> Dyson CameraJet™ is clinically proven to be more effective in improving gum health by removing and preventing plaque buildup.² Vs a manual tooth brush.
Notice they don't include ultrasonic and rotating brushes in that statement.
There isn't great evidence to suggest that electric toothbrushes are much better at removing plaque than manual. E.g. this metaanalysis [1] found basically no difference.
There are also studies that show that electric is better, like this meta-analysis that found a small effect [2] and this Cochrane review. [3]
What I generally read in articles is that the single biggest thing that makes a difference is brushing for the full 2 minutes, and electric toothbrushes can help with that by having a built-in timer.
> Dyson’s brushing action prevents stalling, keeping bristles in constant motion to remove more plaque vs. market leading premium electric toothbrushes in a laboratory test in brush-only variable mode in the hard to reach areas. [0]
Maybe one was an actual, independent though Dyson funded study and the other just their internal comparison to competitors? When I last upgraded my electric toothbrush, I read some studies looking into performance of Oral-B and co. and, to a layman, it seemed like most proper independent studies used manual as the base line.
Edit 2: It might be that I didn’t maintain it properly and the water reservoir was building up bio film over period of time and actively distributing bacterial to my gums.
> It might be that I didn’t maintain it properly and the water reservoir was building up bio film over period of time and actively distributing bacterial to my gums.
Not in any way knowledgeable on Dental Hygiene, so take this for layman's advice from someone who has used a water flosser for half a decade to positive effect: To anyone reading, please read the instructions in terms of proper usage, how to place it, etc., don't go full blast in the first few weeks and absolutely clean it according to the instructions. At least always empty the water fully and dry it out with the reservoir opened.
Not saying this is what caused your negative experience, mind you. Again, Dental is not my field (Dentists, feel free to correct me if anything I wrote is wrong), but from my understanding and reading (I did read some papers when deciding to buy my first, cause of course I do my purchasing decisions on PubMed), some peoples gums seem to be simply more sensitive [0] to water flossers, even with proper device maintenance. In the end, always clear with your dentist.
I have had two different dentists recommend water flossers in the past. Got one as a gift several years ago and am pretty happy.
I believe that sometimes there are bad outcomes from standard medical advice—humans are messy and the world is complicated—but I would like to know much more about the failing case before making a judgement.
I bought a Dyson vacuum, or rather I was given one as a gift from my wife after she saw a joke twitter post about a man being happier about a new vacuum than the birth of his own kids. She gave it to me on Christmas Eve because I was about to vacuum the entire house with our old vacuum - which was also a fantastic vacuum, for the record.
My feedback:
1. It works great. I had to empty it several times because it was picking up so much more stuff than our existing vacuum did - mostly pet hair and the like.
2. It's the one with the little laser thing, which is a dumb little gimmick until you see it in action and then it's life-changing - if you're like me and find satisfaction in picking up every invisible crumb anywhere.
3. After a year and a bit, maybe less, it started misbehaving. It would suddenly turn off, then you'd have to let go of the trigger and pull it again; then it would work fine. Then it would happen a few times until it worked fine. Then it almost never worked fine. I kind of tolerated it for a while until I got fed up and googled the problem, and it was suggested to buy a new housing - the electronics plus the motor, basically the whole 'vacuum' part of the vacuum, which was only just over a hundred dollars direct from Dyson. Irritating to have to spend an extra hundred bucks to get my five hundred dollar vacuum working as expectred, but expected it to cost far more.
Would I recommend it? Not sure. It's very expensive, it works very well; it has a nice wall mount that charges it and which holds a small subset of the attachments it comes with. I'm glad I have it and I use it often.
Yes, it's plastic, but if it were, for example, steel or aluminium then it would be too heavy to use for any length of time. As it is, it feels very sturdy and has held up physically very well, but I'm obviously also not rough with it so there's no reason it would have any issues unless it were, in fact, cheaply or poorly made.
I've had this issue a few times. Took it apart and soaked/scrubbed anything without a pcb or wires coming out of it, and it worked fine after. Eventually the filter on the motor crumbled into dust (not suitable for picking up the dust from sanding paint off indoor walls). I tried to get the right one from Dyson but I ended up just grabbing something that looked like a distant cousin of the right filter off eBay and cut it into the right shape. It stopped working again after a few months, I was going to do the cleansing ceremony again, but then I dropped it and it started working fine again.
I was given a V6 and I bought an adapter that lets me use my dewalt batteries with the vacuum. Kind of a cool party trick but I think they were like $600 new which is bonkers.
