TechRadar News

One of AI’s biggest attractions is its ability to take time and effort out of everyday work. Tasks that would once have demanded hours of attention, such as turning meetings into notes or producing a first draft of a piece of content, can now be completed in minutes. These practical benefits help explain why AI has moved so quickly from experimentation into everyday business use.

Yet, as AI becomes more established in the workplace, a more complicated picture is emerging. AI is changing where thinking happens. When a system can produce an answer almost instantly, the challenge shifts from creating the output to deciding what to do with it.

Employees are no longer spending as much time getting to a first answer, but they are spending more time checking whether the output is accurate, and critically, good enough to inform a decision. This creates a different kind of cognitive burden, moving from production to verification.

AI-generated outputs can appear remarkably polished and persuasive, even when they are based on incomplete information. An answer can sound convincing while overlooking a crucial piece of context or relying on incomplete information. And as AI becomes increasingly better at sounding confident, mistakes may look plausible enough to escape scrutiny and feed into business decisions without being challenged.

When confidence outpaces accuracy

This is why discernment is becoming one of the most important skills in the AI-enabled workplace. The future workforce needs the ability to apply context, experience and judgment to an output that appears authoritative. Someone who understands a market or process deeply may immediately notice that something does not add up, while another person may accept the same answer because it is presented clearly and confidently.

However, the problem is that individual discernment does not scale well, and it is unrealistic to expect every employee to catch every questionable output, especially as AI begins to support more decisions across a business. Human review is indeed essential, but relying on individual vigilance is not a robust or sustainable operating model.

The challenge clearly magnifies with the growth of agentic AI. When AI moves from suggesting to doing, the consequences of a wrong answer become more serious because the error can travel quickly into a real business process. That makes robust governance increasingly important as agentic AI becomes more embedded in how businesses operate.

Better inputs lead to better decisions

Many businesses are investing heavily in making data available to AI, but availability is not the same as readiness. This is where many AI projects begin to struggle. Organizations too often focus on the model because it is the most visible part of the technology, while overlooking the quality of the information beneath it.

The reality is that most organizations will soon have access to similarly capable models. Consequently, what will increasingly differentiate them is not the AI itself, but the quality of the data, governance and operational discipline that sit behind it.

Making data work for AI means ensuring that information is current, trusted and structured in a way that allows AI to generate outputs that reflect how the business actually operates. Without those foundations, organizations spend more time validating AI than benefiting from it.

Poor data pushes additional work back onto employees, who need to spend more time checking outputs and resolving inconsistencies - weakening any productivity case. And the data backs this up. Whilst 74% of frontline employees are now regular AI users, 41% of those report increased cognitive load alongside productivity gains.

Making governance part of everyday operations

This is also why AI governance needs to move beyond policies and principles. If organizations want AI to deliver business value, they need to answer a series of practical questions, such as: Who owns an AI-assisted decision? And where should human judgment remain in the loop?

As AI adoption grows, those questions will increasingly bring the CFO into the conversation. Finance leaders will be asked not only to control spending but also to demonstrate that AI investment is producing profitable value. That will ultimately require greater visibility into where AI is being used, how decisions are being made and whether the costs of validation, oversight and correction are being properly accounted for.

It will also mean recognizing that governance is becoming a lever for cost efficiency. When AI systems are grounded in well-structured, trusted enterprise data, they can find the right information more efficiently, potentially reducing token consumption while improving the quality and consistency of outputs. In other words, strong governance can help lower the cost of running AI tools at scale and improve the return on AI investment.

The competitive edge is still human judgement

As AI becomes a standard part of how businesses operate, simply having access to the technology will no longer be enough to stand out. Instead, the greater advantage will come from how organizations are able to bring together reliable data, strong governance and human judgment to make better decisions.

AI can accelerate the route to an answer, but it cannot decide how much weight that answer should carry. That responsibility still belongs to people, supported by the right data, governance and decision frameworks.

We've featured the best AI website builder.

This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.

The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit

Logitech Yeti 2 two-minute review

It’s been 17 years since Blue launched the original Yeti, and it didn’t take long for it to become fan a favorite in the world of consumer desktop mics. There have been tweaks and touch-ups here and there, but few major changes, even after Logitech bought Blue in 2018. Until now, that is.

I’ve been using the first Yeti for years, so I was intrigued to know how the new model compared. The good news is that while there’s plenty to love about the original Yeti — it became a household name for a reason, after all — the Yeti 2 is even more impressive. It’s one of the best microphones for streaming available right now.

Put the two microphones on a desk together and you’ll see that the Yeti 2 is very slightly more compact, yet it still retains the distinctive Yeti aesthetic. More noticeable when you pick them up is the weight — at 995g (2.19lbs), the Yeti 2 is almost 50% lighter than the 1.4kg (3.09lbs) Yeti.

FutureFutureFuture

Another thing that immediately catches your eye is the Yeti 2’s built-in LED display, which sits above a singular dial that can be pushed in like a button. This display is a new addition and, in combination with the dial, essentially replaces the volume, mute, gain and polar pattern controls on the old Yeti.

This lets you change the mic’s settings and monitor its audio levels on the display, all without needing Logitech’s G Hub app. It’s a handy feature if you want to make quick adjustments on the fly, although we found the push-in dial to be a little finicky at times, where pressing it would occasionally not do anything. Still, it’s useful for quick changes if you don’t fancy diving into the G Hub app.

If you do want to do that, though, there are plenty of audio presets to choose from, including those for interviews, singing, speech to text, different instruments, and more. You can make manual adjustments to equalizer levels, enable the gate, compressor and more, and work through input gain settings, then save your settings to the app or one of five on-board profiles. Those profiles can be set to automatically activate when specific games launch, too.

FutureFuture

That said, G Hub is probably not the most in-depth experience you’re likely to find. For beginners, though, switching polar patterns and adjusting the built-in noise cancelation is about all you’ll need.

The most important part of any microphone, of course, is its audio quality. And here, the Yeti 2 really delivers. Compared to my long-serving Yeti, the Yeti 2 sounded much crisper and clearer. The Yeti was by no means bad, but the latest model shows strong signs of improvement, no doubt helped by the improvement from 16-bit to 24-bit audio and the addition of software noise cancelation.

Part of that is thanks to the new Auto Tracking polar pattern that detects where your sound is coming from and automatically adjusts the pickup area accordingly, ensuring the input is optimized, wherever you’re sat. You can still set a manual polar pattern if you like, but Auto Tracking is effective enough that it will be the best option for most people.

FutureFuture

Another useful aspect of this voice proximity sensor is its impact on gain. Now, the Yeti 2 can automatically decrease or increase the gain as you move closer to or further away from the mic, ensuring your input volume remains level throughout. This feature isn’t perfect — I noticed my voice picked up more echo the as I moved away — but it’s much better than what you got with the first Yeti, where you’d just get quieter as you moved away.

As you’d expect from Blue/Logitech, the Yeti 2’s build quality is top notch. The main body is made of metal and feels rock solid. The included metal stand has a soft padded base to keep it from slipping, while the lugs that hold the mic screwed into the base are rubberized to minimize bumps and shakes while you’re recording. This thing looks beautiful and feels like it’s made to last.

