PC Hardware Reviews - New and Unusual Components

pharma

Legend
Thread dedicated to the latest PC hardware that members find new and unusual. Ideally having this thread should make it easier to find and compare hardware for your next future upgrade. Helpful if review link(s) are included but not necessary.


p1013136.webp

G.Skill has released its WigiDash PC Command Panel, an accessory designed for PCs, offering a range of functionalities to suit various user needs. This 7-inch touch panel device is engineered for versatility and customization, aiming to enhance the efficiency of content creators, gamers, and enthusiast users. It allows users to configure hotkeys, and shortcuts, manage media playback, and monitor system performance. These functions are accessible through customizable widgets provided by the WigiDash Manager software.
...
We like where G.Skill is going with this. The WigiDash's primary function is to optimize workflows and display system information. Users can configure hotkeys for various actions, including program launching, file access, and Windows OS functions. It supports the integration of third-party utilities for displaying information like weather updates and time, however needs to hook into HWinfo or AIDA which for more advanced metrics and polling results.
 
I have a question about those elgato stream decks, are they just a touch screen or a fancy keyboard with oled/lcd buttons and some profiling software ?
Also have a question about these :
1709644187246.png

They claim to cut out up to 65% of blue light does that mean calibrating my monitor is a waste of time because 65% of the blue is being cut out or I have to increase the amount of blue by 65% to compensate ?
 
Last edited:
I have a question about those elgato stream decks, are they just a touch screen or a fancy keyboard with oled/lcd buttons and some profiling software ?
Also have a question about these :
View attachment 10926

They claim to cut out up to 65% of blue light does that mean calibrating my monitor is a waste of time because 65% of the blue is being cut out or I have to increase the amount of blue by 65% to compensate ?
1) Wear glasses to cut out 65% of blue light.
2) Increase blue light output of your monitor by 65%.
3) This is the part I need help with.
 
from me? or the usefulness of the glasses?
Sorry I was being smartass. But why would you wear the glasses if you then crank the blue up enough to overpower them? I must not be understanding what you're doing.

If you want to calibrate the display to account for the glasses you'd have to put the glasses in between the monitor and a colorimeter when you're calibrating it.
 
ok I will explain if you remove 65% of the colour blue the colours will not be correct
eg take purple
top = purple
bottom = the same purple with 65% of the colour blue removed

1709779042356.png

You either live with it or increase the amount of blue to compensate which defeats the point of the glasses (sounds stupid to me)
 
I think we all get the part where they are cutting the blue light; we were confused about what you were asking. I think I get it now.

The entire point of those glasses is to literally remove blue light, there's no purpose other than removal of the blue light. The theory is (was?) blue light later at night can disrupt your brain's ability to easily enter sleep. IIRC there has been more science done recently and it's not really about the blue light anymore, rather it's apparently just keeping yourself awake with interactive anything means your brain is in "interactive mode" and thus taking a while to wind down and enter a sleep state.

I heard some of it on a science podcast I like, I'll see if I can go find the relevant details if anyone is curious.
 
The Gunnar Glasses was to block blue light for eye strain and eye health reasons rather than sleep. Blue light and sleep entering the popular conversation I believe came a few years later more so when smart phones (and tablets) became mainstream.

In terms of the original the question I think he is getting at if you can block blue light while maintaining technical color accuracy. The answer is not objectively but possibly subjectively in terms of perception.
 
The Gunnar Glasses was to block blue light for eye strain and eye health reasons rather than sleep. Blue light and sleep entering the popular conversation I believe came a few years later more so when smart phones (and tablets) became mainstream.

In terms of the original the question I think he is getting at if you can block blue light while maintaining technical color accuracy. The answer is not objectively but possibly subjectively in terms of perception.
I get it now. But can losing 65% of blue really be compensated for subjectively? It seems that would make you effectively colorblind. Surely there are some of these that you could not pass while wearing the glasses unless maybe you turned the blue up on the display massively, defeating the purpose of the glasses.
 
I get it now. But can losing 65% of blue really be compensated for subjectively? It seems that would make you effectively colorblind. Surely there are some of these that you could not pass while wearing the glasses unless maybe you turned the blue up on the display massively, defeating the purpose of the glasses.

Just to clarify here.

The other poster might be misunderstanding the figures thrown out. The glasses aren't removing 65% of the color blue, I believe it's advertised that it blocks 65% of blue light at a specific wave length.

Also I'm not sure (not familiar with this at this level) that translating it like that to the equivalent of just "removing" 65% from the B parameter in RGB is accurate? If you've ever used blue light reduction it just makes the image noticably warmer perceptually.

By subjectively I mean the percieved color accuracy would be "usable" in terms of how the brain adapts to it, well at least to some extent (not to actually losing 65% of blue in the way it was framed).

The other factor here also is most people don't need accurate colors in an objective sense as they aren't viewing things that are color critical that needs to translate to other users. I'm not even sure if people actually prefer accurate colors, there's a reason why show room TVs for example aren't calibrated for color accuracy vs. just set for high brightness and saturation.
 
The other factor here also is most people don't need accurate colors in an objective sense as they aren't viewing things that are color critical that needs to translate to other users. I'm not even sure if people actually prefer accurate colors, there's a reason why show room TVs for example aren't calibrated for color accuracy vs. just set for high brightness and saturation.
I've found that people prefer show room settings until they get used to correct settings. It can be offputting going from "vivid" mode to a correctly calibrated mode. But once people get used to the correct settings they don't like the show room settings anymore. At least in my experience. I used to set up a lot of TVs and stuff for people.

Nowadays it's pretty easy to demonstrate how bad the default settings are on a TV. Just take a picture of the room you're in and throw it on the screen. Even normal people who don't care can clearly see that the colors of the walls and stuff in the room don't match what's on the TV screen.
 
Back
Top