Yes. Meile vacuums are made out of quality plastic, and seem to survive bring dropped down the stairs better than my coccyx did.
Due to the unfortunate quirk of language, its hard do describe how much better I like my Meile bagged vacuum than my Dyson. See my Dyson sucked, but the Meile really sucks.
> Are there vacuums out there nowadays that aren't cheap plastic construction?
As someone in the market for a new (portable) vacuum cleaner, who has a Dyson now and no longer wants to, is there really nothing out there that isn't so flimsy and plasticky and still portable?
I had a dc03 animal for over 10 years, kept replacing bits.. this year replaced it with the modern equivalent as I didn't want a battery powered one.
The new one just feels sort of flimsy in all sorts of ways, definite buyers remorse, the old one just felt indestructible + really powerful, this seems a bit crap.
Metal portions would be nice but i get it’s a weight thing. Also emphasis on it being cheap plastic rather than just plastic. Several parts of mine cracked and broke within a year.
Carbon fiber and 3d printed titanium is probably where I'd start for materials to design a high end vacuum to be light/strong/durable. Injected molded magnesium alloy would also be a candidate if production qty was high enough to offset the tooling.
Mirrors my experience with their airfilter/fan combination: Sounded smart with glowing reviews; ended up being loud, with horrible whining noises, on top of horrible aesthetics and being very expensive.
I never really thought much of any vacuum I’ve ever own until I got a shark one. It picks everything, to the point where you have to be extra careful you don’t vacuum over things you don’t want to be sucked up into the vacuum. It makes total sense, who needs such powerful suction when you can instead just put a roller on the floor to pick things up. Never going back to a suction-only vacuum.
I had the plastic trigger fail on mine. Took the whole thing apart and replaced it with a metal trigger from AliExpress. It’s been going strong since.
I’m not usually a conspiracy theorist, but if I was a product engineer looking for a way to make my well-engineered product fail just after the warranty period was up, that trigger failure looked like a pretty good candidate. There was a specific piece of the plastic that looked like it was ostensibly there as a structural reinforcement, but it was clearly too short, and the trigger had cracked just past it.
My mum used to be a professional cleaner and she would often explain to people there's a reason professionals never use Dysons.
That's not to say it's a bad product, but I've had my Henry vacuum for decades, and in that time it's been kicked down the stairs and used vacuum up all kinds of stuff it probably wasn't design for, but it's still just as good as the day I got it.
Dyson CameraJet™ is clinically proven to be more effective in improving gum health by removing and preventing plaque buildup.² Vs a manual tooth brush. "
So they didn't dare compare it against a 20 EUR Braun Oral B?
Am very happy with my Panasonic water flosser (especially now its chargeable via USB Type-C), great for gum health and far more pleasant than regular dental floss for me personally. Besides the Dyson typical pricing, one concern I have from the get-go is the tank size, seems to be a tenth vs the 200ml the Panasonic packs.
At least I do use all of that to properly clean every area and if they do it simultaneously to regular 2min+ brushing, I'm interested to see how that works in terms of water usage. Likely why they got the camera, for short bursts, looking forward to read some papers on how well that truly works vs a consistent stream.
Besides that, I personally always liked the totally round, smaller Oral-B heads vs Philips and other electrical toothbrushes, mainly cause that's what I grew up on. Seems Dyson is somewhere in the middle, smaller than most but not quite fully round.
Price as mentioned is a lot, but not unprecedented for those just buying the iO Series 10 or Philips equivalent + an Aqua flosser. Though there is no real reason to go for the 10, e.g. 8n is identical even in the superfluous comfort features at often less than 50%.
Absolutely crazy concept. But looks like they actually threw something decent together. I'd wager the bulk of problems people face with teeth come from poor flossing, this makes it effortless to avoid that.
I've owned water jets, the ones I've had suck. I always end up going back to dental floss. These days string on a plastic holder which I hate because it feels so wasteful to have all that single use plastic, but they are just so effective and I hate the manual wrapping of string, so I accept the wastefulness reluctantly.
This product potentially hits home with what I'd want from an effective waterjet, and it also comes with a brush on top.
The price is high, that's for sure, but I'm guessing they aren't aiming at the average electric tooth brush market, more like a competitor to the oral b io series 9 segment. And sure they are quite a bit above that price point, but they got a lot more of a solution backing the price.
