underscored-versus – ReportWire

Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Contour Wand vs. Tarte Sculpt Tape Contour: Which is best for you? | CNN Underscored

[ad_1]

This article is part of our series Battle of the Brands, in which we compare category-leading products to their counterparts to determine which are actually worth your money.

Contouring is one of those magical makeup techniques that can take your look to the next level. It creates depth and dimension, with the power to enhance or camouflage certain facial features. The technique consists of accentuating the shadows of your face — think under the cheekbones, along the jawline, on the sides of the nose and along the hairline — to sculpt and add definition.

Cream and liquid formulas are best for contour since they will blend seamlessly with base makeup like foundation and concealer. Charlotte Tilbury’s Hollywood Contour Wand has been a popular choice since it launched in 2017, thanks to its easy applicator and flexible formula.

Earlier this year, Tarte launched its Sculpt Tape Contour and makeup fans were quick to call out its resemblance to the Charlotte Tilbury wand. We tested the two in a side-by-side comparison to find out if their performance is as similar as their packaging.

Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Contour Wand vs. Tarte Sculpt Tape Contour at a glance


Shades	Light to Medium, Medium to Deep	Soft Bronze, Cool Bronze, Warm Bronze, Deep Bronze, Rich Bronze, Mahogany, Espresso
Formula	Liquid/Cream	Liquid/Cream
Finish	Semi-matte	Matte
Size	12 mL	12 mL
Available at	Charlotte Tilbury, Sephora, Revolve	Tarte, Ulta
Price	$42	$35

As someone who loves a five-minute face, I look for products that make my makeup routine super simple. While contouring can be time-intensive when layered with highlighter, blush and powder, products like Charlotte Tilbury’s Hollywood Contour Wand and Tarte’s Sculpt Tape Contour come in a user-friendly format, making them quick and easy to apply.

In just a few steps, you can sculpt your cheekbones, nose and more. I followed the same method for both products, applying the Hollywood Contour Wand to one side of my face, and the Sculpt tape to the other. Since they basically have the same applicators, the directions are the same: To dispense the product, you twist the top to unlock it, give the tube a squeeze until you can see the cushion-tipped applicator become saturated and then dot or draw on the contour where you want to add some dimension. I opted for the dotting method, applying it in the hollows of my cheeks, along the sides of my forehead and on the sides of my nose. Then, I used my favorite Real Techniques face brush to blend the contour out.

Testing the Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Contour Wand in Light-Medium.

The Hollywood Contour Wand shade Light-Medium was a nearly identical shade match to Sculpt Tape’s Soft Bronze. Both liquid formulas blended out far lighter than they initially applied. I found that the Sculpt Tape appeared more matte and felt slightly creamy on the skin (thanks to the inclusion of skin care ingredients like shea butter, licorice root and porcelain flower), while the Hollywood Contour Wand gave a glowy effect and felt more like a true liquid product. I applied both on top of the Saie Glowy Super Skin Foundation, which helped with a smooth and seamless finish. I recommend applying these contours on top of a base product (such as foundation or primer) rather than on bare skin as this will help the liquid formula blend better.

Furthermore, the Charlotte Tilbury contour wand blended out a bit lighter than Tarte’s contour. In the pictures above and below, the “after” examples were taken following the initial application. For a deeper contour, both products can be layered again until your desired effect. During my additional testing, I found that two layers of the Hollywood Contour Wand gave a more defined contour on my skin tone. With the Sculpt Tape, however, one application was sufficient.

Testing Tarte Sculpt Tape in Soft Bronze.

After you use the contour wands, you’ll want to twist the top of the applicator to lock the product and put the cap back on. One of the few complaints for both the Hollywood Contour Wand and Sculpt Tape is their propensity for leaking. Knowing this before testing, I was careful not to squeeze the tubes too much so there wouldn’t be excess product on the applicators.

Left: Before contour. Right: With Charlotte Tilbury Hollywood Contour Wand on left side of face, and Tarte Sculpt Tape on right side of face.

Charlotte Tilbury’s Hollywood Contour Wand comes in two flexible shades — Light to Medium and Medium to Deep — which can work on a range of skin tones. However, Tarte offers seven shades of its Sculpt Tape Contour, offering a more tailored range for different skin tones. This allows you to choose a shade based on preference, too — you can try a shade darker or lighter than you would normally go, depending on how exaggerated you want your contour to be.

While both products make it quick and easy to create a contoured look, the shade range and color payoff of Tarte’s Sculpt Tape make it more accessible. Being able to choose a shade for your specific skin tone allows for quicker and easier application, so you don’t have to fuss with trying to lessen or increase the saturation on a generalized shade. Plus, the formula has nourishing ingredients that feel light on the skin but give enough of a creaminess that it makes blending a breeze.

[ad_2]

Source link

March 23, 2023

Apple AirTag vs. Samsung Galaxy SmartTag: which tracker is best for you? | CNN Underscored

[ad_1]

This article is part of our series Battle of the Brands, in which we compare category-leading products to their counterparts to determine which are actually worth your money.

Losing things is the worst. Keys, backpacks, coats and wallets, for example, are all likely to be misplaced in the mad scramble of daily life. Thankfully, technology (of course) offers a solution in the form of Bluetooth trackers like Apple’s AirTags or Samsung’s SmartTags. These little trackers can be affixed to key chains or dropped in a pocket to help you keep track of life’s necessities. So which is right for you?

We compared two popular devices, the Apple AirTag and the Samsung SmartTag+, looking at their tracking capabilities, ease of use, compatibility, battery life, privacy, security and value. First, however, you should be aware of something. Which tracker you pick depends on what phone you have. Apple’s AirTags require an iPhone 11 or newer, and the SmartTag+ requires Android OS 11 or higher and a Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra, Galaxy S21+, Galaxy S21 Ultra or Z Fold 2. The trackers will not work outside of their respective ecosystems. If you own neither an iPhone nor one of the listed Samsung Galaxy phones, these particular trackers aren’t for you.

Feeling lost? No need. We’re on top of it. Here’s what you need to know before you decide which smart tracking device is best for you, whether it’s for travel, school or just every day living.

Apple AirTag and Samsung SmartTag+ at a glance


Price	$29 for one, $99 for a pack of four	$40 for one, $80 for a pack of two
Battery Life	1 year, replaceable CR2032	100-130 days, replaceable CR2032
Connectivity	UWB (Ultra-wide Band) Bluetooth	UWB (Ultra-wide Band) Bluetooth
Weight and Dimensions	0.39 oz, 1.26-inch diameter, 0.31 inches high	0.459 oz, 1.54 x 1.54 x 0.39 inches
Platform	iOS	Samsung Galaxy
Range	Approximately 60 yards	Approximately 130 yards
Water Resistance	IP67	IP52
Price	$29	$40

A note on privacy and security

Before we get into a side-by-side comparison, it’s worth noting that any Bluetooth tracker can be abused. Under no circumstances should you try to track someone without their knowledge and permission. It’s highly illegal, depending on the jurisdiction. Both Apple and Samsung have included anti-stalking features in their devices, which I’ll discuss below, but it’s important to recognize the genuine privacy concerns trackers present.

