Gmail lets you unsubscribe from spam emails with a single tap
If you’re seeking information on how to stop receiving emails in Gmail, it’s likely that you’re bothered by persistent messages from various companies. It’s possible that you unintentionally subscribed to newsletters during the sign-up process for a service or product purchase. Perhaps you overlooked deselecting the marketing preferences option, granting permission for the sender to inundate you with promotional content.
No need to fret—Gmail offers a remarkably swift method to unsubscribe from emails with just a single click or tap. This is a fundamental skill to acquire when familiarizing yourself with Gmail. Below, you’ll find instructions on unsubscribing from emails in Gmail, covering both the desktop browser site and the smartphone app.
How to unsubscribe from emails in Gmail
We’ve completed the following steps on an iPhone 15 Pro using the Gmail iOS app, although the steps are exactly the same if using the Android app or the desktop website.
1. Open an email
In the Gmail app, open an email you want to unsubscribe from.
2. Tap the Unsubscribe button
Now simply tap the unsubscribe button. Whatever platform you’re on, it’ll be next to the sender’s contact information at the top of the email. Note that not all emails can be unsubscribed from — only the ones Gmail deems to be from mailing lists.
This portable printer delivers great photo quality and is friendly on the pocketbook.
Canon Pixma TR150 review
The Canon Pixma TR150 is a compact, portable inkjet printer offering basic features and solid performance. The TR150 is a single function printer; it does not copy or scan. What it does offer, however, is a compact size that can be carried in a standard backpack.
The printer alone uses a standard wall outlet. For off-the-grid printing, you can purchase the bundle with printer and mobile battery for under $250. The battery should last up to 330 sheets on a full charge.
Canon Pixma TR150 review: Design
The TR150 is small, measuring 12.7 x 7.3 x 2.6 inches, when closed for travel. The lid lifts up to serve as a 50-sheet input paper tray, dropping a front flap to reveal the output slot. The vertical paper tray increases the depth to 12.1 inches, and the height to 9.7 inches.
At 4.5 pounds, the printer is rather lightweight for a portable model. Attaching the optional battery to the back of the unit increases the weight to 5.1 pounds. By comparison, the HP OfficeJet 250 weighs 6.7 pounds, with battery.
Opening the lid reveals the control panel on the top of the body. There is a four-way control, a small 1.4-inch monochrome OLED display, and a wireless connectivity button.
There are no memory card slots. The USB port is on the right panel, near the back, next to the power port. It offers Wi-Fi and Wi-Fi Direct support, and comes with a USB-C cable. In addition to AirPrint, Google Cloud Print, and Mopria support, the TR150 also offers support for voice commands via Amazon Alexa and Google Assistant, and supports the pairing of devices using IFTTT (If This Then That).
Canon Pixma TR150 review: Print speed
The Pixma TR150 performed well in our testing, printing a five-page text document in 40.5 seconds. or 7.4 pages per minute (ppm). The average for portable printers is 6.9 ppm. By contrast, our top-ranked portable printer, the HP OfficeJet 250, was faster, printing text at 9 ppm.
The TR150 was quick to print text from an iPhone 7, turning in the fastest times we’ve recorded on this test. The TR150 printed a single page in just 10.3 seconds, and a five-page document in 38.7 seconds, or 7.8 ppm. Other portable models averaged 14.6 seconds on a single page, and 1 minute and 3 seconds (or, 4.8 ppm) on the five-page document. By comparison, the HP Tango X printed a page of text in 11.3 seconds. Several other models were significantly slower to print the five-page text document, such as the Epson WorkForce EC-C110, at a much slower 54.3 seconds, or 5.5 ppm.
The TR150 was slightly faster than the average on mixed text and color graphics. It printed our six-page PDF in 2 minutes and 22 seconds, or 2.5 ppm. That’s just a hair faster than the category average (2.4 ppm), but lagged behind the HP OfficeJet 250, which printed the same document in just under 2 minutes, at 3.1 ppm.