My dentist recommended the dental picks (which can be used multiple times) instead of tape/string. I find it a lot easier than trying to fit my hands on my mouth (especially the longer L-shaped picks)
Surprisingly, $30 for two replacement heads is comparable to other electric toothbrushes (not counting third-party bulk knockoff replacements, which I have been using for years without issue). The RFID reader might force you to buy the official replacements, though.
The Oral-B Genius X with A.I. Rechargeable Toothbrush will transform the way you brush for healthier gums and stronger teeth for life*. The dentist-inspired round brush head surrounds each tooth to remove more plaque along the gumline vs a regular manual toothbrush.
lol, nice to see some engineering company building outlandish product. Not everything needs mass appeal, this is not for me but maybe some one finds this interesting
Curious how much replacement heads will cost if they're going to stick an RFID in every single one. Surely there's a cheaper solution to track when you switched heads.
Water flossers with handheld tanks are already unwieldy. I can't imagine using one with the head vibrating, water coming out of my mouth, and I'm trying to view the inside of my mouth in an app. Replaceable battery though. $20 Sonicare can't do that!
I laughed out loud when I read the title, but the more I read about it, it actually sounds really cool. I know that is just their advertising and marketing jargon that is doing this but it does sound awesome... definitely not 500$ worth of awesome though
If this is doing better waterpik + toothbrush and perhaps has a long guarantee and leaves you with a 2x normal feeling every morning, I could see the appeal. I dropped $60 on Waterpic and it broke. So then I got a better Waterpik for $100+ but it was clunky unit with bigger water container that didn't fit in my small bathroom. And it broke. But I do like the feeling of electric toothbrush.
an ultrasonic scaler is far better at removing plaque and build up than a waterpik. I find that a waterpik is only really best at areas where there is high crowding, or hard to reach areas behind molars, etc.
But dental scalers don't offer the advantages water flossers do for gums, do they? Plus, from whet I've read online, it seems that these devices need to be used after brushing, as opposed to water flossers which are used before brushing. And for dislodging food (especially with braces), water flossers remain the best tool.
My dentist uses AI for X-ray analysis. I wish I remembered the name but the monitor was facing me and it was obvious. They also use some sort of fancy imaging tool that they run around my mouth to create a 3d image.
Dyson seem to be the champion of turning a cheap effective device that's well understood into the same device but an order of magnitude more expensive. Are people still buying it?
Of course they will. People buy rubbish like this all the time.
Here I am in a hotel room with a Dyson fan, which simultaneously moves less air, and is more noisy, with a much more piercing tone, than my home fan with blades that I bought for £30 from screwfix.
I'll be turning it off before I sleep... unlike the one at home.
A purchasing decision for households: buy a $500 vacuum or a $500 toothbrush. Dyson competing with itself for limited consumer discretionary income on luxury purchases.
My impression is they're actually way overpriced relative to their quality/value, and get away with it due to effective marketing and aesthetic design.
To be fair, I've never owned a Dyson product, but have used them, and they just seem meh at best.
Just really surprised to see a Dyson announcement get upvotes on HN.
I borrowed a dyson vacuum once from a neighbour. Despite using it to vacuum my apartment after already having used my own vacuum, it filled up almost instantly with stuff my personal vacuum left in the carpet.
My current vacuum is a V15, and I like it a lot. It was expensive (and a gift), but it's very effective, has a lot of attachments to make it easier to clean upholstery/the carpet/a computer/drawers/hardwood/the window frames/whatever, comes with a wall mount that the cable connects to so you can just put it in the mount and it charges. The one issue I had seems to be a relatively well-understood issue with the electronics, which resulted in me having to spend another $100+ on a new housing - the electronics + motor + LCD screen + etc., basically the whole 'vacuum' part of the vacuum. Given how well it's treated my so far, though, I'm not too miffed.
Our last vacuum (which we still have) was a Miele, and while it was also fantastic it was far more of a pain in the ass since it's a plug-in with a bag vs. a cordless canister. The quality is similar, I think the Dyson is a bit better, but I use it exclusively because it's far easier to go get it, vacuum up a spill, and put it back. I know that's more of a comparison between canister and bag vaccums, but the fact that they're around as effective despite the dyson being a canister is I think a point in its favor.
Whether all of their stuff is as good, or only the more expensive stuff, I can't say.