Both devices are small, obviously. There’s no point in a tracker so large you burn calories carrying it. The SmartTag+ is a hair larger, at about 1.5 inches on a side, while the AirTag is just over 1.25 inches in diameter. The SmartTag+ is a bit heavier, at 0.459 oz, compared to the AirTag’s 0.39 oz., but you likely won’t notice the difference.

The SmartTag+ has a small hole for attaching it to things, while the AirTag is typically Apple: smooth, like a tiny skipping stone, with no way to attach it to something unless you want to buy another accessory like a keychain holder or something akin. (You can also just drop both in a purse or pocket or sew them into the lining of a jacket if you wish.)

The AirTag has a waterproof rating of IP67, meaning you can briefly drop it in up three feet of water, and it will be fine. The SmartTag+ is rated at IP52, which provides limited dust protection and some water splashes. Don’t drop this one in the drink.

Both devices use a replaceable CR2032 watch battery, which both companies say will last about a year. You can replace the battery when it runs out. There’s no charging these things.

The SmartTag+ comes in a couple of different colors — black and what Samsung calls “denim blue,” but it looks gray to me — while the AirTag comes in white. But it can be personalized with engraving if you order from the Apple Store.

TL;DR: Both devices are small, lightweight and discrete. Because the Samsung SmartTag+ can more easily attach to objects thanks to a hole in the case, it gets points for being more versatile. But the AirTag is fully waterproof, rather than water-resistant, and it offers an extra engraving option.

Both trackers are simple to set up. Apple users just need to bring the AirTag close to the phone and pull out the tag that keeps the battery from operating. When you open the Find My app on your phone, it will offer to pair the tracker and assign it to an item to track, like luggage, a bike or a backpack. It will also inform you that it is attached to your Apple ID and that tracking people without their consent is a crime in many parts of the world. “AirTag is designed to be detected by victims and to enable law enforcement to request identifying information about the owner.”

The SmartTag+ is also simple. Once you set up your Samsung SmartThing account (which requires an app to be downloaded from the app store on your Galaxy phone), you push the button on the tracker, and it will pair automatically with your phone. Unlike Apple, there’s no warning against tracking people, or that law enforcement could use the tag to find you if you do.

TL;DR: Set up is easy for both devices, but we give points to the AirTag for its warning that you should only use this tracker responsibly.

Now we’re getting into the good stuff. Both devices use Ultra-wideband (UWB) to detect the trackers. This is a low-power, long-range radio signal that allows for the directional location of the tracker. Both also utilize a network of other devices, so if you’re personally out of range of the tracker, it will use the Bluetooth of surrounding devices to pinpoint its location in either the Find My app or the Samsung SmartThing app.

Apple leverages the enormous number of iPhones to locate the tag. If you’ve lost the AirTag anywhere around people, especially in the United States, you’ll likely be able to find said tag. If someone with an iPhone passes within range of the tag, it will anonymously grab its location from that phone and relay that back to you via the Find My app. Once you get within range of the device — about 60 yards — you can use an augmented reality mode to home in on the tracker in the Find My app.

The Samsung SmartThing app does a good job of homing in on the SmartTag+ using the camera for AR directional location. Still, it’s hamstrung by relying on Samsung phones for its network, and there just aren’t as many of them in the United States as iPhones. If someone with a non-Samsung Android phone wanders by, it won’t ping the phone, and you won’t be able to find the tracker.

Both offer anti-stalker protection. If you have an iPhone that detects an AirTag moving with you that doesn’t belong to you, you’ll get a warning about that. And the AirTag will emit little chirps if it’s away from its owner for more than three days.

The Samsung SmartTag+ will do something similar, but it’s not automatic. You’ll need to launch an “unknown tag search” using the SmartThings app on your Galaxy phone.

On the plus side, the Samsung SmartTag+’s alarm was much louder than the AirTag’s. It would be easy to miss Apple’s shy little cheeps, while the SmartTag+ is a noisome little beast.

TL;DR: The AirTag has a large network of devices — at least in the United States — making locating a lost item easy, and its Find My app is detailed and attractive. Its AR functions allow for a high level of precision. The SmartTag+ is about equally accurate, but it suffers from fewer devices in its network to help you find the tracker.

Apple is cheaper and lasts longer

Both devices are decently affordable, with the AirTag costing $29 for one and $99 for a pack of four on the Apple Store. Samsung’s is $40 for one and $80 for a pack of two on the Samsung site.

Apple’s AirTag will last longer — about one year — on a single battery, compared to the SmartTag+’s 100-130 days, which is kind of paltry. The Samsung tracker, however, does allow you to use its button to trigger routines if you’re invested in the SmartThings smart home platform. Apple’s AirTag has no button and offers no similar feature.

TL;DR: This one is easy to call: Apple wins on price and battery for once. Samsung’s smart home integration is nice but hardly a killer feature.

Both trackers offer a relatively inexpensive way to keep track of things you might lose: keys, backpacks, coats, etc. And both trackers suffer from operating within their siloed ecosystems. The bottom line is while the Apple AirTag is a better device tracker, if you’re on a Samsung Galaxy phone, you’re stuck with the SmartTag+ and vice versa. So what phone you have will determine which tracker you should buy.

Plot twist! If you have neither an iPhone nor Galaxy phone, consider trackers from Tile, which work with iOS and Android. It doesn’t offer AR-assisted locating, its network isn’t nearly as robust as either Apple’s or Samsung’s and its most useful features require an annual paid subscription, making it more expensive in the long run. But it’s a decent compromise if you’re not invested in the two heavyweights’ ecosystems.

[ad_2]

Source link

March 16, 2023

Lululemon Align vs. a $23 Amazon lookalike: We put these cult-favorite leggings to the test | CNN Underscored

[ad_1]

This article is part of our series Battle of the Brands, in which we compare category-leading products to their counterparts to determine which are actually worth your money.

Between the self-care explosion — from yoga and Pilates to meditation — and the pandemic’s resultant work-from-home situation, women are wearing leggings longer and more often than ever before. As such, we’ve become more judicious about which leggings are actually worth investing our money in. Fit, comfort, design and style are musts, as are name brand and cost.

In recent years, Lululemon’s Align Pants have become a cult-favorite item thanks to their “buttery soft” fabric that makes wearing them 24/7 an easy decision, and a fit that skims the body rather than pinches or droops. Need proof? The pants have more than 20,000 reviews and the #Lululemonalign hashtag on Instagram has more than 9,000 posts attached to it, ranging from influencers’ workout videos and try-on sessions to on-the-go street shoots. While reviewers are hard-pressed to find fault in Align, the price would likely be high on the “cons” list — each pair typically runs between $98 and $128.

Equally popular on Amazon are Colorfulkoala’s Buttery Soft High-Waisted Yoga Pants, which have a whopping 46,000 positive reviews — hundreds of which liken the pants to Align — and a much (much) cheaper price tag at $23 per pair.

