I feel as though I'm going mad when I say there was once a time when Ryan Murphy TV shows were fresh, bold and innovative. Nip/Tuck was a scathing satirical putdown of cosmetic surgery culture in the early 2000s, Glee – while completely unhinged – dominated the television zeitgeist in a way no other show was daring to, and the first three seasons of American Horror Story were bona fide masterpieces.
Unsurprisingly, Murphy's track history likely means that streamers like Hulu and Disney are all but happy to throw money his way and wait for the next big thing to materialize... except, this isn't really happening anymore. While shows like 9-1-1 are getting more grandiose by the minute (Angela Bassett in space? Really), others including American Sports Story and Grotesquerie fell off the radar and were quickly cancelled.
Then All's Fair became the 0% Rotten Tomatoes stinker that took the internet by storm, guaranteeing a second season purely by fully leaning into its own stupidity. I really didn't think Murphy could top his own dreadfulness, but new FX series The Beauty easily clears any flop he's ever previously produced.
Why? Because at least All's Fair knew how terrible it was. At least Grotesquerie didn't pretend to be a success story. The Beauty is masquerading as something much more significant than it actually is, without contributing anything to the cultural zeitgeist aside from making sure you have the safest sex possible.
The Beauty on FX is The Substance-turned-STD, and everything about it is wrong
I know that you won't want to watch this series based on the above trailer, but let me set the scene for you anyway. Two FBI agents (played by Evan Peters and Rebecca Hall) travel across Europe to unravel the mysterious death of a group of supermodels. None of them appear to know each other, but all have the same symptoms – a virus, burning alive from the inside and spontaneously exploding upon death.
This either sounds like the recipe for absurd hilarity or insightful social commentary, but The Beauty is neither. After you've finished being baffled by Bella Hadid's out-of-place cameo, you're left feeling nothing aside from wondering how the series was green lit in the first place. We had The Substance last year, so we hardly need its knockoff little sister.
It doesn't take long for The Beauty to hit you over the head with its intended messaging of "what will people risk in order to be beautiful?". You could argue that a plethora of shows and movies have mulled over this age-old question already, ironically beginning with Nip/Tuck itself. Truthfully, we know what people would risk to be attractive (everything), and the critical analysis ends there.
Murphy is clearly churning out old ideas here, and there's nothing of merit or value contained within any single scene. The decision to make the killer virus a sexually transmitted disease (STD) is morally ambiguous, particularly when you consider Murphy's deft handling of the AIDS crisis in Pose. Is this meant to be an ironic nod to real-life history? Is it merely intended to shock whoever is watching? Condom sales might increase after this, but not much else will.
Go girl, give us nothing
I can't even remember their character names they are that forgettable. (Image credit: FX)
But let's put the gory gimmicks and missed narrative opportunities to one side. What else do we have left? Peters and Hall are secretly lovers, but don't have an ounce of chemistry between them. This makes flogging an already dead horse even trickier, because there's almost no incentive to watch. Murphy has already told us how our exploding supermodels die thanks to the mutant sex virus, so where's the payoff?
There's also the gauche notion that "fat is bad" that plays through the center of the story, and that's neither fitting for 2026 nor is it an original thought. 20 years ago, Murphy could have been lauded as daring by tackling body image head-on, but now it's just uncomfortable to watch slim actors in fat suits. Again, there's nothing of value to making this a worthwhile endeavor.
So we're left with a mis-matched, tone-deaf, mundane splatter of madness on our screens, and I'd rather have been blasted straight in the face with the VFX department's guts like an Italian horror movie from the 80s. Perhaps that way, I'd have felt something.
During the international press tour, I saw star Ashton Kutcher talk about The Beauty as if nobody has dared to make television like this before. I have to wonder if he's actually ever watched TV before now, and that's before I consider that his ex-wife Demi Moore examined this same topic in an infinitely more successful way.
Our only two wins are the brash pop soundtrack and a cameo role from the icon that is Isabella Rossellini. I don't know what Murphy has got on her to get this appearance, but God is she so much better than this. We all are.
The OnePlus Nord 6 is coming soon, and according to multiple recent rumors, it might be a rebranded and/or slightly tweaked version of the OnePlus Turbo 6, which launched in China earlier this month.
Now the Nord 6 has seemingly run Geekbench, and as always this means there's a listing for it in the benchmark's online database. This reveals the model number CPH2795, and the fact that the phone is powered by the Snapdragon 8s Gen 4 SoC - just like the Turbo 6.
The prototype which ran the benchmark had 12GB of RAM, but of course OnePlus could offer more options upon launch. The device...
In 2025, open earbuds became the trendy new kind of headphone to buy, and the market was dominated by sports loop-style buds. By the end of the year, though, cuff- or hook-style open-ears had dethroned them, and the Huawei FreeClip 2 are some of the big new buds to use this form factor.
My favorite open-ears of last year were the Huawei FreeArc, so I was hopeful that this new option would deliver something special – perhaps even enough to dethrone the big names on this particular block, like the Bose Ultra Open Earbuds or Shokz OpenDots One. However you might as well call these the FreeClicarus, because the company has flown too close to the sun.
The selling point of the FreeClip 2 is this: they’re some of the lightest, thinnest and therefore most comfortable clippy ear-cuff type earbuds to date. This is clear from the size of the charging case, which is the smallest I’ve ever seen in such buds, but also from the design and build of the buds themselves.
However even with the ‘heaviest’ cuff-style buds, I’ve never had a problem with weight, and in the FreeClip 2, the reverse was true. Buds like this rely on gravity to lock them firmly around your ear, and if they’re light, they just won’t sit right. I found the buds didn’t naturally sit properly, so needed some adjustment every time I used them, and were far too easy to knock off if they received a bump or swipe. They never fell out during exercise, but they did when I was pulling up my hood, putting on a bike helmet or bringing my noggin too close to my neck.