I have a Dyson SV22 v15. It was expensive and it doesn't have enough suction for carpets (we have a plug-in for that) but it's much easier to use and everyone in the house prefers it. It doesn't feel particularly high quality and it's possible I could have gotten a shark or similar for much less, but my roommate who moved in with a shark used my vacuum instead so make of that what you will. But after four years of constant use it's never needed a repair and seems to work about as well as when we got it (as long as you clear it out like any other vacuum).
On the same topic, it's been a while since I have tried to find the best product to treat canker sores, but I have never found anything better than solutions composed of carboxylic/mineral acid and alcohol, and even then, it hardly suppresses the pain and I have found the treatment time to be about the same whether I apply something or not. The dream would be to have something that make them disappear near instantly.
I suffered from incredibly painful month+ long lasting chronic canker sores (technically apthous ulcers) for the first 3 decades of my life.
Doctors and dentists suggested all the usual triggers (avoid SLS, supplement with B vitamins, etc)
Then one day someone mentioned the connection of NSAIDs and ulcers, and I instantly realized mouth ulcers are.. ulcers...
I used to use ibuprofen occasionally, often enough to not correlate it to canker sores. Of course then I’d use more ibuprofen for that pain, get more canker sores, and be miserable for months.
Haven’t bought ibuprofen for 10 years now and they just stopped. I have used ibuprofen on a couple occasions since I learned this and both times I developed a canker sore. IANAD, YMMV, I’m just happy they’re gone
The camera is for the ai: "Dyson's Gap Optical Targeting™ prevents plaque formation by detecting the gaps and jetting between teeth every time you brush.²"
I use the cheapest toothbrush I can buy with homemade toothpaste and haven't had a cavity since middle school. The only dental problem I've had in my adult life was my tooth with the filling getting cracked in a car wreck.
Technology marketing continues to suck wealth away from consumers.
Edit: it's hard to find clear info on the risks of improperly using an electric toothbrush or even on overbrushing, let alone the Dyson one, in part because a lot of search results are blogspam. Hopefully if the Dyson one is stronger, they don't use that to give it a default that is too much pressure, whether of water or moving bristles. I don't know that water pressure would cause enamel to come off. As for pressure using bristles, there is a point of pressure at which the cleaning effect stops increasing, and it is better not to go beyond that. Right now it's unclear to me whether the Dyson toothbrush works especially well or not.
This is the gold standard of how to properly apply AI to an existing product like a toothbrush, with significant engineering quality that actually makes it better.
Notice they don't include ultrasonic and rotating brushes in that statement.
There are also studies that show that electric is better, like this meta-analysis that found a small effect [2] and this Cochrane review. [3]
What I generally read in articles is that the single biggest thing that makes a difference is brushing for the full 2 minutes, and electric toothbrushes can help with that by having a built-in timer.
1. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38348549/
2. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34877772/
3. https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD...
> Dyson’s brushing action prevents stalling, keeping bristles in constant motion to remove more plaque vs. market leading premium electric toothbrushes in a laboratory test in brush-only variable mode in the hard to reach areas. [0]
Maybe one was an actual, independent though Dyson funded study and the other just their internal comparison to competitors? When I last upgraded my electric toothbrush, I read some studies looking into performance of Oral-B and co. and, to a layman, it seemed like most proper independent studies used manual as the base line.
[0] https://discover.dyson.com/en-us
Edit: here are some anecdotes https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfmaude/d...
Edit 2: It might be that I didn’t maintain it properly and the water reservoir was building up bio film over period of time and actively distributing bacterial to my gums.
Not in any way knowledgeable on Dental Hygiene, so take this for layman's advice from someone who has used a water flosser for half a decade to positive effect: To anyone reading, please read the instructions in terms of proper usage, how to place it, etc., don't go full blast in the first few weeks and absolutely clean it according to the instructions. At least always empty the water fully and dry it out with the reservoir opened.
Not saying this is what caused your negative experience, mind you. Again, Dental is not my field (Dentists, feel free to correct me if anything I wrote is wrong), but from my understanding and reading (I did read some papers when deciding to buy my first, cause of course I do my purchasing decisions on PubMed), some peoples gums seem to be simply more sensitive [0] to water flossers, even with proper device maintenance. In the end, always clear with your dentist.
[0] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11180943
I believe that sometimes there are bad outcomes from standard medical advice—humans are messy and the world is complicated—but I would like to know much more about the failing case before making a judgement.
That said this looks like a ridiculously overengineered product. Electric toothbrushes have come a long way, at a fraction of the price.
Edit: Ah a gum problem, yeah I've been warned about that (by a dentist no less). I just use interdental brushes.