Photo printing speed also was faster than the category average. From a Windows PC, the TR150 made a 4-by-6-inch glossy photo print at default settings in 1 minute and 4.8 seconds, versus the average of 1 minute and 11 seconds. Printing at high resolution, the TR150 made the same glossy print in 1 minute and 45 seconds, which was significantly faster than the category average of 2 minutes and 6 seconds. The HP OfficeJet 250, however, was twice as fast at default and high-resolution settings, making 4-by-6-inch glossy prints in 37.6 and 49.5 seconds, respectively.
Printing from an iPhone 7, the TR150 printed at comparable speed to printing from a PC, making a 4-by-6-inch glossy at default settings in 1 minute and 5 seconds. The Canon iOS app did not offer a high-resolution setting.
Canon Pixma TR150 review: Print quality
Text printed a little on the light side, rather than in a rich black. Edges of letterforms looked a little rough, and not razor sharp. Color graphics printed on plain paper looked a little washed-out, and banding was visible. The graphics also lacked the sharper details, stronger contrast and richer color saturation of better-looking prints, such as from the HP OfficeJet 250. Pixels were more visible in the TR150’s graphics prints.
Glossy photo prints, however, were top-notch. Details looked very sharp and color saturation was very pleasing. In particular, the colors in our landscape photo looked very natural. By comparison, the same print made by the HP OfficeJet 250 looked a little unnatural due to hyped-up yellow shades.
Canon Pixma TR150 review: Ink cost and yield
The printer takes two ink cartridges: A dye-based ink cartridge with three colors (cyan, magenta, yellow), plus black. The second cartridge holds a pigment-based black ink.
The Pixma TR150 offers low ink costs for a portable printer. At 7.5 cents per text page, it is well below the 8.9 cents category average. By contrast, the HP OfficeJet 250 offers an estimated cost of 9 cents per text page.
The same is true for color pages: At 14.8 cents, the TR150 offers the lowest color page cost of the portable printers we’ve tested. Buying an ink cartridge bundle should lower that cost to roughly 12.7 cents. By comparison, the HP OfficeJet 250 has the highest estimated color page ink cost we’ve seen, at 23 cents, and only lowers that cost per page to 17.3 cents when using high-yield cartridges (which are not available for the TR150).
Canon Pixma TR150 review: Setup and software
Setting up the TR150 was simple. You only need to remove a couple pieces of packaging tape. You lift the lid to reveal the cartridge bay, and first install the print head, which you insert in a similar way to the two ink cartridges, which follow. You download the software online, or insert the installation disc in your PC. I used my iPhone to capture the included QR code in order to launch the online setup instructions. After the printer performs a print head alignment, and you print a test page, you’re ready to go.
To ease the wireless setup, the TR150 has a dedicated wireless connect button on its control panel. Following menu instructions on the 1.4-inch OLED screen, I used the WPS connect method; pressing the WPS button on my wireless router put the TR150 on my network.
Alternatively, you can use Wi-Fi Direct and setup the TR150 as the wireless network connection on your mobile device. I had trouble with my first attempts to do this with my iPhone 7; one possible culprit is that my home wireless network was set to “auto join” and thus interfering with the printer connection. After turning off “auto join”, I connected successfully and printed to the TR150 over Wi-Fi Direct.
The TR150 starts up quickly, displaying its home screen menu in just 4.2 seconds.
Canon Pixma TR150 review: Verdict
The Canon Pixma TR150 performed solidly across our tests. Text printing, in particular, was fast—both from a PC and an iPhone. Color graphics and photo print speeds were faster than the average, and a quick startup time under 5 seconds will get you working quickly. Low ink costs make this portable Pixma very attractive to the pocketbook, and the high quality of the photo prints is tough to match. Text and color graphics quality on plain paper, however, left a little bit to be desired.