FutureFutureFutureFuture

There’s a thread on the bottom for attaching the Yeti 2 to a boom arm, in case you’d rather use it that way instead of upright in its stand. The display can also be flipped 180 degrees, which makes reading it an awful lot easier when it’s mounted this way.

There’s not a lot to dislike about the Yeti 2. The single push-in dial didn’t seem to be the most reliable feature and merging several buttons into one means it takes a little longer to scroll through the settings than dedicated dials would. We’re also disappointed to see the price has increased versus the original Yeti. But that’s all blown away compared to thing you care about most with a microphone — namely, its audio quality — which is as good as it gets in a consumer mic.

Logitech Yeti 2 review: Price & release date

• Available to buy now
• Priced at $159.99 / £139.99 / $249.95 AUD

The Logitech Yeti 2 is available now from Logitech’s website or from third-party retailers. It’s priced at $159.99 / £139.99 / $249.95 AUD.

It’s more expensive than the original Yeti, which was most recently sold for $139.99 (and is currently on sale for $109.99 on Logitech’s website), but the Yeti 2 is not unreasonably expensive. It also offers an awful lot for the price.

Logitech Yeti 2 review: Specs

Polar patterns

Auto Tracking, stereo, cardioid, figure8, omni, hypercardioid, supercardioid, custom

Frequency range

20Hz – 20kHz

Connectivity

USB-C

Audio bit rate

24-bit

Sample rate

48kHz

Should I buy the Logitech Yeti 2?Logitech Yeti 2 scorecard

Attribute

Notes

Score

Features

The clever new LED display makes adjusting settings quick and easy

5/5

Performance

Pitch-perfect audio makes this the consumer mic to beat

5/5

Design

The Yeti 2 looks sleek and understated while being built to last

5/5

Value

The slight cost increase is disappointing, but it’s still fairly priced

4/5

Buy it if…

You want a plug-and-play mic
The auto-gain and automatic polar pattern tracking features make managing your voice easier than ever.View Deal

You want something that’s built to last
This is no cheap plastic affair — the Yeti 2 is almost all-metal, and it feels like it could take a beating and keep on trucking.View Deal

You don’t want to break the bank
Sure, the price has gone up, but the Yeti 2 remains in the consumer price bracket without venturing into pro territory.View Deal

Don’t buy it if…

You want a professional mic
There’s no XLR connectivity and other options have more studio-appropriate features.View Deal

You want dedicated controls
Everything is combined into a single dial, which might mean it takes a little longer to adjust your settings.View Deal

You’re on a tight budget
With the price creeping upwards, this isn’t the cheapest microphone on the market.View Deal

Also consider

Elgato Wave:3
A serious contender for the title of best streaming mic around, the Elgato Wave:3 sounds just as good as it looks. It only has one polar pattern, but with audio quality as impressive as this, that might not matter.

Read our full Elgato Wave:3 reviewView Deal

Razer Seiren V3 Pro
Razer’s Seiren V3 Pro is aiming high with its inclusion of 32-bit float and XLR connectivity. It’s fairly pricey, but offers a lot of bang for your buck.

Read our full Razer Seiren V3 Pro reviewView Deal

How I tested the Logitech Yeti 2

• I tested the mic’s performance during games and on calls with friends. I also made test recordings and compared it to the original Yeti
• I also spent time putting the microphone’s software features through their paces in the Razer G Hub app

I spent a week testing the microphone on my PC. I called friends to test its performance during gaming sessions and made audio recordings where I directly compared its audio quality with that of the original Yeti mic.

• Read TechRadar’s reviews guarantee
• First reviewed: October 2026

• iOS 27.2 is rolling out now
• The update includes a new Apple Music icon, new languages and features for Siri, and adds suggestions to the Messages app
• It also brings Dual Capture to group FaceTime calls, plus various other changes

iOS 27.2 is now rolling out, and while this update isn’t as big as iOS 27 itself was, there’s quite a lot here to get stuck into, so — even putting aside the inevitable bug fixes — it’s well worth downloading.

Highlights include various improvements to Siri, such as the ability for Siri to draw on more personal context sources, including voicemails, photos attached to messages, and calendar event attendees. This update also brings more languages to Siri AI, including French, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese, and Spanish.

Some other AI features have also been improved, with, for example, SynthID labeling now being added to Image Playground creations and substantially edited photos, such as those that have had the Reframe or Extend tools used on them. This means that it will be harder for people to pass off AI images as real ones.

Updates to Apple Music, Messages, and more

The new Apple Music icon (Image credit: Apple)

Away from AI, iOS 27.2 also brings a new icon to Apple Music, with this one being black and white rather than red — bringing it more in line with the company’s other recent iconography.

There are also now suggestions in the Messages app, which are tappable shortcuts that appear based on context. So, for example, if someone invites you to an event, it might prompt you to add it to your calendar.

Plus, Dual Capture is now available in group FaceTime calls, allowing you to show content on both your front and rear cameras simultaneously, and the iPhone Duo has received a couple of updates, adding support for the USB-C Apple Pencil and an Edge Light to brighten your face in video calls.

Those are arguably the seven biggest updates in iOS 27.2, but there are numerous smaller changes too, such as tweaks to the layout of the Podcasts app and an anniversary reminder on phone calls. So there’s a lot here.

Your iPhone should prompt you to download iOS 27.2 sooner or later, but if you don’t want to wait, you can head to Settings > General > Software Update.

Polymath Michael Polanyi famously noted, “We can know more than we can tell,” a paradox that’s now showing up and being solved on the warehouse and retail floor.

Frontline workers possess deep, tacit knowledge of how operations run, mastering practical workarounds, managing exceptions and localized efficiencies, and situational problem-solving. This knowledge never makes it into an official manual, yet real-life experience and multiple academic studies say that up to 85% of company knowledge is tacit.

Because this knowledge relies on muscle memory, experience, ad hoc conversations during lunch and notes, traditional top-down standard operating procedures (SOPs) inherently fail to capture it. Tacit knowledge enables employee competence, autonomy and job satisfaction, but can be unevenly distributed or lead to gatekeeping to the detriment of others. And when experienced or long-serving employees retire or move to a new company, that tacit knowledge is lost.

For years, businesses assumed their SOPs were rock-solid, but the rollout of frontline AI tools, such as AI knowledge agents trained on SOPs and other workforce onboarding and training materials, is bringing long-overlooked knowledge gaps and outdated guidelines to the surface.

Agents are ushering in a quiet evolution in how enterprises capture institutional knowledge and build connected frontline onboarding and training programs. It comes as workplace culture, learning and development take on new urgency with organizations increasingly understanding their importance for workforce AI transformation.

The new knowledge economy

Instead of relying on centralized teams to write SOPs, the new connected frontline knowledge economy is going bottom-up by leveraging AI tools to crowdsource the “corporate brain,” with SOPs acting as the “nervous system” where knowledge is a two-way street.

By empowering the people stacking shelves, processing orders, talking to customers, and running the warehouses to flag inconsistencies, gaps and workarounds, companies are initiating a proactive audit and refresh of their workforce operations data quality.

Workers can actively signal knowledge gaps through their interactions with AI assistants, and those tools are routing the signals into dynamic, intelligently automated updates for training programs and SOPs. Workforce and operations leaders are finally able to turn undocumented, implicit frontline expertise into structured, actionable micro-learning, better procedures, and shift from one-off onboarding to ongoing everboarding.