There are other aspects of the bud that are poorly designed. The touch controls are too finickety, requiring a precision and soft touch that I defy anyone to have at any point, let alone when they’re running or walking. And like all Huawei hearables, the companion smartphone app requires so many hoops to jump through, you’ll feel like an elephant at a circus (on Android, at least – on iOS or HarmonyOS, the process is simple). And, perhaps most damning of all, the audio quality just isn't very good.
You might now be wondering why I gave a modestly positive score to the FreeClip 2, and that's for two reasons. Firstly, it's because these issues aren't terrible. Secondly, it's for two really handy perks that the buds offer which alternatives don't.
Firstly, as I've already said, they're lovely and lightweight, and they were more comfortable to wear for runs or walks than alternatives. Secondly, the maximum volume is really high, fixing a common open earbuds issue – hearing your music properly. Despite their issues, the dearer-than-they-should-be pricing and being a let-own compared to the FreeArc, I can see these being a reliable buy for certain users.
Huawei FreeClip 2 review: Specifications
Component
Value
Water resistant
IP57
Battery life
9 hours (earbuds), 38 hours (total)
Bluetooth type
Bluetooth 6.0
Weight
5.1g / Charging case: 37.8g
Driver
10.8mm
Huawei FreeClip 2 review: Price and availability
(Image credit: Future)
Released on January 21, 2026
Priced at £179.99 (roughly $240, AU$350)
Premium price for clip-style buds
The Huawei FreeClip 2 were announced in December 2025, and put on sale on January 21, 2026 (today, at the time of writing). Just in time for your New Year Resolution to run more – unless you live in the US or Australia, where the things don’t sell.
At £179 (roughly $240, AU$350), the FreeClip are fairly premium cuff-style buds. They match the highly-rated Shokz OpenDots One, though undercut the $299 / £299 / AU$449 Bose Ultra Open Ears. Most earbuds with this form factor I’ve tested have been cheaper, though, with some great options at half the price that we’ll explore near the bottom of this review.
For some Huawei-shaped context, the original FreeClip were released two years prior for about the same price. If you want any open earbuds regardless of the form, the Huawei FreeArc came out in early 2025 for about half the price, and they’re the best sports-loop-style open earbuds I’ve tested to date.
Huawei FreeClip 2 review: Design
(Image credit: Future)
Incredibly light case, comfortable buds
Too flexible and light to fit properly
IP57 protection
When I first took the Huawei FreeClip 2 out of the box, I thought Huawei had left them in the wash too long and they’d shrunk. The case is absolutely tiny. I’m talking about 5 x 5 x 2.5cm, smaller than any other charging case I’ve ever seen, and at 37.8g I don’t recall testing any lighter either. Lovely for popping the case in my pocket.
Like most clip-style open earbuds, the left and right buds are interchangeable, so you can pop them in your ears or the case either way around. But the process of putting them in the case is quite confusing, with an arrangement that seems… illogical. You can see what I mean in the pictures; it’s different to any other cuff buds I’ve tested, and I constantly put them in wrong and only noticed when the lid wouldn’t close properly. I found this quite annoying, but it’s the price to pay for a small case.
Onto the buds themselves: a spherical bud (or Acoustic Ball, according to Huawei), counterweight (Comfort Bean, apparently), and the connector loop (Airy C-bridge Design), all in a 5.1g package. The loop is quite elasticky, so there’s a lot of flex between the components, but I never noticed any ill effects when the buds were in my ears.
(Image credit: Future)
I noticed something with the bud – sorry, the Acoustic Ball – that I’ve not heard on other clipping buds. Sometimes when I put them in my ear, the audio wouldn’t be at full power, and I’d have to readjust them before they sounded right. Usually this kind of bud just falls into place, and I wasn’t used to this kind of micromanagement. It was also easier than I’m used to, to knock them out of place – they had a solid fit when exercising, but I kept hitting them out of my ear with bike helmet straps, hoods and hats. I think the frail design and light weight have resulted in some fit reliability problems.
There are touch controls on the buds: stroke the counterweight – I mean, Comfort Bean – for changing the volume, double-tap any part of the buds to play or pause, tripe to skip. The tapping was generally okay, even though my touch wasn’t always picked up, but I really struggled with the swiping – it’s really hard to intuitively reach the right spot behind your ear to find the trigger, and in my experience it was rarely picked up correctly anyway.
You can pick up the Huawei FreeClip 2 in three colors: blue, black or white. They’re rated to IP57, so they have limited protection against dust and can be immersed in shallow water for a limited time.
Design score: 3.5/5
Huawei FreeClip 2 review: Features
(Image credit: Future)
Fantastic listening test
Battery life is 8 hours, 32 hours with case
Fewer other features than some rivals
A recurring problem with Huawei earbuds is that their app situation is, I'm sorry to have to say it, a bit of a nightmare for Android users (an app-solute nightmare?) and that’s no different for the FreeClip 2. Own an iPhone? You’re in the clear – the companion app can be pinched straight from the App Store.
On my Android phone I had to go into a web browser, download and then install an APK for the Huawei AppGallery and use that to install the Huawei Audio Connect app (I then, for good measure, deleted AppGallery). That’s quite a lot of admin just to turn off touch controls.
It might not be worth it. The app lets you pick between four presets (and lets you create your own with a 10-band equalizer), and lets you toggle a few features like touch control, wear detection and head control (you can shake your head to reject an incoming call). Okay, there’s a ‘Find-My’ feature for lost buds or case and drop detection, two useful features. The app also has an Experimental Features menu which, for now, just has a toggle for adaptive volume – since this is labelled as under development, it didn’t feel fair to evaluate it for this review.
(Image credit: Future)
I will say, wearer detection is rarely present on open earbuds, and even more rarely is it fully functional. One thing I noticed over my testing process is that on the FreeClip 2, it works very well. Sometimes, it’s the small things!
The battery life is a little longer than the rivals, with the earbuds lasting 9 hours before you need to pop them back in the case. The case, despite its short stature, offers a decent amount of mileage too: 39 hours in total. It’s not class-leading, but it’s still very good.