By comparison, the top-ranked HP OfficeJet 250 is faster, makes copies and scans, and offers superior plain-paper print quality—but it’s also larger and much more expensive.
Apple’s first foldable could launch in 2027 according to supply chain
An iPhone Flip or foldable iPad could be with us as soon as 2027. Rumors about the possibility of an Apple foldable have been circulating for a while now, but new information might give us our most solid release prediction yet.
According to a post on X from @Tech_Reve, one source has confirmed that the first Apple foldable could be released in 2027. They also claim that panels for the rumored foldable iPad mini are set to be mass-produced in 2026, which means a possible release for the product in 2026, although 2027 seems more likely. This new information matches the information we have heard from other sources about this date.
Apple was originally rumored to be holding off on creating any form of foldable iPad until they had finished switching over to OLED screens. This led to many sources stating that we would not see any foldable iPad for at least a few years. Meanwhile, there were rumors that we would see a foldable phone in 2025 (via @mingchikuo) that could be a mix of both an iPad and an iPhone, but that seems unlikely now.
However, according to Tech_Reve, this 2027 schedule could be moved up due to several factors. The main reason is the recent drop is Apple’s revenue projections, which were lower than Wall Street’s forecasts (via Barrons). Apple also experienced a revenue drop in China, where it faces serious competition from Huawei. As such, the release of a foldable model could be the push that Apple needs to increase sales again.
We have also had some other information regarding how the phone would work. Supposedly Apple would use an 8-inch screen, similar in size to the 8.3-inch iPad mini, but larger than the 7.6-inch inner display of the Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 5, which offers a 7.6-inch display when it’s opened up. There are also rumors about a feature that will allow the phone to close slightly if it is dropped, thus protecting the inner screen.
Apple’s plans to launch a foldable phone don’t appear to be fully solid yet, and we don’t have much idea of what such a device would actually look like. There’s even a recently discovered patent that suggests Apple is considering an extendable display device instead of a foldable one. However, the existence of a patent does not mean a device using the idea will ever be made.
However, at the moment all we know about Apple’s overall plan for a foldable phone is based on rumors. We’ve seen leaks of how it might be designed and heard reports of a partnership with Samsung for the manufacturing of flexible screens. But we won’t know anything for certain until Apple formally announces such a device, and this new rumor makes it seem like it’s at least two years away in the best-case scenario.
AdSense is updating its revenue share-structure and moving to per-impression payments for publishers.
Updates to how publishers monetize with AdSense
Two decades ago, Google AdSense was created with the goal of assisting publishers of all scales in earning revenue from their websites. Our user-friendly ad network simplified the realm of digital advertising by facilitating the connection between publishers and advertisers worldwide, enabling them to sell their advertising space. Presently, we distribute billions of dollars each year to our ad network’s publishing partners. This empowers content creators to focus more on their core strengths, which is crafting exceptional content.
As the advertising industry has progressed, so too have the monetization options available to publishers. Nowadays, website owners employ a combination of direct sales, ad networks, and sell-side platforms to market their ad space, often utilizing multiple technologies simultaneously.
Hence, we’re introducing two modifications: revising AdSense’s revenue-sharing model and transitioning to a payment model based on impressions. These adjustments will offer publishers a consistent means of comparing the diverse fees associated with the technologies they utilize for monetization. Additionally, they will enhance transparency in the media-buying process.
Our testing indicates that these updates are unlikely to affect publishers’ earnings.
Updating the AdSense revenue share structure
AdSense has maintained transparency regarding its service fee, which aligns with industry standards. When content creators opt for AdSense to monetize their content, they retain 68% of the generated revenue.
Previously, AdSense processed fees in a single transaction. Now, they have divided the revenue sharing into distinct rates for the buy-side and sell-side. For displaying ads with AdSense for content, publishers will receive 80% of the revenue after the advertiser platform, be it Google’s buy-side or third-party platforms, deducts its fee.