When frontline contributions are recognized and shared, the workforce becomes better equipped to serve today’s highly informed customers, whether they are stepping into a shop or making an online purchase.

As David Autor, an MIT economist and author of a widely cited paper on the Polanyi paradox and employment said, “The tasks that have proved most vexing to automate are those demanding flexibility, judgment, and common sense—skills that we understand only tacitly...tasks that cannot be substituted by computerization are generally complemented by it.”

AI with all the senses

Organizations can and should move beyond text heavy documents and process guidance. Broadly speaking, learning and development departments already adopt a mix of text, images, videos, and group discussion. This approach reflects how we learn and should be the preferred method when it comes to employee onboarding, everboarding, and capturing implicit knowledge.

Modern AI agents are multimodal, meaning they can receive and output intelligence via audio, text, image, and video. A frontline worker should be able to verbally highlight a gap, suggest an update or snap a photo of a shelf with the AI agent comparing it to the visual merchandising planogram and provide step-by-step corrective instructions.

And with smaller models, on-device inference is possible, meaning no data leaves the device or company network. Latency is eliminated, an additional layer of security is added, and workers and customers get the intelligence they need in the moment.

Moving from knowing to doing

The development, implementation, and ongoing guidance agents require cannot be done alone, in the same way that text heavy, top-down SOPs are no longer sufficient. The top-down methods that brought organizations to this point will not sustain them for tomorrow.

According to a report by MIT, businesses that partner with AI providers have an AI success rate of 66% compared to those who prefer internal development alone (33%). The best way to succeed is to move forward with partners who have industry expertise, AI models, agents, and developer building blocks. They can support the design, configuration, onboarding, and management of AI systems in retail, warehouse, and logistics settings.

And AI transformation cannot be done with an “IT alone” mindset. Stanford’s Digital Lab finds that a top factor (43%) for AI success is executive sponsorship that enables a culture of experimentation and permission to fail. AI’s value comes from the algorithms, the technology required to implement, but mostly it comes from rethinking the people and culture component.

Polanyi’s “knowing versus telling” gap has been brought to light and is finally being closed on the frontline. By crowdsourcing the corporate brain, businesses are capturing tacit knowledge and transforming it into customer and worker advantages that make work better every day.

We've featured the best AI chatbot for business.

This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.

The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit

• Windows 11's internet speed test currently redirects to a Bing search to facilitate the test
• This is clunky to say the least — and an annoying piece of Bing promotion — but now Microsoft is changing things
• In a new preview build the speed test is fully integrated into Windows 11 — as it should have been in the first place

Microsoft has thought better of one of the methods it was using to push Bing in Windows 11 — via an internet speed test — and we can but hope that maybe it's seeing sense from a broader perspective about such promotional trickery.

Windows Central reports that, in a recent preview release for Windows 11 (build 26340.9767), Microsoft has applied some changes to the Quick Settings panel (accessed via the taskbar).

In the release notes, Microsoft says: "We're making it faster and easier to check the performance of your internet connection in Windows. Windows Insiders can now run an internet speed test and see the results directly in Quick Settings, without being redirected to a browser."

As it stands, when using this feature it simply opens an online speed test in your default browser — but it's in the Bing search page (giving Microsoft some web traffic, of course). With this change it's actually a native speed test that works in Windows 11, as it should always have been in the first place.

You can start the new speed test from Quick Settings, or access it by right-clicking on the network icon in the system tray on the right of the taskbar.

Note that this is just in testing for now, and it's still at an early stage (the Experimental channel), but it should eventually come to all Windows 11 users.

Analysis: fixing Windows 11 includes getting rid of this kind of nonsense

(Image credit: Unsplash / Windows)

It's useful to have a built-in speed test right in the OS for those occasions when you're curious to learn what kind of online speeds you're getting — maybe you're streaming a video and it's buffering or glitching, and you're wondering if that's the fault of the service, or whether your internet connection has hit a rocky patch.

However, it's hardly convenient to be redirected to a web browser to have that test conducted.

Microsoft says of this change: "This updated experience builds on the internet speed test we previously introduced for Windows Insiders, bringing the test and its results directly into Windows."

Which makes it sound like the current implementation was always just a stopgap or a temporary stepping stone, but let's be honest about this: we all know it was another way that Microsoft was trying to push traffic to Bing.

It's far from the only time that Microsoft has tried this kind of trick, and most recently, we've witnessed the Bing Wallpaper app once again crowbarring in Bing searches for people who merely click on a blank part of their desktop (see the further explanation of that incident here).

No, the Bing Wallpaper client isn't part of Windows 11 by default, but it's nonetheless a piece of Microsoft software, and it demonstrates that the company's attitude is still leaning towards exploring annoying ways of promoting its own services — this is another great example — at the cost of the user.

As one Redditor observed of the current Bing-laden internet speed test in Windows 11: "This is the kind of stuff that pushed me to Linux. Overall it wasn't too bad, but Linux (Fedora in my case) feels like a breath of fresh air."

All of these kinds of practices need to end, and at least this fresh move in testing is a hopeful sign that Microsoft is finally realizing this, given that it's battling to fix Windows 11 and change public sentiment around its desktop operating system this year — needless Bing promotion certainly won't help that cause.

• Microsoft wants to trim its headcount with a voluntary redundancy buyout scheme
• The voluntary redundancy has been offered to 60,000 employees with a Microsoft experience score of less than 70
• At the same time, Microsoft is spending billions on new AI infrastructure

Microsoft is looking to slim down its workforce and is hoping that a voluntary redundancy buyout will convince some workers to leave of their own accord.

The redundancy buyout has been offered to 60,000 Microsoft employees across the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and India and represents about a quarter of the company’s global headcount.

While no official reason has been given for the cutting down on headcount, the company was expected to funnel around $50 billion into spending between July and September - with AI infrastructure such as data centers and computing taking up a significant chunk.

Microsoft trims headcount

Those offered the voluntary redundancy package are all considered to have an experience score of 70 or less according to Microsoft’s scale. The terms offered to employees are more generous than standard redundancy packages, with some employees with a score between 65 to 67 receiving two weeks of pay for every six months at the company.

Those below 65 on the experience scale will receive just one week for every six months spent working for Microsoft. Extra support has also been offered to workers who accept voluntary redundancy including continued healthcare coverage, outplacement support, and extended stock vesting.

Employees considering the voluntary redundancy package have until December to make a decision. Some sectors of the business, such as marketing, sales, and engineering teams have reportedly decided to refuse to participate.

"The Voluntary Exit Offer is new for us. We’ll learn from it,” Microsoft Chief People Officer Amy Coleman wrote in a memo to employees. “At the same time, we’ll keep helping people focus on the work that matters most, build new skills and, where it makes sense, find new opportunities across Microsoft.”

Microsoft bets big on AI

The company has reported strong growth this year with revenue increasing 18% year-over-year to just over $90 billion.

Microsoft, alongside other top AI firms, have spent hundreds of billions on AI data centers, new computing chips, and the associated infrastructure in the expectation that AI will deliver the productivity and efficiency increases promised by developers.

The tech giant has opened 31 new data centers in the last quarter, and cut the ribbon on its $7.3 billion Fairwater 1 facility in April 2026 - much to the annoyance of local residents.