What’s so great about these leggings, which we named the best workout leggings? They are soft and slinky and literally skim your curves, from waist to ankle. Second, there’s the fabric. Called Nulu, the material is über-soft, sweat-wicking and has a four-way stretch. You can move in these pants — whether you’re doing hot yoga or hopping in and out of your car doing errands.

Our pick for the best budget leggings of the year, the Colorfulkoalas are available in more than 40 colors and are just as soft as Lululemons, but at a fraction of the cost.

Lululemon’s Align and Colorfulkoala’s Buttery Soft are both ultra-popular pants designed for yoga. The chief selling point of both options is the super-soft fabric they’re made of.

Align is comprised of the brand’s proprietary “Nulu” fabric, which is a combination of nylon and lycra that is sweat-wicking, stretchy and, as I’ve mentioned more than a few times, buttery soft. I’ve been an Align devotee for years and can attest that the leggings are great for low-impact exercise like Pilates or yoga — and that they’re so comfortable (and flattering) that I end up wearing them the whole day after my morning workout. Unlike other yoga pants, the Align fabric doesn’t constrict, squeeze or pinch your body, instead it skims over your shape without creating any sort of muffin-top situation.

Lululemon's Align leggings (left) and Colorfulkoala's leggings (right)

Having tested Colorfulkoala’s Buttery Soft pants as well, I can say that the nylon/spandex fabric is the closest I’ve ever seen to the Nulu softness, but it’s not quite as buttery as the Align and they have a sheen to them. I didn’t mind the sheen at all, but the Align leggings definitely have a softer, matte texture. Interestingly enough, the Colorfulkoala pants are brushed on the interior and that texture is nearly exact to Align — so they do feel identical on the inside of the leggings, but on the exterior they are shinier.

Given Align’s matte texture, the fabric can be prone to catching lint or stray hairs, which is more visible on darker colors and patterns. I didn’t experience this with the Colorfulkoala leggings, however, because the fabric’s slight sheen doesn’t attract debris.

Lululemon's Align leggings (left) and Colorfulkoala Buttery Soft leggings (right)

More about that fabric: Align’s Nulu fabric is completely opaque. Maybe it’s attributable to the brand’s “see-through pants scandal” from a decade ago, but you’re never going to see someone’s underwear during a downward-facing dog if they’re wearing Align. And nowadays, Lululemon is also double-lining its lighter hues to triple-confirm the coverage (which results in a thicker, cozier feel to the legging). Undies aside, the fabric density also camouflages the other bits you might want to conceal (read: cellulite, a tummy roll, whatever).

The same cannot be said for Colorfulkoala’s coverage. I tried the leggings in both black and a lighter mauve pink hue and while the black had me covered, the pink was very see-through. I actually wore the pants to Pilates and spent much of the class feeling overexposed. Not just due to my underwear lines being visible, but also those aforementioned bits that I’m not dying to show off — the pant fabric is so thin that, especially in a lighter color, you can see every detail of your tush, legs and beyond. I did appreciate that the waistband is lined, which provides decent tummy control.

Two pairs of Lululemon's Align leggings (left) and the Colorfulkoala leggings (right)

In terms of design, both pants are pretty much identical, with flat, exposed seams cut exactly the same way. I didn’t experience any drooping or sagging with either pair — both stay put all day long. The Align waistband is a bit more generous, coming in at 3/8 inches longer than the Colorfulkoala pants’ and thus providing slightly more tummy coverage. Align leggings also have a hidden waistband pocket for keys, cash or credit card, which is a thoughtful detail.

Both the Lululemon Align and Colorfulkoala High Waisted Yoga Pants are very comfortable to wear all day long. I wasn’t racing to take either pair off after working out, which is a good sign! While their fabrics aren’t identical, both are incredibly soft, and given that their designs are so similar, they fit the same way, contouring your curves rather than pinching or squeezing. Yes, the Colorfulkoala pair are thinner, which affects coverage, but it doesn’t affect comfort at all.

	Lululemon Align High-Rise Pant	Colorfulkoala Buttery Soft High-Waisted Yoga Pants
Sizes	0 to 20	XS to XL
Lengths	17”, 21”, 23”, 25”, 28”, 31”	25”, 28”, “full length”
Fabric	80% nylon, 20% lycra	80% nylon, 20% spandex
Color options	20+	40+
Number of reviews	20,000+	46,000+
Care	Machine wash cold, line dry	Machine wash and dry

Lululemon’s Align leggings are the sure bet and worth the investment. Yes, you can buy four to five pairs of Colorfulkoala pants for every one pair of Align, but the quality of Align far outweighs the competition. I’m writing this story while wearing a pair of five-year-old Align leggings that still look and fit like they’re brand-new — the ROI is legit.

Ultimately what it came down to for me is that I can’t endorse Colorfulkoala’s inconsistent coverage. While the black pair did provide opaqueness, the fabric is still thinner than Align’s Nulu, and that left me feeling more vulnerable, especially as I was doing squats and lunges on a reformer machine. The Align fabric is bulletproof when it comes to coverage and leaves me feeling more confident when I wear them. As a mom of four in my 40s, that is worth the price of admission.

If budget is a concern, however, Colorfulkoala is a decent legging to buy, but I’d advise sticking to the darker colors and patterns to be safe.

[ad_2]

Source link

March 11, 2023

Apple AirTag vs. Samsung Galaxy SmartTag: which tracker is best for you? | CNN Underscored

[ad_1]

This article is part of our series Battle of the Brands, in which we compare category-leading products to their counterparts to determine which are actually worth your money.

Losing things is the worst. Keys, backpacks, coats and wallets, for example, are all likely to be misplaced in the mad scramble of daily life. Thankfully, technology (of course) offers a solution in the form of Bluetooth trackers like Apple’s AirTags or Samsung’s SmartTags. These little trackers can be affixed to key chains or dropped in a pocket to help you keep track of life’s necessities. So which is right for you?

We compared two popular devices, the Apple AirTag and the Samsung SmartTag+, looking at their tracking capabilities, ease of use, compatibility, battery life, privacy, security and value. First, however, you should be aware of something. Which tracker you pick depends on what phone you have. Apple’s AirTags require an iPhone 11 or newer, and the SmartTag+ requires Android OS 11 or higher and a Samsung Galaxy Note 20 Ultra, Galaxy S21+, Galaxy S21 Ultra or Z Fold 2. The trackers will not work outside of their respective ecosystems. If you own neither an iPhone nor one of the listed Samsung Galaxy phones, these particular trackers aren’t for you.

Feeling lost? No need. We’re on top of it. Here’s what you need to know before you decide which smart tracking device is best for you, whether it’s for travel, school or just every day living.