The FreeClips support Bluetooth 6.0, a figure I don’t always see in buds like these, and I never had any connection issues; they were fast to pair every time I used them. They can also pair with multiple devices simultaneously so you can use them with both your phone and, say, a running watch.
Features score: 4/5
Huawei FreeClip 2 review: Sound performance
(Image credit: Future)
Single 10.8mm driver
Music sounds lifeless
Lovely, high max volume
Each Huawei FreeClip 2 earpiece has a 10.8mm driver, just like its predecessor – it seems that the improvements in this sequel are in the design department, not the audio sector. That’s a shame because while we didn’t receive the original model, I saw some negative responses to its audio quality, and I’m going to level (I think) those same complaints at the new model.
Music, frankly, sounds flat and lifeless, condensing different instruments into one musical line instead of a sonic spread and then, oddly elevating mid tones higher above treble and bass. It sounds like the guitarist forgot to plug their axe in, the singer is struggling to remember the lyrics, the bassist is pushing through carpal tunnel syndrome.
In The Roosevelts & James Mason’s This Is Life, the rhythmic acoustic guitar seems to take dominance of the mix over the bass and vocals (drums? Not here, officer). The same happened in ABBA’s Waterloo: the acoustic stings in the verse stood above everything else, but strangely when the instrument returned in the chorus it was barely audible. I listened to a recording of the fourth movement of Antonin Dvorak’s New World Symphony, and the brass overshadowed the entire instrumentation – even in the segments they’re barely present.
In short, I wasn’t wowed by the Huawei FreeClip 2’s sonic prowess – it’s not the worst I’ve ever tested, but it is for the price. However, the buds do one spec better than any other model I’ve reviewed, and it’s a department that’s crucial for open earbuds: volume.
Too many times, these open-fit headphones don’t go loud enough, and they’re hard to hear due to the background noise you’re not meant to be isolated from. The FreeClip 2, however, go really loud, and for this reason alone I’d still recommend them to some fitness users who’ve struggled with other options.
If the buds support any features like Dolby Audio or aptX, or codecs like LDAC or AAC, it isn't mentioned on Huawei's website or app.
Sound performance score: 3/5
Huawei FreeClip 2 review: Value
(Image credit: Future)
Given the glut of cuff-style open earbuds at sub-$100 (or £, AU$ equivalent) prices, you can expect a premium product if you’re going to pay a premium price like this. I’m sorry to say that I don’t think the FreeClip 2 quite deserve to be called that, though; the feature set, fit and sound quality aren’t significantly better than the budget options on the market.
I think Huawei missed a trick by pricing these buds as they did. You can pay less and get just as much, or pay the same amount and get more from rivals.
Value score: 3/5
Huawei FreeClip 2 review: scorecard
Category
Comment
Score
Value
These are priced like premium buds but perform like budget ones.
3/5
Design
The teeny tiny build feels good, although it brings problems. At least the case is small.
3.5/5
Features
It may be a little light in the feature department, but what it has works well. It's a shame about the app situation though.
4/5
Sound
They sound a little flat and lifeless, but the high max volume makes them a suitable pick for certain users.
3/5
Huawei FreeClip 2: Should I buy?
(Image credit: Future)
Buy them if...
You need something loud Listening in a noisy environment? The volume you can reach makes these better than others on the market.
You want a small charging case The tiny carry case for the Huawei FreeClip 2 is easily pocketable and won't weigh you down like some of the alternatives.
You find them as a gift with another gadget They cost more than they should, but as a purchase gift with a Huawei tablet or phone, they'd be alright.
Don't buy them if...
You're an audiophile It should go without saying, but it's doubly true of the Huawei. Don't buy these if you want a detailed sonic experience.
You're a cyclist or hat-wearer Because of its build, headwear could really affect the FreeClip. Not for helmet-wearers or those who like a hat.
Also consider
Component
Huawei FreeClip 2
Shokz OpenDots One
Bose Ultra Open Earbuds
Water resistant
IP58
IP54
IPX4
Battery life
9 hours (earbuds), 39 hours (total)
10 hours (earbuds), 40 hours (total)
7.5 hours (earbuds), 27 hours (total)
Bluetooth type
Bluetooth 6.0
Bluetooth 5.4
Bluetooth 5.3
Weight
5.1g / Charging case: 37.8g
5.6g / Charging case: 52g
6g / Charging case: 43g
Driver
10.8mm
2x 11.8mm
12mm
Shokz OpenDots One
Shokz' debut options are a solid fit, sound great and come in a charging case that's small, though not Huawei small. They match the FreeClip 2 in price, though are slightly older so have seen some reductions.
These top-price options have fantastic audio, even if they look a little more robotic than most alternatives. If you've got money to burn, Bose is ready.
I listened to the Huawei FreeClip 2 for just over two weeks before writing this review. In that time I used it paired to my Android smartphone.
I used the FreeClip daily during that time. I worked out at the gym, went on runs and cycled, and also used it when not exercising at home and on walks around my neighborhood. I listened on Spotify and Tidal, watched on streaming services and played several games with them.
These are the latest in a busy line of earbuds I've tested at TechRadar, including plenty of open-ear options and various gadgets from Huawei.
The HP Pavilion 16 is aimed at those looking for a capable everyday machine for a reasonable price.
It’s clear that HP has paid attention to the aesthetics of the Pavilion 16. Not only does the Sky Blue colorway add more interest than the monochromatic tones typical of mid-range laptops, but the materials employed look premium as well.
Its elegance is further emphasized by its sheer slenderness; I don’t recall having seen a thinner 16-inch laptop, making it one of the best laptop designs around. While this aspect helps with portability, the deceptively hefty weight doesn’t.
I can’t complain about the build quality of the Pavilion 16, though. There’s little flex to any part of it, despite its aforementioned lean form, while the parts that are plastic are pleasing to the touch. This is especially true of the keys, which have a slight texture for added tactility.
There are some useful ports on the Pavilion 16, including two USB-A, two USB-C (which support both Power Delivery and DisplayPort standards), and an HDMI port. However, most are loaded on the right-hand side, and the two USB-C ports are placed closest to the user, which can be inconvenient as the power cable has to be plugged into one of them.