Microsoft has also taken steps to reduce the hardware costs of its data centers. The company’s most powerful chip yet - Maia 300 - was unveiled in October, with the company already using the chip for inference with Copilot. The design delivers 1.7 times more tokens per watt than leading GPU infrastructure, Microsoft said.

Microsoft said the chip will become the company’s main inference capability thanks to the reduced token costs and increased efficiency.

As AI use expands globally, questions are emerging about where training data originates, who owns it, and how organizations keep sensitive information secure. This is the domain of sovereign AI: the protection of data, its uses, and its results, which is becoming increasingly important as AI moves from proof-of-concept to production deployments spanning entire countries and continents.

Beyond where data is stored, sovereign AI is really a question of who controls an organization's or region's AI capabilities. In practice, this requires control over the entire infrastructure stack, both software and hardware, along with policies governing who can view data, manage infrastructure, and install software.

Because data protection laws and practices vary widely across geographies – even within Europe – the governance of data flows and processing pipelines must be understood and followed.

While sovereign AI is often discussed on a country-by-country basis, the same rules and procedures apply to enterprises. For them, questions of data location, ownership, and transmission are even more complex.

Location is only part of the story

Much attention has focused on where a data center is physically located, but a closer look at what a data center actually comprises is needed when assessing sovereign infrastructure.

Physical location is usually easy to determine, but many providers run multi-cloud infrastructures in which data centers are linked by high-speed networks, and a cloud provider may shift workloads between its own facilities when capacity is tight. Organizations need assurance that their applications and data stay where originally intended.

If the proprietary data behind AI workloads sits with a cloud provider, the end-user may not know the exact location of the storage devices. Additionally, putting location aside, control is the critical concern: if one jurisdiction owns data stored in another, who decides what it can be used for and whether it can cross borders? The question grows more complex when a company has offices in multiple countries or regions.

Traditional workloads like ERP, inventory and HR systems typically keep data in a corporate database accessed remotely. AI is different: users are widely dispersed, while inference increasingly takes place on edge devices such as smartphones, connected vehicles and industrial systems. These devices often need access to the underlying data and trained model outputs, rather than receiving a stream of rendered content.

As models and proprietary data move between central infrastructure, regional data centers and edge environments, they may cross multiple networks and storage systems. Who owns that data in transit, especially when it crosses borders, is a question every organization scaling AI inference needs to answer.

Evaluating sovereignty layer-by-layer

AI today demands substantial compute, high-performance data input/output, and high-speed networking – components that must work together under a common set of laws, processes and procedures. An organization's AI infrastructure might combine powerful servers in one location, edge devices in another, and cross-border communication between them.

And then there's the data itself: where does it live, is it centralized, and in what format?

Ownership matters just as much as location. Data ownership might sit with an enterprise business unit, a compliance function, or the C-suite. Looking beyond the data, considerations include: who decides which data center runs a given training job, especially when a centralized scheduler manages many facilities for utilization and performance?

Can that automation be overridden? Should certain data be restricted to certain training uses, and does making specific data available to certain providers create enterprise value?

Because training data is drawn from sources around the world, enterprises need a clear governance framework for deciding which sources are trusted, who approves their use, and how regional regulatory or political requirements shape those decisions. That framework should establish accountability at both an organizational and individual level, with transparent records of where data originated, how it was used and whether the necessary permissions or licenses were secured.

The same principles should extend across the infrastructure stack. Organizations need defined ownership of the training environment, model weights and deployment decisions, alongside controls that determine who can administer these systems and from which jurisdiction. AI users may not need visibility into every technical detail, but they should understand the provenance, governance and location of the systems handling sensitive data and intellectual property.

Sovereign AI depends not only on where infrastructure is hosted, but on maintaining auditable control over the data, models, platforms, and people involved throughout the AI lifecycle.

There is also the challenge of demonstrating that an AI system’s outputs are grounded in legitimate training data, while ensuring that the data remains protected and accessible only to authorized parties across the infrastructure stack. Verda, a European AI cloud provider, offers one example of how this can be addressed in practice. Its infrastructure is hosted in Nordic data centers and allows customers to configure hardware and software around their operational and regulatory requirements.

The platform supports organizations across the private and public sectors, with controls designed to help address requirements including GDPR, the EU AI Act and sector-specific rules. These include confidential virtual machines, hardware-enforced trusted execution environments, and encryption for CPU and GPU memory, as well as data in transit and at rest.

The broader lesson that we can take from Verda’s success is that sovereign AI depends on embedding governance, security, and regulatory control throughout the system lifecycle, rather than treating data location as the only measure of sovereignty.

Operational sovereignty means more than compliance

AI is now critical infrastructure for enterprises worldwide, and compliance with local laws must be an architectural concern from the start, rather than being addressed after a data center goes live. From design through implementation and ongoing workloads, a sovereign data center must continually meet its operational sovereignty commitments.

Once online, sovereignty may help data centers remain operational through commercial disruption like recessions, geopolitical shifts or conflicts, and technical changes – new chips, models and architectures.

The concept of sovereignty is about resilience rather than eliminating every external dependency, with extreme events like war threatening to destroy infrastructure. It is about understanding where dependencies exist, deciding which ones are acceptable and avoiding unnecessary concentration of risk.

Technical decisions in design and operation can help avoid vendor lock-in, allowing a data center to keep running even if a business relationship ends. Relying on a single supplier for critical technology carries risk, since shifting geopolitics can bring tariffs or restrictions that block business with suppliers from certain countries.

Every data center operator depends on an ecosystem with a limited number of server, storage and power suppliers. Supply chains are global even when a facility sits in one geography, which optimizes cost but means not everything is controllable – so, understanding where risk concentrates matters. With many thousands of components from hundreds of suppliers, a smooth operation may still lean on a small set of vendors.

Open standards and formal standardization reduce this risk by making interoperability less dependent on any single supplier, and by allowing workloads to move between technologies and environments. In turn, this builds confidence in sovereign data centers as resilient infrastructure.

Building trust through control, not assumptions

Trust in sovereign AI depends on organizations knowing who can access their data, infrastructure and production environments, under what circumstances and with what oversight. Privileged access should be tightly controlled, clearly assigned and documented, with responsibility sitting at an appropriate level such as the CIO or Chief Compliance Officer.

This is particularly important when AI workloads involve proprietary data, prompts, model outputs or fine-tuning datasets that could reveal commercially sensitive information about an organization's products, customers and internal processes.

Policies and employee training remain important, but they should be reinforced through technical and operational controls. Organizations need clear assurances that their data will not be retained, reused or incorporated into provider model training without explicit permission.

Access controls, encryption, logging, workload isolation and data-retention settings can help enforce these expectations, while documented processes should show who controls each part of the AI environment, where supply-chain risks exist and which regional laws govern the data.

With this in mind, governance is becoming as important to AI infrastructure evaluation as performance, scalability and cost. Sovereign AI providers must be able to demonstrate, rather than simply claim, how they protect data and manage workloads across the full hardware and software stack.

For organizations increasingly reliant on AI as critical infrastructure, transparent ownership, auditable controls and consistent processes will be central to building confidence and supporting broader adoption.

We've featured the best AI tool.

This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.

The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit

Ali G: Who I Iz? is about to set to a major — and likely unwanted — new record on Prime Video.

The comedy flick, which sees Sacha Baron Cohen reprise his role as the infamous character, will make its debut on Amazon's streaming platform on Wednesday, October 28.