My feedback:
1. It works great. I had to empty it several times because it was picking up so much more stuff than our existing vacuum did - mostly pet hair and the like.
2. It's the one with the little laser thing, which is a dumb little gimmick until you see it in action and then it's life-changing - if you're like me and find satisfaction in picking up every invisible crumb anywhere.
3. After a year and a bit, maybe less, it started misbehaving. It would suddenly turn off, then you'd have to let go of the trigger and pull it again; then it would work fine. Then it would happen a few times until it worked fine. Then it almost never worked fine. I kind of tolerated it for a while until I got fed up and googled the problem, and it was suggested to buy a new housing - the electronics plus the motor, basically the whole 'vacuum' part of the vacuum, which was only just over a hundred dollars direct from Dyson. Irritating to have to spend an extra hundred bucks to get my five hundred dollar vacuum working as expectred, but expected it to cost far more.
Would I recommend it? Not sure. It's very expensive, it works very well; it has a nice wall mount that charges it and which holds a small subset of the attachments it comes with. I'm glad I have it and I use it often.
Yes, it's plastic, but if it were, for example, steel or aluminium then it would be too heavy to use for any length of time. As it is, it feels very sturdy and has held up physically very well, but I'm obviously also not rough with it so there's no reason it would have any issues unless it were, in fact, cheaply or poorly made.
Going on 13 years now I think.
My cleaners moaned about the Dyson but they love love love the Henry.
Our Dyson is cordless and so so so convenient for a quick 15-20s cleanup after kids dinner etc. Grab and go.
So we persoanlly use the Dyson for day to day cleanup, and the cleaners use the Henry when they come.
Due to the unfortunate quirk of language, its hard do describe how much better I like my Meile bagged vacuum than my Dyson. See my Dyson sucked, but the Meile really sucks.
As someone in the market for a new (portable) vacuum cleaner, who has a Dyson now and no longer wants to, is there really nothing out there that isn't so flimsy and plasticky and still portable?
The new one just feels sort of flimsy in all sorts of ways, definite buyers remorse, the old one just felt indestructible + really powerful, this seems a bit crap.
I’m not usually a conspiracy theorist, but if I was a product engineer looking for a way to make my well-engineered product fail just after the warranty period was up, that trigger failure looked like a pretty good candidate. There was a specific piece of the plastic that looked like it was ostensibly there as a structural reinforcement, but it was clearly too short, and the trigger had cracked just past it.
ifixit guide for the curious: https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Dyson+V11+Trigger+Replacement/1...
That's not to say it's a bad product, but I've had my Henry vacuum for decades, and in that time it's been kicked down the stairs and used vacuum up all kinds of stuff it probably wasn't design for, but it's still just as good as the day I got it.
https://youtu.be/V39qPwKpcGg?is=tH7WYtkzHik_HJpd
Dyson CameraJet™ is clinically proven to be more effective in improving gum health by removing and preventing plaque buildup.² Vs a manual tooth brush. "
So they didn't dare compare it against a 20 EUR Braun Oral B?
At least I do use all of that to properly clean every area and if they do it simultaneously to regular 2min+ brushing, I'm interested to see how that works in terms of water usage. Likely why they got the camera, for short bursts, looking forward to read some papers on how well that truly works vs a consistent stream.
Besides that, I personally always liked the totally round, smaller Oral-B heads vs Philips and other electrical toothbrushes, mainly cause that's what I grew up on. Seems Dyson is somewhere in the middle, smaller than most but not quite fully round.
Price as mentioned is a lot, but not unprecedented for those just buying the iO Series 10 or Philips equivalent + an Aqua flosser. Though there is no real reason to go for the 10, e.g. 8n is identical even in the superfluous comfort features at often less than 50%.
I've owned water jets, the ones I've had suck. I always end up going back to dental floss. These days string on a plastic holder which I hate because it feels so wasteful to have all that single use plastic, but they are just so effective and I hate the manual wrapping of string, so I accept the wastefulness reluctantly.
This product potentially hits home with what I'd want from an effective waterjet, and it also comes with a brush on top.
The price is high, that's for sure, but I'm guessing they aren't aiming at the average electric tooth brush market, more like a competitor to the oral b io series 9 segment. And sure they are quite a bit above that price point, but they got a lot more of a solution backing the price.
Surprisingly, $30 for two replacement heads is comparable to other electric toothbrushes (not counting third-party bulk knockoff replacements, which I have been using for years without issue). The RFID reader might force you to buy the official replacements, though.