(Image credit: Future)
The Pavilion 16 handles general tasks rather well, from light productivity to 4K video streaming. However, since it lacks a dedicated GPU, graphics-heavy workloads are handled with less aplomb. Some light gaming is still possible, but you’ll have to dial back the settings and settle for unremarkable frame rates and visuals.
Fan noise is noticeable, even when the Pavilion 16 is running at a moderate intensity, but I would still describe it as being within acceptable bounds. Nearly all of the heat is confined to the very rear of the underside, which I also appreciated.
The 1200p WUGXA display is sufficient for this size of laptop, providing a clear and sharp image. Color reproduction and brightness levels are also commendable, although reflections can be a little too prominent at times.
If you’ll be doing a lot of typing, the Pavilion 16 is likely to meet your needs. The wide spacing of the keys, coupled with their deep travel and dampening, makes them satisfying to use. And if you’ll be dealing with lots of numbers in your work, you’ll be pleased with the inclusion of a numpad, too.
However, the touchpad is less impressive. It’s quite small for this size of laptop, yet at the same time manages to intrude while typing; I would often trigger cursor movement with my thumb palm. In the main, though, it’s still sufficient enough for everyday use.
An area where the Pavilion 16 excels is battery life. It lasted over 20 hours in our movie playback test, and charging times are very fast as well. On this front, it beats most of its similarly-priced rivals.
When you combine this aspect with its other plus points, the Pavilion 16 adds up to an enticing proposition, given its reasonable starting price. There are certainly other great laptops at this end of the market, some of which may have the edge in terms of performance, but the Pavilion 16 remains one to consider if you’re after a mid-range, workaday machine.
HP Pavilion 16 review: Price & Availability
(Image credit: Future)
Starts from $459 / £569 (about AU$700)
Available now in various configurations
Reasonable price point
The HP Pavilion 16 starts from $459 / £569 (about AU$700) and is available now. Models with different Intel and AMD processors are available, as are models with touchscreens. RAM configurations also vary from 8GB to 16GB.
This is a reasonable price for a large laptop of this spec. For a similar price, you could also get the Acer Aspire Go 15. I was impressed with its performance when I reviewed it, which is perhaps marginally better than that of Pavilion 16. However, its display is less impressive than the Pavilion 16’s.
If you’re looking for another budget alternative, the HP OmniBook 5 14-inch (2025) could be one to look out for. It features a cutting-edge and vibrant OLED display, and impressively long battery life.
Value: 4 / 5
HP Pavilion 16 review: Specs
HP Pavilion 16 review configuration
Price
£569 (about $745 / AU$1,140)
CPU
Intel Core Ultra 5 125U (3.6GHz, 12 cores)
GPU
Intel Graphics (integrated)
RAM
16GB LPDDR5
Storage
512GB PCIe 5.0 NVMe M.2 SSD
Display
16-inch (1920 x 1200), 16:10, IPS, micro-edge, anti-glare
The Pavilion 16 cuts an elegant figure, thanks to its minimalist design that’s free from fuss and unsightly bulges. The Sky Blue colorway also helps to distinguish it from many others in this sector, endowing the unit with enough interest while maintaining a professional appearance.
More impressive is just how slender the Pavilion 16 is. For a 16-inch laptop, it’s remarkably thin, which certainly helps with transportation. Its weight, on the other hand, is more of a hindrance, since it’s heavier than I expected it to be.
The plastics used in the Pavilion 16 feel premium, especially that of the keys, which are finished with a subtle texture that offers a pleasing amount of traction. They’re also secured firmly in place, without a hint of looseness.
(Image credit: Future)
This same level of solidity applies to the overall construction of the Pavilion 16, too. There’s remarkably little flex to the chassis or the lid, despite how thin both are. What’s more, the hinge holds the display in place with impressively little wobble, no matter the angle, while being very easy to adjust at the same time.
There are two USB-A and two USB-C ports on the Pavilion 16, as well as an HDMI port – an increasingly rare sight on modern laptops. There’s no SD card reader, though, which is a small shame.
A bigger point of contention is the placement of the ports. All but two are on the right, which might prove inconvenient for some. And while I was glad to see the USB-A ports split across both sides, the two USB-C ports are both on the right.
What’s more, they’re located in front of all other ports, nearly mid-way along the chassis, which can cause issues when connecting the USB-C power adapter. Personally, I always prefer the power port to be the furthest away, in order to prevent the power cable from trailing over others or being obstructed by things you may have next to your laptop.
Design: 4.5/ 5
HP Pavilion 16 review: Performance
(Image credit: Future)
Reasonable everyday performance
Not ideal for gamers or creative pros
Tactile keyboard
HP Pavilion 16 benchmarks
Geekbench 6 (Single Core): 2,166; (Multi Core): 9,496 Cinebench R23 (Multi Core): 7,730 Cinebench R24 (Single Core): 94 (Multi Core): 411 Crossmark Overall: 1,433 3DMark Night Raid: 18,673; Fire Strike: 4,717; Steel Nomad: 352; Solar Bay: 6,519; Solar Bay Unlimited: 6,993; Solar Bay Extreme: 737; Solar Bay Extreme Unlimited: 734 BlackMagicDisk Read: 2,639MB/s; Write: 2,494MB/s Total War: Warhammer III: Mirrors of Madness (1080p, Low): 22.7fps
The everyday performance of the Pavilion 16 is commendable. It handles light productivity, browsing, and entertainment tasks well, which is what one would expect from this grade of laptop. More impressively, it can stream ultra-HD video without issue.
Such content is enhanced by the large display, which is allowed to make full use of its space thanks to the thin bezel. There’s enough brightness and vibrancy to make the viewing experience an enjoyable one, and while reflections can reveal themselves at points, for the most part the Pavilion 16 does an admirable job of keeping them at bay.