Why is that such a big deal? Because Who I Iz? was only released in cinemas on Friday, October 23. As such, it'll be the first film in history to make its streaming debut less than a week after its initial theatrical launch when it drops on one of the world's best streaming services.

A post shared by Ali G (@official.ali.g)

A photo posted by

Amazon hasn't explained why Who I Iz? will make its premium video on demand (PVOD) so soon after landing in theaters. In fact, the only individual who's commented on the imminent Prime Video arrival of one of 2026's many new movies is Cohen himself, with the comedian taking to Ali G's various social channels to announce the news.

I've reached out to Amazon for an official comment on this unprecedented release date decision, but nobody had responded by the time of publication. If I receive a reply, I'll update this article.

Ali G: Who I Iz? marks the first time in almost 20 years that Cohen has portrayed the titular character, with Cohen having retired his most famous creation in 2007.

Defending the decision to bring back the controversial character in a Time magazine essay, Cohen wrote: "Why does my new movie bring back that phony and unfunny guy, which some have criticized as 'microwaving a relic from a generation ago'?

"The fact that Ali G is outdated and problematic is the very reason I resurrected him. The world he’s returned to is, in many ways, worse than the one he left 20 years ago. All the prejudices my characters are designed to expose haven’t just lingered — they’ve metastasized... Twenty years ago, Ali G would sit next to world experts spouting absurdities. Today — fed a steady diet of disinformation and conspiracy theories by social media influencers and TikTok news — we have created an entire world where ignorance reigns and truth is inverted.

"I made this latest film for the same reason I’ve always done this work," he added. "Not only to make people laugh, but also to bring them face-to-face with the danger of fanaticism and conspiracy theories."

What do you make of this release strategy? And will you check out Ali G: Who I Iz? on Prime Video? Let me know in the comments.

Imagine a NASCAR team where leadership decides the winner is the car that burns the most fuel. The crew chief tunes every engine to run rich and wasteful. Drivers ride the gas and the brake at once. The telemetry shows record fuel consumption. The car finishes dead last.

For a stretch this year, wasteful consumption metrics drove AI measurement programs. Companies stood up internal leaderboards ranking employees by how many tokens they burned. A Meta employee built one, crowned the top "token legends," then quietly took it after the numbers leaked externally. By spring the trend had a name: tokenmaxxing.

By the start of summer the inevitable backlash arrived, with companies like Uber acknowledging they’d already spent their entire AI budget for the year in a matter of months.

More recently, the inevitable swing toward using the minimal number of AI tokens (tokenminning) leads to the same problem. If leadership defines winning as using the least amount of fuel, the winning car would never leave the starting line.

Burning or saving tokens should never be the end goal. The objective is shipping more products, at higher quality, with the same or fewer people. The job of a leader is to define the most strategic path toward the finish line, and based on that definition, build metrics that support it.

Why leaderboards miss the mark

A vanity metric is any number that looks great on a slide, leaderboard or dashboard but doesn't change how you run your business. In the AI space, even highly technical and complex metrics can become vanity metrics.

Here’s a couple I’ve seen lately, each a different way to look busy GPU utilization rates that brag about how much raw compute you’ve hoarded, regardless of whether it's solving real problems. AI features shipped per quarter, where leadership slaps a sparkle-emoji text summarizer on every legacy product to pad the release notes.

Metrics like these can feel rigorous, but they're detached from the end work itself. When leaders don’t relate metrics to end goals, engineers may race toward the nearest countable item.

The missing race map

Work completed only matters if it’s the right work. When leadership celebrates "95% adoption" of GitHub Copilot because the licenses are deployed, they can mistake superficial access for deep engagement. They assume productivity is skyrocketing. They're measuring who adopted the tool, not who is effectively using it to improve outcomes.

Developers might be generating more code faster, but if the tool isn't deeply integrated into a refined process, PR sizes inflate and the bottleneck simply shifts to human code review. Cycle time stays stagnant, or worse, bug rates go up because humans are rubber-stamping AI hallucinations.

Close the disconnect: tie depth of use directly to outcomes and business goals. If you have 95% "adoption" but your cycle time hasn't dropped by 30% or your rework hasn't decreased, you don't have high use. You just have an expensive new software distribution.

How to set the finish line

A single number rarely tells a story. If I can produce twice as much code but it takes twice as long to ship, I haven't gained efficiency. I've created more work. The right question isn't how much AI you're using — it's whether the work is actually getting better.

For engineering teams with more established workflows, start with the outcome you want to move, then use a framework like DORA or SPACE to check whether you got there. The framework is the instrument, not the goal. DORA tracks the health of your delivery pipeline — how often you deploy, how long changes take, how quickly you recover from failures, how often changes cause incidents.

SPACE tracks the full picture of developer productivity across five dimensions, including outcomes and satisfaction. Neither was designed for AI, which is exactly why they're useful: they’ll help you measure whether AI made the work better, not whether AI got used.

Pair one of those frameworks against your AI tool usage and your business outcomes like cycle time, rework rate, cost per change. A 25% increase in AI adoption that correlates with a drop in delivery stability isn't a win. The 2025 DORA report found that's exactly what many teams got when they deployed AI into underprepared systems. The tools amplified what was already there. Good engineering foundations got better, fragile ones got more fragile.

For roles outside engineering — marketing, finance, operations — build from first principles. Start with one outcome you're already trying to move: response time, pipeline conversion, forecast accuracy. Establish the finish line before AI enters the workflow. Measure toward that same outcome after. If it moved, figure out whether AI caused it and whether you can repeat it. If it didn't, you've learned something too. Picture a support team that wants to cut first-response time.

They baseline it at nine hours, then let agents draft replies with an AI assistant. Two months later response time is down to three hours, and reopen rates haven’t budged — so the speed isn’t costing them quality. That’s an outcome they can name, measure and repeat. It never needed a leaderboard.

Keeping the finish line in sight

The goal of a metric is to manage toward an outcome. If you're doing more work on the metric than on the outcome, you're upside down. You're looking at the gas tank, not the finish line. So before you stand up your next AI metric, ask one question: what outcome would move if this number did? If you can’t name it, you’re not measuring progress — you’re watching the fuel gauge. Define the finish line first; everything else is just telemetry.

We've featured the best AI website builder.

This article was produced as part of TechRadar Pro Perspectives, our channel to feature the best and brightest minds in the technology industry today.

The views expressed here are those of the author and are not necessarily those of TechRadarPro or Future plc. If you are interested in contributing find out more here: https://www.techradar.com/pro/perspectives-how-to-submit

• 25,000 Dutch government jobs will be cut by 2035, new plans say
• The Netherlands is looking to save €3.5 billion by 2035
• Selling off buildings, simplifying rules, and smaller desks will also contribute to the savings

The Dutch government has announced plans to phase out 25,000 jobs by 2035 in an effort to increase efficiency with the end goal of saving €3.5 billion ($3.9 billion), amounting to about 16% of the government’s total workforce.

According to plans laid out by Dutch State Secretary for Kingdom Relations and Effective Government Eric van der Burg, the cuts will save €900 million ($1 billion) by 2027 while AI will deliver increased productivity to take up the additional workload.

"We cannot keep doing what we did," Van der Burg said. "That is why we are going to make sharp choices for a central government that really works: simpler, smarter and smaller."