Apple AirTag and Samsung SmartTag+ at a glance


Price	$29 for one, $99 for a pack of four	$40 for one, $80 for a pack of two
Battery Life	1 year, replaceable CR2032	100-130 days, replaceable CR2032
Connectivity	UWB (Ultra-wide Band) Bluetooth	UWB (Ultra-wide Band) Bluetooth
Weight and Dimensions	0.39 oz, 1.26-inch diameter, 0.31 inches high	0.459 oz, 1.54 x 1.54 x 0.39 inches
Platform	iOS	Samsung Galaxy
Range	Approximately 60 yards	Approximately 130 yards
Water Resistance	IP67	IP52
Price	$29	$40

A note on privacy and security

Before we get into a side-by-side comparison, it’s worth noting that any Bluetooth tracker can be abused. Under no circumstances should you try to track someone without their knowledge and permission. It’s highly illegal, depending on the jurisdiction. Both Apple and Samsung have included anti-stalking features in their devices, which I’ll discuss below, but it’s important to recognize the genuine privacy concerns trackers present.

Both devices are small, obviously. There’s no point in a tracker so large you burn calories carrying it. The SmartTag+ is a hair larger, at about 1.5 inches on a side, while the AirTag is just over 1.25 inches in diameter. The SmartTag+ is a bit heavier, at 0.459 oz, compared to the AirTag’s 0.39 oz., but you likely won’t notice the difference.

The SmartTag+ has a small hole for attaching it to things, while the AirTag is typically Apple: smooth, like a tiny skipping stone, with no way to attach it to something unless you want to buy another accessory like a keychain holder or something akin. (You can also just drop both in a purse or pocket or sew them into the lining of a jacket if you wish.)

The AirTag has a waterproof rating of IP67, meaning you can briefly drop it in up three feet of water, and it will be fine. The SmartTag+ is rated at IP52, which provides limited dust protection and some water splashes. Don’t drop this one in the drink.

Both devices use a replaceable CR2032 watch battery, which both companies say will last about a year. You can replace the battery when it runs out. There’s no charging these things.

The SmartTag+ comes in a couple of different colors — black and what Samsung calls “denim blue,” but it looks gray to me — while the AirTag comes in white. But it can be personalized with engraving if you order from the Apple Store.

TL;DR: Both devices are small, lightweight and discrete. Because the Samsung SmartTag+ can more easily attach to objects thanks to a hole in the case, it gets points for being more versatile. But the AirTag is fully waterproof, rather than water-resistant, and it offers an extra engraving option.

Both trackers are simple to set up. Apple users just need to bring the AirTag close to the phone and pull out the tag that keeps the battery from operating. When you open the Find My app on your phone, it will offer to pair the tracker and assign it to an item to track, like luggage, a bike or a backpack. It will also inform you that it is attached to your Apple ID and that tracking people without their consent is a crime in many parts of the world. “AirTag is designed to be detected by victims and to enable law enforcement to request identifying information about the owner.”

The SmartTag+ is also simple. Once you set up your Samsung SmartThing account (which requires an app to be downloaded from the app store on your Galaxy phone), you push the button on the tracker, and it will pair automatically with your phone. Unlike Apple, there’s no warning against tracking people, or that law enforcement could use the tag to find you if you do.

TL;DR: Set up is easy for both devices, but we give points to the AirTag for its warning that you should only use this tracker responsibly.

Now we’re getting into the good stuff. Both devices use Ultra-wideband (UWB) to detect the trackers. This is a low-power, long-range radio signal that allows for the directional location of the tracker. Both also utilize a network of other devices, so if you’re personally out of range of the tracker, it will use the Bluetooth of surrounding devices to pinpoint its location in either the Find My app or the Samsung SmartThing app.

Apple leverages the enormous number of iPhones to locate the tag. If you’ve lost the AirTag anywhere around people, especially in the United States, you’ll likely be able to find said tag. If someone with an iPhone passes within range of the tag, it will anonymously grab its location from that phone and relay that back to you via the Find My app. Once you get within range of the device — about 60 yards — you can use an augmented reality mode to home in on the tracker in the Find My app.

The Samsung SmartThing app does a good job of homing in on the SmartTag+ using the camera for AR directional location. Still, it’s hamstrung by relying on Samsung phones for its network, and there just aren’t as many of them in the United States as iPhones. If someone with a non-Samsung Android phone wanders by, it won’t ping the phone, and you won’t be able to find the tracker.

Both offer anti-stalker protection. If you have an iPhone that detects an AirTag moving with you that doesn’t belong to you, you’ll get a warning about that. And the AirTag will emit little chirps if it’s away from its owner for more than three days.

The Samsung SmartTag+ will do something similar, but it’s not automatic. You’ll need to launch an “unknown tag search” using the SmartThings app on your Galaxy phone.

On the plus side, the Samsung SmartTag+’s alarm was much louder than the AirTag’s. It would be easy to miss Apple’s shy little cheeps, while the SmartTag+ is a noisome little beast.

TL;DR: The AirTag has a large network of devices — at least in the United States — making locating a lost item easy, and its Find My app is detailed and attractive. Its AR functions allow for a high level of precision. The SmartTag+ is about equally accurate, but it suffers from fewer devices in its network to help you find the tracker.

Apple is cheaper and lasts longer

Both devices are decently affordable, with the AirTag costing $29 for one and $99 for a pack of four on the Apple Store. Samsung’s is $40 for one and $80 for a pack of two on the Samsung site.

Apple’s AirTag will last longer — about one year — on a single battery, compared to the SmartTag+’s 100-130 days, which is kind of paltry. The Samsung tracker, however, does allow you to use its button to trigger routines if you’re invested in the SmartThings smart home platform. Apple’s AirTag has no button and offers no similar feature.

TL;DR: This one is easy to call: Apple wins on price and battery for once. Samsung’s smart home integration is nice but hardly a killer feature.

Both trackers offer a relatively inexpensive way to keep track of things you might lose: keys, backpacks, coats, etc. And both trackers suffer from operating within their siloed ecosystems. The bottom line is while the Apple AirTag is a better device tracker, if you’re on a Samsung Galaxy phone, you’re stuck with the SmartTag+ and vice versa. So what phone you have will determine which tracker you should buy.

Plot twist! If you have neither an iPhone nor Galaxy phone, consider trackers from Tile, which work with iOS and Android. It doesn’t offer AR-assisted locating, its network isn’t nearly as robust as either Apple’s or Samsung’s and its most useful features require an annual paid subscription, making it more expensive in the long run. But it’s a decent compromise if you’re not invested in the two heavyweights’ ecosystems.

[ad_2]

Source link

March 9, 2023

Le Creuset vs. Lodge: Which Dutch oven is better? | CNN Underscored

[ad_1]

This article is part of our series Battle of the Brands, in which we compare category-leading products to their counterparts to determine which are actually worth your money.

Le Creuset has long been lauded for its iconic enameled cast-iron cookware, and the French company’s Dutch oven has become an heirloom-worthy kitchen staple across the world. Sure, it can braise, boil and simmer pretty much anything to perfection. But is its several-hundred-dollar price tag actually worth it? How much are you giving up if you saved yourself a couple of hundred dollars and picked up the much cheaper — but still respected — Lodge Dutch oven?

