Points
              • They offer great sound and noise cancelling for the price.
              • The earbuds have a solid battery life of 5-6 hours with ANC, and an additional 3 charges in the case.
              • They are available in three colors and ship from April 22nd.
            • Accuracy
              No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
            • Deception (80%)
              The article contains editorializing and selective reporting. The author states 'They manage to stand out from the crowd despite their AirPod-like shape.' and 'Great sound for the price' which are opinions. The author also only reports details that support their position of the earbuds being great value, such as their low price and good sound quality, while not mentioning any potential drawbacks or negative aspects. There is no deception regarding facts or statements made by anyone other than the author.
              • Great sound for the price
              • They manage to stand out from the crowd despite their AirPod-like shape.
            • Fallacies (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Bias (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication
            • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
              None Found At Time Of Publication