The Oral-B Genius X with A.I. Rechargeable Toothbrush will transform the way you brush for healthier gums and stronger teeth for life*. The dentist-inspired round brush head surrounds each tooth to remove more plaque along the gumline vs a regular manual toothbrush.
From https://www.galaxus.ch/en/page/dysons-electric-brush-sprays-...
*https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iterative_closest_point
Here I am in a hotel room with a Dyson fan, which simultaneously moves less air, and is more noisy, with a much more piercing tone, than my home fan with blades that I bought for £30 from screwfix.
I'll be turning it off before I sleep... unlike the one at home.
But I find myself a bit skeptical. Would love to see some long-term third party testing on it.
My impression is they're actually way overpriced relative to their quality/value, and get away with it due to effective marketing and aesthetic design.
To be fair, I've never owned a Dyson product, but have used them, and they just seem meh at best.
Just really surprised to see a Dyson announcement get upvotes on HN.
My current vacuum is a V15, and I like it a lot. It was expensive (and a gift), but it's very effective, has a lot of attachments to make it easier to clean upholstery/the carpet/a computer/drawers/hardwood/the window frames/whatever, comes with a wall mount that the cable connects to so you can just put it in the mount and it charges. The one issue I had seems to be a relatively well-understood issue with the electronics, which resulted in me having to spend another $100+ on a new housing - the electronics + motor + LCD screen + etc., basically the whole 'vacuum' part of the vacuum. Given how well it's treated my so far, though, I'm not too miffed.
Our last vacuum (which we still have) was a Miele, and while it was also fantastic it was far more of a pain in the ass since it's a plug-in with a bag vs. a cordless canister. The quality is similar, I think the Dyson is a bit better, but I use it exclusively because it's far easier to go get it, vacuum up a spill, and put it back. I know that's more of a comparison between canister and bag vaccums, but the fact that they're around as effective despite the dyson being a canister is I think a point in its favor.
Whether all of their stuff is as good, or only the more expensive stuff, I can't say.
4k resolution mouth camera?? That's why we go to a dentist every 6 months because I wouldnt know wtf im looking at.
"Oh there's that canker sore I feel. Huh, at least I can see it"
Bruh, you don't need a camera for gap detection. Just stick an IR sensor, detect change in light. Boom, $0.05.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7701991/
It's a bit hard to find toothpastes without it that aren't also fluoride free, but they exist.
I suffered from incredibly painful month+ long lasting chronic canker sores (technically apthous ulcers) for the first 3 decades of my life.
Doctors and dentists suggested all the usual triggers (avoid SLS, supplement with B vitamins, etc)
Then one day someone mentioned the connection of NSAIDs and ulcers, and I instantly realized mouth ulcers are.. ulcers...
I used to use ibuprofen occasionally, often enough to not correlate it to canker sores. Of course then I’d use more ibuprofen for that pain, get more canker sores, and be miserable for months.
Haven’t bought ibuprofen for 10 years now and they just stopped. I have used ibuprofen on a couple occasions since I learned this and both times I developed a canker sore. IANAD, YMMV, I’m just happy they’re gone
On paper it looks like a solid application of vision models.
The camera is for the ai: "Dyson's Gap Optical Targeting™ prevents plaque formation by detecting the gaps and jetting between teeth every time you brush.²"
Technology marketing continues to suck wealth away from consumers.
Putting the word "camera" in the name seems pretty dumb, but who knows? Maybe I'm the dumb one.
https://youtu.be/-0S3Jf-NxdI?si=hpyEcQUzguDDQaQ6
I would be disinclined to use it. It reminds me of the Astral Codex Ten Article about the Midjouney Scanner https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/preliminary-thoughts-on-the... , as well as those who've had problems with AirPods. https://discussions.apple.com/verify-human/verify.html?next=... (42 pages) What sounds the most amazing in a press release is often not the most medically sound.
Edit: it's hard to find clear info on the risks of improperly using an electric toothbrush or even on overbrushing, let alone the Dyson one, in part because a lot of search results are blogspam. Hopefully if the Dyson one is stronger, they don't use that to give it a default that is too much pressure, whether of water or moving bristles. I don't know that water pressure would cause enamel to come off. As for pressure using bristles, there is a point of pressure at which the cleaning effect stops increasing, and it is better not to go beyond that. Right now it's unclear to me whether the Dyson toothbrush works especially well or not.
That is what I call not "slop".