Even when performing moderately intense workloads, the fans in the Pavilion 16 were audible. However, the noise never rose above a muted whir, so I didn’t find them disruptive. Most of the heat was confined to the rear underside, with commonly-touched surfaces remaining cool.
Since it has no dedicated GPU, the Pavilion 16 isn’t the best choice for gamers or creative types. Cyberpunk 2077 was just about playable on Medium settings, but even here I experienced some stuttering and the occasional slowdown. Naturally, it wasn’t very pleasant to look at, either. You'd be better off checking out our list of the best gaming laptops instead.
(Image credit: Future)
Thanks to the wide chassis, the keyboard fits comfortably in the Pavilion 16, even with its number pad. However, while the keys have plenty of space between them, they don’t seem as large as those on other laptops. I had to adapt my typing accordingly, but as the size difference is that great, this didn’t take long.
Better is the considerable amount of travel and dampening they have, especially by laptop standards. This makes them more tactile and engaging to use.
Despite its relatively small size, the touchpad got in the way as I typed. The palm of my right thumb frequently triggered cursor movement; thankfully, no clicks or taps registered, which would’ve been much more disruptive.
Its small size also means navigation isn’t as expansive as it could’ve been. What’s more, it lacks the smoothness of some of the best in class, and I felt a slight rattle whenever I tapped or clicked, which made such actions feel awkward. Having said all this, I’ve certainly experienced more frustrating laptop touchpads, and it’s perfectly usable in the main.
Performance: 3.5 / 5
HP Pavilion 16 review: Battery Life
(Image credit: Future)
Lasts long
Beats many rivals
Quick to charge, too
The battery life of the Pavilion 16 is very impressive. It lasted a mighty 20 hours and 15 minutes during our movie playback test, a score that bests many of its rivals by a large margin. The Acer Aspire Go 15, for example, only managed close to 12 hours.
Equally as impressive is just how quickly the Pavilion 16 can fully recharge, taking about 90 minutes.
Battery Life: 5 / 5
Should I buy the HP Pavilion 16?
HP Pavilion 16 Scorecard
Attributes
Notes
Rating
Value
The HP Pavilion 16 offers a lot for the money, but it stands alongside some equally-capable rivals.
4 / 5
Design
The HP Pavilion 16 is remarkably thin for its size, while the looks and build quality are admirable at this price point.
4.5 / 5
Performance
For general tasking, the HP Pavilion 16 suffices. The display and keyboard are great, but gaming and creative applications suffer from the absence of dedicated graphics.
3.5 / 5
Battery Life
The HP Pavilion 16 can outlast many of its rivals by a long way, and it’s quick to recharge, too.
5 / 5
Total
The HP Pavilion 16 represents good value considering what it offers, but you’ll have to settle for poor graphical performance.
4 / 5
Buy the HP Pavilion 16 if...
You’ll be doing a lot of typing The tactile keyboard is a cut above many others at this price point, owing to its deep travel and comfortable layout.
You want all-day battery life Its impressive score in our battery test means the HP Pavilion 16 should last you a full day or more unplugged.
Don't buy it if...
You want to game or create Since it doesn’t have a dedicated GPU, the Pavilion 16 can only handle very light gaming and creative tasks.
You want the best touchpad The touchpad on the HP Pavilion 16 is quite small for a 16-inch laptop, and it’s not the smoothest operator. It can also get in the way when typing.
HP Pavilion 16 review: Also Consider
Acer Aspire Go 15 The starting price of theAcer Aspire Go 15 is much lower than that of the Pavilion 16, but you’d be wise to ignore this base model, since its spec is frankly unfit for modern use. The model that most closely matches the Pavilion 16 is also similarly priced. But while it performs well, its display is far less impressive, so I wouldn’t recommend the Aspire Go to those wanting the best visual experience.
HP OmniBook 5 14-inch (2025) Another HP laptop, the OmniBook 5 is a little more expensive than the Pavilion 16, but it features an OLED display, which impressed us with its vibrancy. Its light build and enjoyable keyboard and touchpad were further highlights. Build quality and top-tier performance are somewhat lacking, but the OmniBook 5 is a solid offering all the same.
I tested the HP Pavilion 16 for a couple of days. I used it for a variety of tasks, from productivity and browsing to streaming video and gaming.
I also ran our series of benchmark tests, designed to comprehensively assess every aspect of a laptop's performance. This included a battery life test, where I ran a movie on a continuous loop until the HP Pavilion 16 shut down.
I am an experienced laptop reviewer, having tested a large number across a broad range of price points, form factors, and specifications.
The Polar Loop is, on the surface, what a lot of folks want. It’s a lifestyle-friendly wearable like the popular Whoop MG, but one that doesn’t come with a mandatory monthly subscription.
It’s screen-free, with a lightweight body and fabric strap for maxed-out comfort. Polar has kept the Loop simple, offering a limited set of features rather than trying to cram in lots of extras. It tracks your sleep, your steps and has a crack at recognising and logging activity sessions — runs, walks and so on. This part is patchy, but the Polar Loop was never going to be that big a hit as a one of the best fitness tracker with the hardcore exerciser crowd anyway.
The Polar Loop’s issues are largely software-based. You have to get on with the Polar app to make the Loop fun to use, and its interface and presentation of data could really do with a rethink. This is planned for the future, but for now, this isn’t quite the Whoop-killer you may be hoping for. It’s shown up on that front by the cheaper Amazfit Helio Strap.
As is, what you get is a decent screen less tracker, but one that may be better later into its lifespan – after a software update, at least.
Polar Loop: Specifications
Component
Polar Loop
Price
$199 / £149.50 / AU$299
Dimensions
42 x 27 x 9mm
Weight
29g with band
Case/bezel
Stainless steel/Plastic
Display
N/A
GPS
N/A
Battery life
Up to 8 days
Connection
Bluetooth
Water resistant
Yes, 3ATM
Polar Loop: Price and Availability
(Image credit: Future / Andrew Williams)
$199 in the US
£149.50 in the UK
AU$299 in Australia
The Polar Loop launched in early September 2025 as a subscription-free alternative to the Whoop band. This is a little over a year since the launch of the Polar 360, a business-oriented wellness wearable that’s ultimately pretty similar to this consumer version. It costs $199 in the US, £149.50 in the UK and AU$299 in Australia.