Smaller desks and AI part of savings plans

The plans hope to deliver a 20% productivity boost by using AI to increase efficiency, while simultaneously reducing the total government workload by simplifying rules. To that end, the Dutch government also has a plan in place to scrap or simplify at least 500 rules a year.

But AI isn’t the only way the government is looking to reduce costs. New rules will see pairs of employees sharing a single desk, surplus buildings sold off, and IT systems standardized.

While police and defense jobs are not being affected by the cuts, permanent advisory councils and advisory committees are not. The government will release new targets for the number of advisory bodies later this year, with current numbers sitting at 28 and 150 respectively.

According to Bloomberg several motions - albeit voluntary motions - to increase productivity using AI have already been passed. These motions are a catalyst for the resulting job and spending cuts, according to Van der Burg.

The Dutch government has seen a record number of central government officials, peaking at 160,000 by the end of 2025 - a rise of 41% since 2018 according to Bloomberg.

Individual cybersecurity could previously be glossed over, but the situation has changed. Cyber threats have become more sophisticated, as malicious actors increasingly deploy artificial intelligence (AI) tools. From AI-generated phishing emails to deepfakes and automated vulnerability scanning, individuals need protection against the widening net of cyberattacks.

The good thing is that AI also aids in fighting cyberattacks. Cybersecurity tools have become much more sophisticated at countering sneaky methods. To make online protection more accessible, platforms offer all-in-one cybersecurity suites with many features.

IDX is one example, and I’m reviewing it to see how it stacks up alongside the best data removal services and identity theft protection tools we've tested. Read on to learn about the features you’ll get with an IDX Complete subscription, its pros & cons, and how it fares against competitors.

IDX Complete: Plans and pricing

You can see the full list of services from IDX by clicking here.

IDX offers various pricing plans, but in this review I’m focusing on the Complete bundle. For $33 monthly, this bundle offers a data removal service, password manager, VPN, dark web monitoring, identity theft insurance, and many other features.

It's a steal compared to paying for each feature separately. Think of having to pay separately for a VPN, password manager, and data removal platform– it can run into $100 a month, compared to a $33-per-month IDX Complete plan.

(Image credit: IDX )

Users who pay annually get a 10% discount compared to paying month-to-month. I’m unimpressed with this discount, as 30% to 50% is the norm for most cybersecurity bundles I’ve reviewed. If I decide to pay for 12 months upfront, I think I deserve more than 10% off, but some platforms disagree.

IDX also offers a family version of the Complete plan. For $65 per month, the same features on the individual plan are expanded to 2 adults and 5 dependents under 18. It’s built for a conventional family of two parents and several children.

I’ve reviewed many family cybersecurity bundles and hardly encountered age specifications for users. It’s usually just a limit (e.g., 5 or 10 members) regardless of age, but IDX Complete is the exception.

IDX doesn’t offer a standard free trial or money-back guarantee. This is another complaint I have about its pricing system.

IDX Complete: Setup

Setting up IDX follows a straightforward pattern. It starts by entering your name and email, then choosing a password. However, there’s an obstacle here. I mentioned that IDX doesn’t offer a free trial—users have to choose a plan and enter payment details before gaining access. It’s a strictly paywalled service, unlike several platforms I’ve tested that offered free trials at the get-go, then requested a payment later.

After subscribing to the IDX Complete bundle and gaining access, it’s time to start using its security features. IDX offers many features under this bundle, so much that I’ll struggle to cover every one in this review. Instead, I’ll focus on the core features that keep users safe online.

The first is the ForgetMe data removal service. With this feature, you can scan data broker sites for your personal information. If your information is found on any site, IDX sends automated deletion requests. An IDX scan covers 100+ data broker sites, which isn’t as extensive as designated data removal platforms (many rivals cover 500+ sites), but it’s sufficient to remove your information from the most popular data broker sites.

The second is the password manager. This tool lets you store passwords securely and, if needed, share them with others. When it’s time to log into any site with a saved password, you’ll simply autofill the details. This tool also checks if your password got compromised in data breach incidents and alerts you immediately– the corrective action is to change the password for every site where you’ve used it.

The third is the virtual private network (VPN) feature. A VPN encrypts your online traffic by routing it through remote servers—think of surfing the web in the U.K., but using an IP address from faraway Australia. Your identity gets disguised to third parties that want to show you personalized ads or maybe stage malicious attacks.

A VPN is particularly important when you use public WiFi networks, which are often insecure. When using the IDX VPN, I could choose from roughly 20 server locations. This figure pales compared to dedicated VPN apps, some of which offer 200+ locations from countries down to cities. IDX’s server coverage is nowhere near as widespread, but the VPN worked reliably.

For U.S.-based users, IDX Complete includes identity theft recovery and insurance. That is, if a user experiences identity theft, IDX experts walk them through the corrective actions (e.g., freezing credit files and closing certain accounts). Users can get reimbursed for damages if they pay for an insurance plan.

Admittedly, I didn’t get to test the identity theft recovery feature (and hopefully won’t need it soon), but it’s a valuable service when needed.

From my perspective, IDX Complete doesn’t offer the best of each feature, relative to competitors, but the bundle is unbeatable. It’s not the best VPN compared to standalone VPN apps, nor the best data removal platform compared to rivals. However, offering many cybersecurity features in one cost-effective package is the selling point.

IDX Complete: Ease of use

IDX offers a modern interface that I liked using. It’s best described as minimal and simple. It’s not too interactive like I’ve found on some apps, yet not too bland. I’ll say it prioritized function over form, with features neatly arranged in places users can easily find them.

You can access IDX from a web browser or download the mobile app (iOS and Android). I’ve tested various cybersecurity tools that didn’t have mobile apps, so I’ll note that having both iOS and Android apps is a benefit.

(Image credit: IDX )IDX Complete: Security and privacy

Given its numerous features, IDX Complete is a highly effective privacy protection tool. With it, you get to kill multiple cybersecurity-related birds with one stone. Better still, you get the numerous features at a lower cost in one bundle compared to paying for each one separately.

IDX Complete: Support

IDX users get decent support resources, starting with a Knowledge Center offering detailed user guides, how-tos, and articles discussing emerging cyber threats to watch out for. There’s also an FAQs section that provides solutions to frequently encountered issues. For direct support, users can contact IDX’s staff by filling out an online ticket, and a response is delivered via email.

IDX Complete: Competition

Competition is the name of the game in the cybersecurity niche, with countless platforms offering all-in-one bundles similar to IDX Complete. The PrivacyHawk bundle is the most notable rival I’ll mention. It offers similar personal protection features at an affordable price: $30 per month for the most advanced plan, which includes identity theft protection, dark web monitoring, data removal, and spam filtering.

Personally, I prefer PrivacyHawk because it offers some free scans to help users test its features, unlike IDX, which requires payment before granting access. PrivacyHawk also has a 30-day money-back guarantee, which IDX doesn’t offer.

IDX Complete: Final verdict

IDX Complete provides much value for money. For a monthly subscription, you’ll unlock various tools to protect your online privacy, getting a good deal compared to paying for each tool independently. However, I think IDX should offer a standard free trial to attract users. Being hard-paywalled puts it at a competitive disadvantage.

