Warnung:
Bundesnetzagentur führt außerdem für das Modell ,,BAOFENG UV-5R 5W HT" seit dem 24.11.2021 eine abgeschlossene markteinschränkende Maßnahme.
1. nicht konform im Bereich der Frequenzablage
2. unerwünschte Nebenaussendungen
3. die Konformitätserklärung ist fehlerhaft

bundesnetzagentur.de/DE/Fachthemen/Telekommunikation/Technik/Marktueberwachung/MarkteinschraenkendeMassnahmen/EuVertriebsverbote.html

Just a heads up, in the title it's stated that it has one big flaw, but reading the article I'm struggling to understand what it is, is it the battery runtime at high brightness settings, the temporal dithering or the limited connectivity? Not quite sure, great testing though.

Quote from: heffeque on March 12, 2026, 10:55:05

Quote from: opckieran on March 11, 2026, 02:39:44

Quote from: heffeque on March 10, 2026, 12:54:56Bluetti should think about a product line that is simply UPS with either LFP or sodium, without the solar power stuff.

If I'm spending $1100 on such a capable battery backup, the last thing I'd want is for the manufacturer to opt to save $15 in manufacturing costs just to deprive me of a way of charging said backup.

Bluetti has devices that are $115 (the Elite 10).

I'm asking for Bluetti to make a version that is less solar/portable oriented (so less bulky), and more UPS oriented (lower response times basically).

They would sweep the small UPS market, since traditional brands keep using old-car battery tech while still maintaining prices high.

Ugreen has one, but it's extremely proprietary (it only works with their own products, and only subset of them). Bluetti could try to make a generic one.

Goldenmate might have what you're looking for.

BIG RESPECT for checking temporal dithering existence. THANK YOU. And please check the same thing (every kind of flickering) with every screen.

All you have to do is to remove the word "privacy" out of dictionary.
You have a crazy writer-kid, who promotes irrelevant BS articles

Quote from: LupiN on March 11, 2026, 11:09:32

Quote from: opckieran on March 11, 2026, 02:12:27This would have been killer at $1499. A real shot against Panther Lake. But $2199, with only 32GB of RAM? DOA.

not a great deal though... just get a rtx 4060 laptop instead. They can be found even under 1000$, and performance wise still better. I got my zephyrus g16 year and a half ago with a 155h and rtx 4060 for around 1450$ and the quality of that laptop is top tier in every aspect. So unfortunately even 1499$ at this point is too high of a price for what you get. Certainly that powerhouse strix halo chip won't be more efficient than the 155h either. So not much advantage there.

Having the ability to allocate more VRAM to the GPU has several gaming and AI benefits. I own a quality R7 260 + 5060 laptop myself. Cheaper than $1499, sure, but limited nonetheless. You also don't have to deal with GPU switching headaches, and can feasibly fit a single SOC in a lighter chassis vs SOC + dGPU.

Quote from: Onexfly Apex on March 11, 2026, 15:00:16Btw, this garbage uses realtek WiFi lol. Both apple and Asus are cutting corners. Atleast onexfly apex uses intel WiFi.

And sadly it doesn't look like Intel is interested in opening up their WiFi 7 capabilities to AMD systems. For the time being, Intel's 6E is the best 6E you can run on an AMD platform. If you want to run 7 on AMD, you have to go Mediatek or Qualcomm.

Quote from: Fordon on Yesterday at 15:54:47Go try any Chromebook for real before comparing - they are mostly plastic trash with Intel Pentium CPUs.

My first Chromebook was all aluminium (arm64). It was $200.

Quote from: Julian M on Yesterday at 16:41:31The Chromebook comparison is faulty
...
Chromebooks run web apps and have very little local (fast) storage, like thin clients.

The problem is, it kind of doesn't matter that the neo is delivering M1 like cpu performance or that it's running a full desktop OS. With the amount of memory it comes with, all you're gonna be capable of using that for is running web apps. So basically using it like a Chromebook essentially. It will end up being used the same way.

Quote from: Boo LENOVO on March 09, 2026, 10:29:27True. And just to make it clear: LENOVO artificially decreased the maximum RAM capacity, as the CPUs/APUs themselves support up to 256 GB RAM:

Wrong, Panther Lake supports only up to 96 GB of RAM on the X chips (the ones with 12 Xe units) and 128 GB of RAM for the other chips. But Arrow Lake (which was in the T16 gen 4) does support 256 GB of RAM (though confusingly, it still shows as 192 GB in many places)