Device uses movement of ions to generate airflow without any moving parts like in iPads and MacBook Air.

  • splinter@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    17 hours ago

    You made a claim first, so you should provide your citation first as well.

      • splinter@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Advertising for a product isn’t a citation. That article literally just repeats Dyson’s own claims. Do you have anything that actually tests that claim?

        • xthexder@l.sw0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          15 hours ago

          I don’t think you two are even contradicting each other. The airflow going through the base can be 15x smaller than the total result, but also require more energy than just using a regular fan that moves that amount of air.

          Total airflow and efficiency are two independent things.

          Disclaimer: I have no real data on how Dyson fans work.

            • xthexder@l.sw0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              As demonstraded by the ActionLab video someone else posted, “bladeless” fans in general are less efficient. The one he tested was not a Dyson and didn’t have a HEPA filter.

                • xthexder@l.sw0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 hours ago

                  It was also moving more volume of air, not just airspeed. Sure I would have loved to see a fully shrouded experiment, but their experiment did show a regular fan moved air faster over a wider area, which would mean it is also moving a higher volume of air.