For instance, if Google Ads buys display ads on AdSense, Google Ads will typically retain around 15% of the advertiser’s spending. There may be variations because Google Ads charges based on user actions like clicks or conversions, rather than a fixed per-impression fee. In the end, publishers will continue to receive approximately 68% of the revenue.
When advertisers utilize a third-party platform to purchase display ads on AdSense, publishers will keep 80% of the revenue after the third-party platform subtracts its fee. It’s important to note that Google has no control over, nor insight into, the fees these third-party platforms charge advertisers or their fee calculation methods.
Moving to per-impression payments for publishers
In addition to revising our revenue-sharing structure, AdSense is set to shift from primarily compensating publishers based on clicks to align with the industry standard of paying per ad impression. This modification aims to create a consistent payment method for publishers across Google’s offerings and third-party platforms, facilitating comparisons with other tech providers they utilize.
It’s essential to emphasize that this adjustment won’t impact the type or quantity of ads that publishers can display on their websites. Publishers within our ad network must adhere to our AdSense policies and the Better Ads Standards, which prohibit practices such as pop-ups or intrusive ads that dominate the screen.
We anticipate these changes to be implemented early next year, and they won’t require any action on the part of publishers.
Advertising technology plays a crucial role in supporting the diverse and creative content we all enjoy online. That’s why we have dedicated years to enhancing AdSense, making it easier for publishers of all sizes to generate revenue and expand. As the internet continues to evolve, our commitment remains firm in contributing to the open web and maintaining access to content, which is sustained by advertising, all while simplifying and offering transparency throughout the process.
According to Dan Taylor, Vice President of Global Ads, these alterations will establish a uniform method for publishers to evaluate varying charges associated with the diverse technologies they employ for revenue generation.
Google Adsense pay-per-click to pay-per-impression in 2024
Google is implementing two important modifications to its digital advertising service, AdSense, set to become effective early next year. According to Dan Taylor, Vice President, Global Ads, in a recent blog post, these alterations aim to establish a consistent method for publishers to compare the various fees associated with the technologies they use for monetization. Additionally, they seek to enhance transparency in the media-buying process.
Nonetheless, Google does not anticipate that publishers will notice a change in their earnings due to these updates.
AdSense will soon transition from its primary payment method of per-click to the industry-standard practice of per-impression payment. This transition is expected to create a more uniform way of compensating publishers for their ad space across Google’s products and third-party platforms, facilitating comparisons with other technology providers they employ.
Furthermore, there is a modification to the AdSense revenue structure, wherein fees are no longer processed in a single transaction. Previously, when publishers opted to use AdSense for monetizing their content, they retained 68% of the revenue, with the Google AdSense network processing all fees in one go.
Now, the AdSense revenue sharing model is split into distinct rates for the buy-side and sell-side. For displaying ads using AdSense for content, publishers will receive 80% of the revenue after the advertiser platform deducts its fee, whether it’s Google’s buy-side or third-party platforms.
Taylor clarifies this with an example, stating, “For instance, when Google Ads purchases display ads on AdSense, Google Ads will, on average, retain 15% of the advertiser spend. There may be variations because Google Ads doesn’t charge a fixed, per-impression fee, as many advertisers opt for payment based on user actions, such as clicks or conversions. Overall, publishers will still retain around 68% of the revenue.”
When advertisers employ a third-party platform to acquire display ads on AdSense, publishers will keep 80% of the revenue after the third-party platform has accounted for its fee. Google does not have control over or visibility into the fees charged by these third-party platforms to advertisers or their calculation methods.
In summary, the change in the AdSense revenue structure implies that publishers will now receive a larger share of the ad revenue (80%) after the advertiser’s platform deducts its fee, in contrast to the previous 68% when fees were processed as a single transaction. This adjustment is aimed at benefiting publishers by increasing their earnings from displaying ads within their content.