While there are no explicit ongoing costs, there is a totally optional subscription called Polar Fitness Program, which works out an adaptive training plan for you. This costs 9.99 Euro a month after a free trial. This is far better value than the Whoop, which doesn’t sell you the device at all – just an expensive subscription. But for a fitness tracker that doesn’t actually do a lot, it’s still quite highly-priced.
Value score: 3.5/5
Polar Loop: Design
(Image credit: Future / Andrew Williams)
Screenless
Steel accents
Comfortable stretchy bands
The Polar Loop is similar enough to the Whoop band that Whoop has sued Polar claiming the company nicked its design. However, what this really boils down to is a couple of conventions already seen across the screenless wearables landscape.
Polar uses a fabric strap that weaves, buckle-like, over the wearable’s main unit. It covers where the screen would be in a normal watch. The Loop uses a velcro-style fastener and is clearly designed to look like a lifestyle wearable over a hardcore fitness gadget. While much of the core brick is plastic, the top and outer parts are brushed bronze-shade steel. It’s there to provide a touch of class.
These screen-free wearables are intended to be the kind of gadget you set and forget, at least until the battery runs out. The Polar Loop weighs 29g, strap included, light enough not to pick up any real momentum as you swing your arms unlike a watch like the Apple Watch Ultra, which weighs close to 60g. But you are still gong to see those familiar skin indents when you occasionally take the watch off, pressing its contours into your wrist.
Is it comfy? Sure, these slightly stretchy fabric bands are ace for comfort. But I’ve found the Amazfit Helio Band slightly easier to forget I’m wearing, no doubt because it’s even lighter: just 20g.
The Polar Loop has no buttons and no LED status indicator. You can’t interact with it if you try. There’s not even a vibration motor: it’s about as stripped-back as Polar could make it. Water resistance is rated at WR30, which in other wearables is often seen as not enough for safe swimming, while Polar says the Loop is fine for “bathing and swimming” under the ISO22810 standard, just not diving or snorkelling.
Design score: 4/5
Polar Loop: Features
(Image credit: Future / Andrew Williams)
No subscription
Very little interaction
Precision Prime heart rate sensor from 2018
One of the core appeals of the Polar Loop is, of course, that there is no mandatory subscription. There is a paid part of the app, though.
It’s called Polar Fitness Program, which costs around $11 a month (9.99 Euro). This launched in April 2025, provides tailored workout plans. It would work much better when paired with Polar’s more conventional fitness watches, like the Polar Grit X2, than a Loop.
The Polar Loop’s own feature set is very stripped-back. You can’t, for example, make the watch broadcast its heart rate data to be used by another device. There’s no altimeter, so counting of steps climbed is not recorded. You cannot use the Polar Loop as an alarm as there’s no vibration motor. When the Polar Loop is running low on battery you’ll simply get an incessant reminder to charge on your phone. You know the funny bit? Polar actually released a tracker called the Loop 2 in 2015 that did have vibration, and a half-hidden screen made up of 85 LEDs.
Neither that band nor the Polar Loop records blood oxygenation data either, despite the heart rate array making use of green, red and orange LEDs. Polar calls this its Precision Prime array, and it has been around for absolutely ages. A similar design was found in 2018’s Polar Vantage V. That’s a lifetime ago in tech terms, but the basics still work well.
Features score: 2.5/5
Polar Loop: Performance
(Image credit: Future / Andrew Williams)
8 days of battery life
Some activity tracking errors
HR data testing similar to Garmin Elevate V5 sensor
Despite the lack of a screen, Polar says the Loop lasts eight days, which is actually a bit less than some of its watches with displays. This is basically on the money. You can expect it to last around a week. With no GPS or screen, there should be little variation in how long it lasts based on your activity level.
Like any wearable, the Polar Loop is heavily reliant on its heart rate sensor for any data beyond your steps. This wearable has a pretty good one, despite using older hardware. While this is not a replacement for a full-on runner’s watch due to its lack of GPS, its HR data during runs is pretty similar to that of a Garmin Forerunner 970 (one of the best Garmin watches) and its Elevate V5 sensor, wore concurrently during most of my testing.
The Polar Loop doesn’t tend to mess up the start of workouts, or show unexpected major HR spikes during the work day when you do little more than potter about. There was one unexpected spike during a tracked run, but in general the results are solid here.
By default, the Polar Loop will record basic stats 24/7, and then automatically log any slightly extended stretches it believes you’re exercising. Go for a 12-minute walk? You can expect to see that pop up in the Polar app. It’s not entirely flawless, though; during one run, the Loop only clocked half of the hour-and-change workout, seemingly stopping during a brief break, only to fail to register the second half. The durations of some sessions are off too, although you can always take a more active approach to tracking: in the Polar phone app, you can manually start a tracked session, select the Loop, and use it as the source for HR data.
That aside, the Polar Loop has a good stab at recording your daily steps. And it of course tracks sleep, too, estimating your time spent in the light, deep and REM sleep zones, and records interruptions. The Polar Loop is more sensitive to these than another wearable’s full-on wakeful moments detection, so you may well see your sleep records peppered with these tiny interruption blips.
The lead stats Polar wants you to focus on are sleep duration, sleep solidity and regeneration — basically how much that sleep is getting your body back where it needs to be. However, there’s also an ANS Charge (autonomous nervous system charge) section in which you can check out breathing rate and heart rate variability.
All the basic data is here, and it’s sound enough. The Polar Loop’s biggest issue is the phone app isn’t really all that enjoyable to use, may look dated to some and doesn’t really direct the user that well as to what they should focus on.
The app’s home screen is Diary, which acts like a feed of your day, showing recent auto-tracked exercises, your step count and so on, in semi-chronological order. This is not as effective as the software in Amazfit’s rival Helio Strap app, which is more intuitive and has a handy traffic light-style system to alert you to any stats that may be out of the ordinary.