During our extensive testing of Dutch ovens, we found one glaring truth: The pans all performed similarly when it came to cooking. The details that make a big difference in everyday use — the handles, lids, weight and heat distribution — are actually what separates good from great.

And, evaluating those minute details, the Lodge Dutch oven stood toe to toe with the famed Le Creuset.

Lodge’s enameled cast-iron Dutch oven outperforms expensive competitors. Large handles and a spatula-friendly shape make it a breeze to move from oven to stovetop, and the finish cleans up easily. Even after years of regular use, its performance has not faltered.

Le Creuset’s iconic colorful Dutch oven has been a go-to for serious cooks for nearly a century. While it’s much more expensive than most of the models we tested, its perfect heat distribution, easy handling, high performance and durability make it an heirloom piece you’ll hand down to your children.

As far as performance, there wasn’t a huge difference in results among the different Dutch ovens we tested. All made light, fluffy rice with no burning, although the grains stuck to the sides of most pans.

But the Lodge’s 6-quart size was just right for all sorts of tasks — boiling water for pasta or corn on the cob, whipping up slow-cooked braises and stews, even throwing a simple no-knead bread into the oven for a fresh, hot and crispy loaf at dinnertime.

When we tested how quickly each pan could bring water to a rolling boil, the Lodge wasn’t as swift as Le Creuset — with the latter boiling water much faster than any model we’ve tested. The Lodge did deliver a tender braised pork shoulder, slow-cooked for more than three hours. And our no-knead boule bread loaf came out crispy and golden with just a bit more color on the bottom than the Le Creuset.

Overall, though, while all the recipes we made turned out well, Le Creuset’s results were always just a little bit superior. For example, all the pans produced fluffy, light rice, but while the others left at least some of the grains sticking to the pan and had variances in heat distribution when we tested different areas of the Dutch oven with an infrared thermometer, Le Creuset left nary a trace of rice behind and displayed perfect heat distribution.

When it came to cleaning up after each round of testing, the Lodge looked good as new after a little soaking in sudsy water, with no visible staining, chips or cracks. (It’s dishwasher-safe, but we chose to hand-wash all models.) We’ve owned a Lodge for three years now, and can report it does not show its age even after near weekly use.

The Le Creuset, even after cooking red sauce and a multi-hour slow-cook braise, cleaned up looking good as new. Of course, any enameled pan can chip or flake, but we’ve owned a similar Le Creuset model for 15 years that has yet to do so. And a lifetime warranty can be put to use in case of any damage.

Build and design

The Le Creuset displays excellent heat retention and distribution, and locks in moisture, thanks to its tight-fitting lid. It definitely has a slight edge over the Lodge, thanks to its wide and roomy handles as well as the comfort of the lid’s knob, which is large enough and placed high enough that it was hard to grasp the lid while wearing oven mitts. Its weight, at 11.5 pounds, was third lightest, which makes a noticeable difference when hoisting a heavy — and steaming hot — roast out of the oven.

Lodge’s enameled Dutch oven, too, boasts large handles and a lid with an amply sized metal knob, both features that make using a heavy pan easier — especially while wearing oven mitts or handling with a kitchen towel, which is necessary because these pans get hot, handles and all.

True, the Le Creuset earned top marks for comfort, but at less than a fifth the cost of that high-end model, the Lodge was a close second. The Lodge was easy enough to maneuver, even more so than most lighter models. And its slightly sloped sides allowed a spatula to scrape up everything along the edges.

The impressiveness of the classic Le Creuset Round Dutch Oven is undeniable. But it’s more for the serious cook who’s looking to hand cookware down to their kids. For a fraction of the price, the Lodge will not disappoint — its quality and form-focused build, alongside its top-tier performance, will elevate any home chef’s kitchen for years to come.

[ad_2]

Source link

March 7, 2023

Amazon Echo vs. HomePod Mini vs. Nest Audio | CNN Underscored

[ad_1]

This article is part of our series Battle of the Brands, in which we compare category-leading products to their counterparts to determine which are actually worth your money.

When it comes to smart speakers, Amazon’s Echo, the Nest Audio from Google and Apple’s HomePod Mini are currently the three most popular models. When you distill their functionality down, they all do mostly the same thing — effortlessly allowing you to get answers, control your home, make phone calls and even play music — all by using your voice. They even cost the same at around $100.

However, these three small speakers have some noteworthy differences in terms of size, design and sound quality, and your experience with each one will vary based on which Apple, Google and Amazon products you already own.

Not sure which smart speaker is for you? We’ve tested the Echo, Nest Audio and HomePod Mini extensively, and are ready to help you make that decision.


Smart assistant	Alexa	Google Assistant	Siri
Smart home ecosystem	Alexa, Matter	Google Home, Matter	HomeKit, Matter
Integrated smart home hub	Zigbee	N/A	HomeKit
Bluetooth audio	Yes	Yes	N/A
AirPlay 2 support	N/A	N/A	Yes
Chromecast support	N/A	Yes	N/A
Size and weight	5.7 x 5.7 x 5.2 inches, 2.1 pounds	6.89 x 4.89 x 3.07 inches, 2.65 pounds	3.9 x 3.3 inches, 0.76 pounds
Color options	Charcoal, Glacier White, Twilight Blue	Chalk, Charcoal, Sage, Sand, Sky	White, Yellow, Orange, Blue, Space Gray
Price	$100	$85	$99

echo dot with clock 5th gen review cnnu 7

The 4th-Gen Echo isn’t just a smart speaker — it can also help get smart home gadgets online and keep them connected using its built-in Zigbee hub. Thanks to the combination of the Alexa app and Zigbee, setting up additional smart home devices is a painless process; tap a few buttons, the Echo finds compatible nearby smart home devices and asks if you want to use Alexa to control them. While other smart speakers require you to have a dedicated hub for, say, pairing a set of Philips Hue lights, the Echo lets you do it all from a single device.

You want the most robust and most reliable smart assistant

Amazon started the smart speaker craze with its Alexa digital assistant, and in our testing, has generally been proven to be the fastest to respond — and capable of doing the most. For example, you can ask Alexa via your Echo to turn your lights on or off, run a custom smart home routine and make an announcement that it’s movie time across the rest of your Alexa-enabled devices.

If you shop on Amazon often, you can not only place orders with your voice — say, “Alexa order more toilet paper” — but also receive updates about any Amazon deliveries. A short chime and a yellow LED light let you know there’s an alert, which will then tell you when to expect delivery of your latest order. It sure is handy, but can also be dangerous, especially if your kid asks Alexa for the newest Lego set.

While all of these speakers sound good, we found the 4th-gen Echo to offer the strongest, loudest audio of the bunch. It got notably louder than the Nest Audio and HomePod Mini in our side-by-side tests, and doesn’t get noticeably distorted at full volume.

With Amazon’s Echo lineup, you’re able to place audio (or video, for devices that support it like the Echo Show) calls to other Echo devices and talk with friends or loved ones. Once a family member adds you as an approved contact, you’ll be able to “Drop In” on their Echo device(s) whenever you want to have a quick chat or see how their day was. Conversely, you can approve loved ones who you want to have access to your Echo. Though you may want to think twice before you add your mother. Just saying.