De'Longhi Magnifica Start: Two-minute review

The De'Longhi Magnifica Start is one of the Italian manufacturer's more affordable automatic bean-to-cup coffee machines, designed to take much of the effort out of preparing fresh coffee at home. It doesn't offer the extensive drinks menu or customization options of more expensive models, but it benefits from the company's LatteCrema automatic milk frothing system, making it a potentially appealing choice for anyone who enjoys milk-based coffee.

The particular model I have on test here, the ECAM220.61.W, offers just four one-touch functions — namely espresso, coffee, latte macchiato and hot water — meaning only three are actually coffee drinks. Other versions of the Magnifica Start offer different selections, so it's worth double-checking exactly which model you're buying.

Despite its relatively basic specification, this Magnifica Start is a good-looking machine, with a smart white finish and a minimalist control panel. It certainly looks like it should be straightforward to operate but, as I discovered, it takes a little time to master.

The controls aren't quite as intuitive as those on some other machines I've tested, such as the KitchenAid KF2, which offers similar functionality but has clearly labelled buttons that make preparing coffee incredibly straightforward. The Magnifica Start's steeper learning curve isn't necessarily a deal breaker, but it's something to be aware of.

There are plenty of positives, though. Espresso shots are consistently well extracted with an appealing layer of crema, and I was impressed by how quickly the machine could prepare them, taking just 30 seconds from pressing the button to the finished drink. I did, however, find that adjusting the grinder to a slightly coarser setting produced a noticeably more satisfying flavor.

The LatteCrema system also impressed me, producing a generous amount of foam with a pleasing texture using oat milk. While I still prefer the finer control offered by a traditional steam wand, it's still a capable alternative for anyone who wants the convenience of automatic milk frothing. The clearly marked milk carafe also takes thesome guesswork out of preparing drinks, while dishwasher-safe components help make cleaning easier.

Honestly, for just a one- or two-person household, it’s easy to recommend the De'Longhi Magnifica Start, especially since its compact design makes it a good option for smaller kitchens, too. It may require a little patience initially, as the brewing adjustments aren’t as intuitive as I would have liked, but the results are worth spending that little extra time at the start to familiarize yourself with the instructions.

De'Longhi Magnifica Start review: Price and availability

• Different variants of the Magnifica Start are available in different markets
• Model on test available in the UK and Australia; US version comes with an additional preset
• List price: $749.95 / £399.99 / AU$799

(Image credit: Future / Max Langridge)

The Magnifica Start is the entry-level machine within De’Longhi’s wider selection of automatic coffee makers. Within it, however, there are multiple variants that may look virtually identical, yet offer different features, so it's important to pay attention to the model number.

For example, the exact model number of my review unit is ECAM220.61.W, which is only available in Australia for AU$799, exclusively through De'Longhi's online store. A black variant, with model number ECAM220.63.B, is available at a wider selection of third-party retailers, although it replaces the ‘latte macchiato’ preset on my review model with ‘cappuccino mix’. There’s yet another model that replaces the LatteCrema system with a manual steam wand.

While this particular white model is specific to Australia, similar versions are available internationally. In the US, for example, the comparable ECAM22080B retails for $749.95, but benefits from an additional cappuccino preset, bringing its total number of one-touch functions to five.

In the UK meanwhile, the ECAM220.61.GB is a closely related model finished in dark grey. It offers the same four one-touch functions as the model reviewed and carries a £399.99 recommended retail price.

Given its limited selection of drinks, the Magnifica Start can be compared with the KitchenAid KF2 released earlier in 2026. It, too, has a relatively small selection of presets, although it uses a Pannarello steam wand for milk frothing as opposed to the automatic LatteCrema system on the De'Longhi. The KF2 also adds iced coffee to the mix, although I found the results to be something of a mixed bag.

On price alone, the Magnifica Start is the clear winner of the two. However, I have to mention the Ninja Luxe Café as a viable alternative. It retails for $599.99 / £579.99 / AU$849 (or less as it’s often discounted), and while it might be a more hands-on machine, it offers considerably greater versatility than the De’Longhi, including the ability to prepare cold brew and filter coffee.

There's also the option of moving up, both in price and size, to the De'Longhi Magnifica Evo Next, which retails for $1,099.95 / £649.96 / AU$1,149. It uses a similar brewing system to the Magnifica Start, but offers a more comprehensive selection of drink presets and a colour display for easier navigation.

(Image credit: Future / Max Langridge)

• Value score: 4 / 5

De’Longhi Magnifica Start review: specs

Category

Specification

Type

Fully automatic bean-to-cup espresso machine

Dimensions (HWD)

13.78 x 9.45 x 17.32 inches / 350 x 240 x 440mm

Weight

20.3 lbs / 9.2 kg

Water tank capacity

1.9 quarts / 1.8 liters

Steam wand

No (Includes automatic LatteCrema Hot carafe / Hot water spout)

Max pressure

15 bar

Model number

ECAM22061W

De'Longhi Magnifica Start review: Design

• Attractive, compact design with a minimalist control panel
• Only three coffee presets on model reviewed, with no dedicated cappuccino or hot-milk function
• Clearly marked milk carafe and dishwasher-safe components

No matter which model of the De'Longhi Magnifica Start is available in your location, they’re all identical. The only real differences are whether it uses the LatteCrema system or a steam wand, the color of the machine and the number of drink recipes it offers.

It’s an attractive coffee machine, particularly in the glossy white finish of the model sent for this review. The Magnifica Start has a relatively minimalist appearance, with a predominantly plastic construction and a black control panel providing some contrast. I’d argue it doesn't have quite the same premium appeal as the KitchenAid KF2 and KitchenAid KF3 I've reviewed previously, but I think it looks smart enough for most kitchens.

(Image credit: Future / Max Langridge)

It measures 24 x 44 x 35cm (W x D x H), making it a relatively compact appliance for a fully automatic coffee machine. That said, its 24cm width might be a small footprint, but its 44cm depth is worth considering if you have a particularly narrow countertop.

The machine's compact dimensions should also make it a reasonable option for kitchens with low-hanging cabinets. You will, of course, need some clearance above it to remove the lid and refill the hopper, but I didn't find accessing it to be particularly troublesome.

The bean hopper, located on top of the machine towards the rear, can accommodate up to 250g of beans and is covered by a lid that unfortunately doesn't form a completely airtight seal, meaning the beans will lose freshness if left in the hopper for more than a couple of days.

The Magnifica Start also accepts pre-ground coffee via a separate chute on top of the machine, and a measuring scoop is included in the box. While I'd generally recommend using freshly ground beans wherever possible, it's a useful addition if you occasionally fancy a decaf but don't want to empty the hopper of your regular beans.

Another design feature I appreciate is the positioning of the water reservoir, which slides out from the front-right side of the machine. I praised this same arrangement in my De’Longhi Magnifica Evo Next review, and I'm pleased to see it make an appearance on a more entry-level model. It makes refilling the tank incredibly easy, particularly compared with machines that have their reservoirs located at the rear — like those from KitchenAid — and might require you to move the entire machine to gain access.

Future / Max LangridgeFuture / Max LangridgeFuture / Max LangridgeFuture / Max Langridge

The reservoir also looks deceptively small, but holds a generous 1.8L of water, matching the capacity of the more expensive Magnifica Evo Next. The drip tray covers the entire depth of the machine and slides out from the front, along with the internal container that collects used coffee grounds. The latter can hold up to 14 coffee pucks before needing to be emptied — far more generous than the KitchenAid KF4 that I use at home, which can only hold six or seven used pucks before it needs emptying.