Screen-free wearables are massively reliant on their apps for the overall quality of experience. And Polar’s could do with some work. It’s just not that inviting a space to hang out in. Polar does plan to fully revamp the app in future, but right now we can only work with that we have.
Performance score: 3.5/5
Polar Loop: Scorecard
Category
Comment
Score
Value
The lack of a forced subscription is good but this is not the most aggressively priced tracker around.
3.5/5
Design
It’s comfortable, it looks decent and has some higher-grade steel elements, plus you get a choice of colours.
4/5
Features
A watch like this doesn’t need scads of features, but it does miss out on a few elements that could be handy.
2.5/5
Performance
Heart rate accuracy is decent but you may not want to rely on auto exercise recognition for accurate session logging.
3/5
Polar Loop: Should I buy?
Buy it if...
You like its style
An important factor here is how the Loop doesn’t look like a fitness watch, with a two-tone fabric outer strap with steel accents.
You want a subscription-free experience
While you can pay for a training plan subscription, there’s no mandatory subscription with a Polar Loop.
You want pure passive tracking
With no screen, and even no vibrate or buttons, this is a zero-interaction wearable for those who want no wrist distractions.
Don’t buy it if…
You are expecting big health insights
At the time of review the Loop doesn’t present its data in the most cogent way, and also has fairly basic hardware.
You want better software before buying
While Polar has plans to overhaul its software and interface, we don’t know when that will happen at the time of review.
Also consider
Whoop MG
The screen-free band that made this category sing, but requires a pricey subscription.
Samsung is rumored to be bringing support for Qi2 wireless charging with magnets to its Galaxy S26 devices that are due to launch soon, perhaps as early as next month. And now a purported Qi2 power bank designed to work with the Galaxy S26 series has been outed.
The power bank has the model number EB-U2500 and supports wireless charging at up to 15W. It can also charge devices via a USB-C cable at up to 20W with USB-PD or Qualcomm Quick Charge. The power bank itself charges at 25W. It will attach magnetically to the phones, of course, since Qi2 is basically MagSafe for...
The nubia RedMagic 11 Air, unveiled in China yesterday, will debut internationally on January 29 at 7 AM EST.
The global RedMagic 11 Air will come with the Snapdragon 8 Elite SoC, a 7,000 mAh battery, and a cooling fan, just like its Chinese counterpart. And if it shares the entire specs sheet with the Chinese model, international customers will get the RedMagic 11 Air with Redmagic OS 11, up to 16GB RAM and 512GB storage, and a 6.85" 144Hz 1,216p AMOLED display.
Other highlights of the RedMagic 11 Air include 120W charging, bypass charging, an in-display fingerprint scanner, and an...
Ever since I first played it on the PS5 a few years ago, I’ve been certain Final Fantasy VII Remake Intergrade is a gaming masterpiece – the inarguable best way to play the role-playing game (RPG) classic that is Final Fantasy VII. But now that it’s coming to the Nintendo Switch 2, is the game still as excellent?
TL;DR, yes, but I’m left feeling like the Switch 2 edition is only the second best way to play the best way to play Final Fantasy VII.
I’m not the only person who loves Final Fantasy VII Remake. Former TechRadar Computing Hardware expert Jackie Thomas gave it five stars out of five back when it released on the PS4 almost six years ago, and the story, music, and general beauty of the game haven’t changed with this port.
But as you’d expect, going from a home console to a handheld hybrid, some technical downgrades are to be expected – with both texture quality, framerate, and fidelity dips noticeable, though playing in Docked mode does give it a noticeable visual bump.
(Image credit: Square Enix)
That said, are you playing on the Switch 2 for graphical superiority? If you are you might want to rethink your console choice, as the true beauty of the Nintendo hybrid is its ability to game on the go, and for an tens-of-hours-long RPG – that’ll hold your attention between 30 and 90 hours based on whether you want to focus on the story, complete a few side quests along the way, or seriously devour every piece of additional content across both the main campaign and bonus Intermission downloadable content (DLC) episode – is essential for more time-strapped gamers.
Finding time to play all of that at home can be tough, especially if you share your TV. Taking Final Fantasy 7 Remake on the go as part of your morning commute, on trips if you travel regularly, or simply enjoying it in portable mode on the couch while someone else uses the main screen in your home entertainment setup makes finding the time much more manageable – meaning you can actually start enjoying the games you buy, and not just stare at them in your ever-growing digital library.
If this convenience is what you crave, you’ll love Final Fantasy VII Remake Intergrade on the Nintendo Switch 2. For everyone else, this game is still required reading, but you’d be better served by its PlayStation 5 edition (provided you have access to the console).
(Image credit: Square Enix)
Final Fantasy 7 Remake is part one of Square Enix’s recreation of the 1997 RPG, Final Fantasy 7. While it is, in some ways, simply a third of a game, the care and attention put into every inch of this title doesn’t leave you feeling shortchanged.
As I mentioned in the intro you can easily spend close to 90 hours playing Remake if you sink your teeth into every challenge the game has to offer, including finishing every side mission, earning the high score in every minigame, completing the game on Hard mode (which requires a whole replay), and besting the greatest foes in Shinra’s virtual battle zone.
I can say, as someone who has done exactly this, you won’t regret the time you spend in Midgar, but even if you simply focus on the main quest-focused story (including the Intermission story featuring Yuffie), then you’ll still be savouring Final Fantasy VII for around 30 to 40 hours.
Even if you’ve played the 1997 version, there’s plenty to enjoy here too.
The Remake expands on the story in a way that better fleshes out each character, the relationships between the key players, and (if I’m honest) makes the experience much more engaging rather than what could at times feel like a slog.
There are a few new twists and turns to discover as well, but every single one feels like a worthy addition to the mythos and the core story FFVII is telling – rather than fluff that would detract from its message.
Combat ready!
(Image credit: Square Enix)
The gameplay has had a tune-up, too.