You want a smart speaker with Bluetooth

Not only can you ask the Google Assistant to play your favorite tunes, podcast or other audio service, you can also connect to the Nest Audio from any Bluetooth-capable device and use Nest Audio as an external speaker. To be clear, you can use an Echo as a Bluetooth speaker as well, but Apple’s HomePod Mini lacks the same feature. For the Nest, you’ll need to use the Home app for the initial pairing process, but after you can just to say “Hey Google” or “Ok Google,” followed by “Connect” to reconnect Nest Audio to your phone, computer or tablet.

You want to fine-tune your music playback — and use multiple speakers

The Nest Audio sounds pretty good out of the box, but we appreciate that you can fine-tune the audio within the Google Home app for iOS and Android. Amazon offers a similar feature for Echo speakers on the Alexa app, but you won’t find any customization options on the HomePod Mini.

And while all three of these speakers support multi-room audio — you can pair multiple Echoes, Nests or HomePods to spread sound around your home — we found the Nest Audio to offer the smoothest pairing process. It took us about 10 seconds to pair two Nest Audio devices and assign them as separate left and right speakers, creating a more immersive stereo mix with minimal hassle.

Nest Audio uses the Google Assistant for all voice interactions, which is the same assistant Android phones and tablets rely on when you use the phrase “OK Google” or “Hey Google” before asking for things like a weather update or to check on a local store’s hours. By using Google Assistant, Nest Audio is able to do things like look up your daily Google Calendar agenda, or take advantage of Voice Match to identify who is talking so you can get tailored answers or play podcasts or music from your linked streaming accounts.

If you use the Google Home app on your iPhone or Android phone to control smart home devices, then a Nest Audio is a natural choice. You can continue to use the Home app on your phone, but you’ll also be able to use Google Assistant to control lights, adjust your home’s temperature or control any of the hundreds of smart home devices that work with Google Home.

The HomePod Mini is the smallest out of the leading smart speakers, with a design that’s about the size of an apple. It’s easier to fit into a tight space than the 4th-Gen Echo or the Nest Audio, and is a fraction of the weight of both speakers for when you need to take it with you.

Apple’s smart speaker comes in yellow, orange, blue, white and Space Gray, giving it the most color options out of the bunch — and certainly the boldest. If you want a smart speaker that can truly stand out in your setup, the newer yellow, orange and blue options are especially worth looking at.

The HomePod Mini relies on Siri — yes, the same Siri the iPhone, iPad, Mac and Apple Watch use — for any voice interactions. All of your Apple devices are smart enough to know when they’re around each other, so when you say “Hey Siri” near a HomePod Mini, your Apple Watch or iPhone will let the smart speaker answer. You can then use Siri to play from your Apple Music library, control your smart home devices, send messages or ask for your daily agenda. You can even use a HomePod Mini to place or receive a phone call. We found the HomePod Mini especially easy to set up with our iPhone, thanks to a quick pairing process that only took about three minutes.

Going beyond the iPhone, if you already have smart home devices around your house like light switches, thermostats or a doorbell that integrate directly with Apple’s HomeKit platform, then you should add a HomePod Mini to the mix. Not only does it allow you to use Siri for voice commands and interactions, but a HomePod Mini doubles as a HomeKit Hub. That means you can control smart home devices when you’re not home.

The choice between the three different smart speakers starts with what kind of phone you have. Amazon’s Alexa and Google’s Assistant work with either an Android or iPhone, so an Echo or Google Home are interchangeable. The HomePod Mini is the best choice for Apple users and anyone with an iPhone.

From there, you’re able to eliminate at least one option as you continue to examine your needs and wants from a smart speaker. The Echo works with almost every smart home device and platform, with Nest Audio right behind it, and finally, the HomePod Mini’s deep integration with Apple makes it a must-have for any iPhone user.

That said, the emergence of the new Matter standard (which Apple, Amazon and Google all support) is allowing all of these devices to become more platform-agnostic, so it’s easier to mix and match no matter what kinds of other smart home gadgets are in your household. As such, it’s equally important to consider factors such as sound quality and space — the Echo will get the loudest, while the HomePod Mini will fit easiest into any setup.

[ad_2]

Source link

March 7, 2023

Apple AirPods Pro 2 vs. EarFun Air Pro 3: Which earbuds are best for you? | CNN Underscored

[ad_1]

After spending a few weeks with the EarFun Air Pro 3, I was shocked by how well these $80 earbuds replaced my trusty AirPods Pro 2 that cost nearly four times as much. EarFun’s latest affordable earbuds offer noise cancellation and sound quality that’s almost on par with Apple’s high-end headphones, and even trump them with some unique advantages, thanks to their useful companion app.

That being said, you do make some significant concessions at this lower price, and if you’re an Apple user, the AirPods Pro’s seamless connectivity is hard to resist. So is it worth it to save? Here’s how the AirPods Pro 2 (our best true wireless earbuds pick for Apple users) and EarFun Air Pro 3 (our favorite ANC budget earbuds) stack up after weeks of head-to-head testing.


Active noise cancellation	Yes	Yes
Ambient sound	Yes	Yes
Battery life (rated)	6 hours (earbuds), 30 hours (with case)	9 hours (earbuds), 45 hours (with case)
Wireless charging	Yes	Yes
Water resistance	IPX4 (earbuds and case)	IPX5
Ear tip sizes	XS, S, M, L	XS, S, M, L
Software support	iOS	iOS, Android
Colors	White	Black
Weight	0.19 ounces	0.18 ounces
Price	$230	$72

If you opt to save some money on the EarFun Air Pro 3, you won’t be sacrificing much in the way of comfort. Both of these earbuds have a similarly soft and secure fit, to the point where I often forgot which pair I was wearing when using them back-to-back. The Air Pro 3 even have the same four ear tip sizes as the AirPods Pro 2 (extra small, small, medium and large), so you’ll have plenty of options to swap between if they don’t feel right out of the box.

However, while the Air Pro 3 feel great, it may be no surprise that you’re getting what you pay for in terms of overall design and build quality. These larger-size buds aren’t nearly as sleek as the AirPods Pro, and while they’re not embarrassingly ugly, I definitely noticed the extra bulk whenever I caught my reflection on a walk. Speaking of bulk, the Pro 3’s charging case is also notably chunkier than Apple’s (something worth noting for those with tight pockets), and its flimsy plastic design picks up smudges and scratches very easily. And while the Air Pro 3’s touch controls are impressively customizable, I didn’t find them as consistent and reliable as the AirPods Pro’s tactile pinch controls whenever I had to skip or pause a song on the fly.

None of these are total deal breakers, but if looks and controls are your priority, the AirPods Pro are worth the splurge.

TL;DR: The AirPods Pro 2 and EarFun Air Pro 3 are neck and neck when it comes to comfort, but Apple’s buds have a much nicer design.

Competitive sound quality and noise cancellation, but Apple has the edge

As you might expect, the $80 EarFun Air Pro 3 trail the $249 AirPods Pro 2 in audio quality — but not by much. EarFun’s buds offer impressively great sound for the price, pumping out my usual mix of loud guitar rock and soft acoustic indie with enough oomph to keep my head bumping and enough clarity to let me hear every subtle detail and vocal harmony buried in the mix. It was only until I switched back to the AirPods Pro that I realized what I’d been giving up; Apple’s buds just provide a cleaner, more detailed sound that make the otherwise good EarFuns sound a little fuzzy by comparison. Call quality was a similar story, with the Air Pro 3 holding up great for long chats and only trailing the AirPods Pro by a smidge when comparing recordings.

There was even less of a gap between the two when it came to active noise cancellation, something that the AirPods Pro do better than nearly any pair of buds on the market. Both buds did a great job softening everyday annoyances like the clatter of nearby construction and the chatter of folks in a subway car. In fact, the Air Pro 3 were even slightly more suppressive when it came to drowning out my loud bedroom fan as I worked from home. The two sets of earbuds were also very comparable when I used transparency/ambient sound mode to let noise in, though EarFun’s buds had a tendency to over-amplify harsh noises like the wind.

TL;DR: These buds are equally great at blocking out noise, but the AirPods pro have the edge on overall sound quality and transparency mode.

You would think that cheaper earbuds would mean fewer features, but that’s not the case with the EarFun Air Pro 3. Thanks to the EarFun Audio app for both iOS and Android, the Air Pro 3 come loaded with extras — including a few things that the AirPods Pro can’t do.

EarFun’s app offers a wealth of customization options, starting with a fully adjustable equalizer that lets you activate presets (such as Bass Boost or Treble Boost) or play with the sliders yourself to create and save your own sound profiles. While the AirPods Pro sound great out of the box, there’s no custom equalizer option. You can also fully remap the Air Pro 3’s controls, with the ability to assign whatever function you like to things like single, double and triple taps as well as long presses. By comparison, you can only customize long-press controls on the AirPods Pro, and the options are pretty limited at that.

The EarFun Audio app isn’t the most intuitive to navigate, but the fact that it exists at all gives it a big advantage over Apple’s buds — especially if you’re using an Android phone. The AirPods Pro don’t have a companion app of their own, though iPhone users can adjust things like noise cancellation, select controls and spatial audio via the iOS settings menu. Android users won’t have the same luxury when using the AirPods Pro, and will largely have to depend on on-ear controls. So, if you’re an Android user who cares about customization, the Air Pro 3 win out here.

AirPods Pro 2nd-gen vs Galaxy Buds 2 Pro-9

Naturally, if you’re in the Apple ecosystem, the AirPods Pro (and any pair of AirPods, for that matter) have a big advantage over the cheaper competition. Apple’s buds just work with your iPhone, iPad and Mac in a way that makes other Bluetooth headphones feel clunky by comparison. You’ll be prompted to pair them the second you open up the case, and switching between, say, your iPhone and Mac with the same pair of buds feels seamless (to their credit, the Air Pro 3 can be paired to two devices at once). The AirPods Pro are also smart enough to automatically pause your music when you take even a single bud out — by comparison, the Air Pro 3 often kept playing even when I took them out, which was a frequent frustration. You’ll also benefit from immersive 360-degree spatial audio in supported apps like Apple Music and Disney+, which can be personalized to your ears via the iOS settings app.

TL;DR: The EarFun Air Pro 3 are the more customizable earbuds overall, and will work equally great on both iOS and Android. Meanwhile, the AirPods Pro 2 have some major perks specifically for Apple users.

Now, here’s one area where less can mean more. Despite being a fraction of the price of the AirPods Pro, the EarFun Air Pro 3 edge out Apple’s buds on battery life by a decent margin. EarFun’s buds are rated for nine hours of playback from the earbuds alone and up to 45 from the case, which is a stark increase from the AirPods Pro 2’s rating of six hours/30 hours. I found these estimates to hold up in my everyday testing as well; whereas I often went up to four days without having to recharge the Air Pro 3’s case, the AirPods Pro 2 typically conk out on me after two or three. You also won’t be sacrificing wireless charging if you go for the cheaper buds here; both sets worked just fine with my Belkin Boost Charge pad.

TL;DR: The EarFun Air Pro 3 have better battery life, and just like the AirPods Pro, support wireless charging.

The gap between affordable and high-end earbuds has never been closer, and the EarFun Air Pro 3 are the best example of that yet. They’re a no-brainer at $80 (and often less, thanks to frequent sales and coupons), offering sound quality and ANC that holds up to the AirPods Pro 2 — not to mention longer battery life and more customization options, particularly for Android folks.

That said, if you’re in a position to splurge — and especially if you have an iPhone — the AirPods Pro 2 really are worth their high price. They’re our pick for the best Apple earbuds for a reason, offering truly seamless compatibility with your iPhone, iPad and Mac while pumping out some of the best audio quality and noise cancellation you can find in any pair of buds. They also just look nicer, complete with a sleeker case that’s better built to last.

Of course, there’s a big gap between these two buds, and there are plenty of great options in the middle to consider. The Sony LinkBuds S are our favorite Android earbuds, offering a unique adaptive sound mode, a robust app for both operating systems and high-res audio support for Android users. But if your budget is firmly under $100, the EarFun Air Pro 3 prove that you don’t have to give up a ton when you’re looking to save.

[ad_2]

Source link

March 3, 2023

Dyson Airwrap vs. Shark Flexstyle: We put these top-tier multi-stylers to the test | CNN Underscored

[ad_1]

This article is part of our series Battle of the Brands, in which we compare category-leading products to their counterparts to determine which are actually worth your money.

Multi-styler technology truly changed the game of at-home hair styling, and it just so happens that two major vacuum brands are also leading the charge of innovative hair tools. The Dyson Airwrap Multi-Styler Complete and the Shark Flexstyle Air Drying & Styling System allow users to bring salon-level results home with a bevy of styling attachments and features. Both tools combine drying and styling technology to streamline your routine, so you can blow dry, style and set your hair all with one device.

On the surface, the Airwrap and Flexstyle have more similarities than differences — but let’s see how they measure up.

Dyson’s Airwrap uses enhanced Coanda airflow technology to make styling surprisingly quick and easy, whether you’re going for a sleek and straight look or a volumized and bouncy blowout.

A dryer, curler, volumizer and smoother all in one, the Shark Flexstyle also uses the Coanda effect for smart hairstyling.

The Airwrap and Flexstyle are multi-styler tools that offer similar features. Both market themselves as hot-tool alternatives that are healthier for the hair than traditional hair dryers, curling irons or smoothing systems because of temperature-measuring technology. According to Dyson, the Airwrap measures airflow temperature more than 40 times per second, ensuring that the device stays under 302 degrees Fahrenheit. The Flexstyle also constantly measures airflow temperature (Shark says 1,000 times per second), and features a no-heat setting so you can use the device to speed up your air-drying time.