I enjoy turn-based battling, but Final Fantasy VII’s approach to combat is undeniably more active and approachable to a wider audience. At the same time, I appreciate the “Classic” difficulty mode the game introduces, which helps to return some of the accessibility offered by turn-based combat if you want it.
If playing regularly, you must actively attack and block with your character to charge ATB so you can perform more powerful skills and spells. In Classic mode, the characters all fight and guard automatically, letting you simply focus on which enemy to target and when you want to use those more powerful moves.
It’s not a substitute for the slower pace of turn-based fights, but feels closer to it if you require a slightly calmer pace.
(Image credit: Square Enix)
In any case, with this more active approach to combat comes complexity where lots can be happening at once – especially in bigger fights that have Cloud, Tifa, and Barrett slashing, punching, and firing away at a small army of Shinra guards and bots returning fire – but the Switch 2 did its best to keep things flowing smoothly.
There’s no in-system way to track framerate, but the gameplay did seem to hold steady at 30 frames per second (fps) as Square has promised. If you’re used to higher rates, you’ll notice some frameyness to the game in handheld mode, but honestly, it doesn’t detract from the experience – especially since this isn’t a game like a shooter where 60fps-afforded precision is essential.
There are also a few noticeable texture and model downgrades compared to the PlayStation version, which are even more apparent if, like me, you’re used to the PS5 rendition rather than the PS4 edition of Remake. When you dock your Switch 2, however, things do start to look a lot better, and even in handheld mode, there is an undeniable beauty to Final Fantasy VII Remake that persists even if the overall quality has taken a hit.
Again, as I mentioned in my intro, it’s also not like you’re choosing the Switch 2 for its graphical fidelity. Quality is the price we pay for handheld convenience, and I’ll hold firm to the fact that this port does look great, even if not quite as great as the PlayStation edition. It just comes down to what you value more.
(Image credit: Square Enix)
The only other point I’ll make on the Switch 2 vs PlayStation comparisons is cost.
At launch, the Switch 2 Final Fantasy 7 Remake Intergrade will cost you $39.99 / £39.99 / AU$69.95. It’s a reasonable price of entry in my mind, but you should note that a twin pack of Remake and its part 2 Rebirth on PS5 will set you back $59.99 / £59.99 / AU$159.95 (it’s not such a great deal based in Australia at full-price, though I’ve seen it on sale for much less in each of these regions meaning it’s a better deal than these numbers make it look).
Two games for effectively the price of one-and-a-half (or even for the price of one if you get the twin pack with a discount) is clearly a good deal. So if you have access to both consoles, and won’t appreciate the convenience of handheld mode, or would appreciate the better value proposition, then you might want to consider your options for how to experience Final Fantasy VII.
(Image credit: Square Enix)
Should you play Final Fantasy 7 Remake Intergrade on the Switch 2?
Play it if…
You want to experience one of the greatest RPGs ever made again FFVII is beloved for a reason, and the remake is simply the best way to experience the story in 2026.
You care about portable gaming The game runs really well on the Switch 2 in handheld mode. Sure, it isn’t graphically perfect, but that’s not what the Switch 2 is for.
You like games with lots of content You can easily spend over 50 hours playing this title if you devote yourself to its bonus content and DLC in addition to its main story, you might even stretch to closer to 90 hours if you want to complete hard mode too. So if you like long games this is a solid pick up.
Don’t play it if…
You have a PS5 The Nintendo Switch 2 version is good, but for the most cost-effective and best quality way to experience FFVII on console, you should play the PS5 version if you can.
You want high quality and performance This title still looks beautiful on the Switch 2, but it does look more framey and overall looks lower quality than non-handheld versions.
You want turn-based action The appeal of classic RPGs is turn-based combat, and while this remake maintains elements of that style of gameplay it’s a very different experience.
(Image credit: Square Enix)
Accessibility
Final Fantasy VII Remake Intergrade has several difficulty controls to help with accessibility.
There’s Classic mode if you’d prefer a simpler battle system, but also the ability to always have max HP, a full ATB gauge, and constantly deal max damage (among other effects) that can make the game more approachable.
Beyond this, there are subtitles for all cutscenes, and there isn’t a built-in colorblind mode, which can unfortunately make a couple of fights and minigames a little tougher if you are colorblind.
How I reviewed Final Fantasy VII Remake on Nintendo Switch 2
I’ve already put over 80-hours into Final Fantasy VII Remake and its DLC episode on my PS5 – as I mentioned in my review, I enjoyed it so much I went out of my way to get every trophy – so I already knew my thoughts on its mechanics and its story before booting this title up, and had a great point of reference for the Switch 2 version.
The focus of this review was to test how well the Nintendo Switch 2 can handle the game I love. To test this, I played the title over many, many hours in both docked and handheld mode, made sure to explore both the main story, side quests, and minigames, and made notes about its technical capabilities.
The Realme Neo8 is set to launch tomorrow in China, and fresh details have surfaced ahead of the announcement. Realme has now confirmed the phone’s camera specifications, while its pricing has leaked separately.
In separate posts shared on Weibo, the company confirmed that the Neo8 will feature a 50MP Sony IMX896 primary rear sensor.
The phone will also get a 50MP periscope telephoto camera that will support 3.5x optical zoom, 7x lossless zoom, and 120x digital zoom. It is also expected to offer an 8MP ultrawide unit at the back, and a 16MP selfie camera.
Meanwhile, the...
Apple expanded its Fitness+ service to 28 markets last month, including Chile, Hong Kong, India, the Netherlands, Singapore, and Taiwan, and said that Fitness+ would launch in Japan in early 2026. Well, it's not really early 2026, but the service is now available in the East Asian island country.
The Apple Fitness+ subscription costs JPY980/month or JPY7,800/year in Japan. However, new Fitness+ users in Japan will get a free one-month trial, while those purchasing a new Apple Watch, iPhone, iPad, Apple TV, AirPods Pro 3, or Powerbeats Pro 2 are eligible for a 3-month trial.
Members...