In terms of look and feel, both are sleek and sophisticated. They take up about the same amount of space; however, the Airwrap comes with a convenient storage case to keep the attachments and device organized between uses. Before I get into the attachment comparisons, let’s take a look at the devices’ respective specs.

	Shark Flexstyle	Dyson Airwrap
Size	1.8 inches x 13.5 inches, with an 8-foot cord	1.9 inches x 10.7 inches, with an 8.5-foot cord
Weight	1.54 pounds	1.5 pounds
Number of heat settings	4, plus cool shot	3, plus cool shot
Number of speed settings	3	3
Number of attachments included	4	7
Additional attachments offered	2 (curling-defining diffuser and wide-tooth comb)	6 (wide-tooth comb, 3 additional Airwrap barrel sizes and lengths, 2 additional smoothing brush sizes and 1 additional round brush size)
Storage case	No	Yes
Color options	1	2

I tested the tools side-by-side by using the Shark Flexstyle on the left side of my head and the Dyson Airwrap on the right side of my head. Because my hair is naturally stick-straight, thick and very long, I typically have a lazy approach to hairstyling and opt for air drying most days because of the time and effort it takes to completely style my hair. I found both tools easy to use and durable, and it was a breeze to switch from one attachment to the next, making it feel like one smooth-sailing process, rather than an involved routine with a bunch of separate steps.

The Airwap and Flexstyle both boast a hair drying feature, which allows you to cut down the number of hair appliances in your routine. (The two brands also happen to make tech-driven hair dryers too, the Dyson Supersonic Hair Dryer and the Shark HyperAir Hair Dryer.) The Airwrap features one Coanda smoothing dryer attachment, while the Flexstyle’s dryer is built into the body of the device and then comes with your chosen dryer attachments based on your hair type (the set for straight and wavy hair comes with a concentrator, while the set for curly and coily hair comes with the concentrator and a diffuser but no smoothing brush). Both recommend starting with towel-dried hair, and then rough drying the hair to 80% before using another styling attachment to finish your look. Each device dried my hair to that 80% state in about 5 minutes, using the max heat and speed settings.

Between the two, the Flexstyle’s drying feature impressed me the most. To activate its hair dryer, the top of the device rotates and locks in place at an angle. This gives more control for your styling, and almost feels like you’re holding a standard hair dryer.

Since my hair is straight, I typically use a concentrator attachment on my regular hair dryer to keep it smooth. Having the concentrator attachment on the Flexstyle gave it the same functionality and control.

The Airwrap’s Coanda dryer attachment, on the other hand, isn’t quite as intuitive. It features two modes, Drying and Smoothing, with the latter utilizing the Coanda technology. The Drying mode features a shot of focused airflow, but it didn’t provide as much control as I’m used to with a regular hair dryer. According to Dyson, the Smoothing mode is for already dry hair, is best for naturally straight or wavy hair and will help tame flyaways. With the Airwrap’s other smoothing attachments, however, I didn’t see a need to use this on already dry hair, and instead tried the Smoothing mode to finish drying my hair. While my hair looked straight and smooth, I didn’t notice any major difference from how it would look after using a standard dryer.

The Flexstyle has one paddle brush attachment that features short and long bristles, while the Airwrap has two, the Soft smoothing brush and the Firm smoothing brush. I used these to finish my usual straight styled look on 80% dry hair, after using the dryer attachments.

On the Dyson’s smoothing attachments, the airflow is more concentrated and uses the Coanda technology to attact the hair, however, the Flexstyle’s dual-length bristles gripped my hair the best out of any of the smoothing attachments. Overall, there weren’t any major differences in the final results across the devices — both delivered a straight, sleek look.

To add volume to your ‘do, the Flexstyle offers a large-barreled oval brush, while the Airwap has a round volumizing brush. The Flexstyle’s volumizing attachment more closely resembles the fan-favorite Revlon One-Step Volumizer, whereas the Airwap’s barrel is closer to a traditional round brush.

Again, I tested these on 80% dry hair. I found that the Dyson’s smaller barrel gave more defined curls, making my hair appear fuller and bouncier. The Shark’s barrel added some volume and a bit of bend to the ends of my hair, but not any super-defined style. Since I have thick hair, I imagine the Flexstyle would make more of a noticeable difference on fine hair.

Left side: Styled with Shark Flexstyle. Right side: Styled with Dyson Airwrap.

For me, the Dyson definitely won this round. The round brush was easy to use and gave a polished blowout with minimal effort — I truly love the results every time. In the past, I had tried maneuvering a round brush with a traditional hair dryer and it was always a struggle. My hair would get caught in the brush and I would ultimately give up and just go with straight hair. The Airwrap’s round drying brush combines the two steps, and my hair pulls through easily. I never thought I’d be able to give myself a blowout in under 15 minutes, but here we are!

The Coanda effect curlers are what make these hair tools magic. Both the Shark and Dyson feature this technology, which automatically wraps the hair around the barrel of the curler as the airflow dries and sets the hair. Unlike the wand curlers of my youth (the ones that came with a glove to protect your hand as you hold your hair to the 400-degree tool), there’s no worry of burning any digits with these. The Flexstyle has two 1.25-inch barrels, which direct the curls clockwise or counterclockwise. The previous model of the Airwrap also had separate barrels to switch the direction of the curls, but the current version is able to switch the direction of how the hair is wrapped in a single barrel (a knob at the top can be twisted to choose the direction). Now, the Airwrap comes with two sizes of barrels, a 1.2-inch and 1.6-inch, both with this rotating tip. Dyson also offers two lengths of curling barrels, with one made specifically for long hair. For this story, I tested the Airwrap’s 1.2-inch barrel against the Flexstyle’s curling barrel, since they are closest in size.

As with the other attachments, the Flexstyle and Airwrap essentially provided the same function with the curlers. However, I found that the Dyson handled my thick hair much better than the Shark. I was able to style my hair with the Airwrap at medium speed, high heat, working in 1-inch sections and it created voluminous, loose curls. For the Flexstyle, I started out with the same settings — medium speed, high heat, 1-inch sections — but had to switch it to high speed because it was struggling to wrap my hair. Even then, the curls weren’t as defined as with the Airwrap.

Left photo: Left side - Styled with Shark Flexstyle. Right side - Styled with Dyson Airwrap. Right photo: 6 hours after styling.

By the end of the day, the side styled with the Airwrap had relaxed into waves, while the side styled with the Flexstyle looked virtually straight.

While the Flexstyle’s hair drying features top that of the Airwrap, Dyson’s device outperformed it overall. The Airwrap’s ability to create next-to-professional-level styles that last — in under 20 minutes — is truly impressive.

Taking hair type into consideration, I could see that the Flexstyle would work with finer, lighter hair. Since I have thick, heavy hair — and a lot of it — it usually takes more time and power to get styles to set.

Of course, budget comes into play. With the Airwap at twice the price of the Flexstyle, I would still recommend Shark’s option for those looking for a more budget-friendly multi-styling tool.