On the front, you'll find the removable LatteCrema milk carafe, which attaches alongside the height-adjustable coffee dispensing spouts. It slots into place easily and takes care of milk frothing automatically, removing the need for a separate steam wand. The carafe can be swapped out for a water spout if you wish to pour hot water for a tea instead.

The particular model under test here features De'Longhi's LatteCrema Hot system, although more expensive models, such as the Eletta Explore, can also come with a separate LatteCrema Cool carafe for preparing cold milk foam. Its absence here isn't especially surprising given the Magnifica Start's more affordable positioning.

One feature I particularly appreciate here is the measurement markings on the carafe to indicate how much milk you should add for your chosen drink. This helps minimize waste, especially if you're only making coffee for one person. Interestingly, there are markings for ‘cappuccino’ and ‘cappuccino mix’ coffees, neither of which is available as a preset on this particular Magnifica Start, but is a present for the model sold in the US. The carafe also has an automatic cleaning function, while several removable components, including the drip tray and milk carafe, are dishwasher-safe.

The control panel is similarly minimalist, with four prominent drink icons and separate buttons for adjusting coffee strength and accessing other settings and functions, such as cleaning modes. On the surface, it looks incredibly straightforward, which is exactly what I'd expect from a machine offering such a limited selection of drinks.

However, I didn't find it quite as intuitive as I'd hoped. The layout initially led me to believe I should select my desired drink before adjusting its strength, whereas the machine actually requires you to select the strength first. It's something that becomes easier with familiarity, but I do think the controls could have been better explained.

The Magnifica Start lacks dedicated user profiles, something that I’ve come to appreciate on other automatic espresso machines I’ve reviewed. While you can customize individual drink quantities and adjust coffee strength, there’s only one saved volume setting per recipe.

This means that if two people prefer different-sized coffees, they’ll have to keep adjusting the programmed volumes to suit their tastes. Combined with its limited selection of drinks, I think this makes the Magnifica Start best suited to a single person or couple, particularly if both enjoy similar coffees. Larger households with different preferences would likely benefit from a machine with user profiles and a more extensive drink menu.

• Design score: 4 / 5

De'Longhi Magnifica Start review: Performance

• Consistent espresso extraction with a good layer of crema
• LatteCrema produces impressive milk texture, although a manual steam wand offers greater control
• Quick coffee preparation, but some functions take time to master

(Image credit: Future / Max Langridge)

As with any bean-to-cup coffee machine, the most important consideration is how well the De'Longhi Magnifica Start actually makes the drink. Ease of use is a close second, especially for a machine designed to simplify the process of preparing your favourite drinks at home.

My first experience with the Magnifica Start was something of a mixed bag.

Setting it up was relatively straightforward, but I soon discovered that getting it to produce the exact drink I wanted would require some experimentation. My first latte macchiato, for example, dispensed considerably more liquid than I had anticipated, almost causing my cup to overflow.

Part of the problem is that there's no clear indication of precisely how much coffee or milk each preset will dispense, at least not without referring to the full user manual on De'Longhi's website.

While coffee strength can be adjusted before preparing each drink, there's only one saved volume setting per recipe. To adjust the volume of any drink, press and hold its dedicated button for a few seconds until the light blinks rapidly. The built-in grinder will have already kicked into action, which is normal. Once the coffee (or milk if you’re customizing the latte macchiato) reaches your desired level, press the same drink button again and the settings will be saved.

Once I'd figured out the process, I was able to customize the volume of my latte macchiato successfully, and the Magnifica Start remembered my settings for subsequent drinks. However, restoring the original quantity isn't quite as convenient. While it's possible to reset drink volumes to their factory defaults, doing so also resets all other settings and customized recipes. This seems unnecessarily cumbersome if you simply want to undo a change to one drink.

While I appreciate that all automatic coffee machines require some familiarization, I found myself returning to the user manual more often than I'd expected from a machine with such a limited selection of drinks.

There's also an amusing inconsistency in the setup guidance, which recommends preparing several cappuccinos before expecting the machine to deliver its best results. That's perfectly reasonable advice for a machine with a cappuccino preset, but this particular version of the Magnifica Start doesn't have one. It's a minor detail, admittedly, but it adds to the impression that the instructions aren't tailored as carefully as they could be to the individual machine.

(Image credit: Future / Max Langridge)

Fortunately, when it comes to actually making coffee, the Magnifica Start has proved to be a reliable performer. After preparing several espressos, I found extraction quality to be consistently good, with each shot producing an appealing layer of golden-caramel crema. The results were remarkably similar from one coffee to the next, suggesting the machine has little trouble delivering a repeatable extraction.

I wasn't initially sold on the flavor, however, particularly as I've used the same beans in other machines, including KitchenAid's semi-automatic and fully automatic models, with more satisfying results. Fortunately, adjusting the grinder to produce a slightly coarser grind had a noticeably positive effect, resulting in a more enjoyable espresso. It goes to show that while the Magnifica Start is capable of producing good coffee, some experimentation may be required to get the best results.

The De’Longhi Magnifica Start doesn’t feature any kind of intelligent grind adjustment — De’Longhi does have its own BeanAdapt technology to do just that, but it’s reserved for its higher-end models — so you’ll need to adjust the grind yourself if you’re not totally satisfied with the results.

By default, the grinder is set to position four of seven, which De’Longhi claims “has been factory set to ensure that coffee is prepared correctly”. If coffee is being dispensed particularly slowly, the grind may be too fine, in which case De'Longhi recommends adjusting the dial towards a higher number. You’ll need to turn the grind dial, found inside the bean hopper, towards a higher number. Conversely, if you want a fuller bodied or creamier coffee, then you’ll need to turn the dial towards position one. In either case, the grind dial should only be adjusted when the grinder is in motion, and it takes at least two poured coffees for results to take effect.

I was pleased with the temperature of the finished coffee, which I found to be comfortably hot without being unpleasant to drink. If you prefer your coffee a little hotter or cooler, the brewing temperature can be adjusted through the machine's settings.

What surprised me most, however, was just how quickly the Magnifica Start could prepare an espresso. I timed it at just 30 seconds from pressing the espresso button to the finished drink, which is impressively brisk for a machine that grinds fresh beans for each cup.

It's also relatively quiet in operation. I recorded an average noise level of approximately 69dB using decibelX app in my iPhone in a quiet room and standing right in front of the machine, rising to around 74dB during grinding before dropping to 65dB while brewing. While the grinder is clearly audible, I never found the noise particularly intrusive, especially given how quickly the machine completes the process.

(Image credit: Future / Max Langridge)

Milk-based drinks take a little longer to brew, as the LatteCrema system needs time to heat up before it can start dispensing milk. Even so, the overall process remains convenient, particularly as there's no need to manually froth milk or transfer it between containers.

Speaking of which, I was pleasantly surprised by the performance of the LatteCrema milk frothing system. I've used it on other De'Longhi coffee machines in the past and haven't always been completely convinced by its ability to produce the milk texture I prefer, particularly when using plant-based alternatives.

This time, however, the results have been noticeably better. Using oat milk, the Magnifica Start produced a generous amount of foam with a satisfyingly smooth texture, making for a more convincing latte macchiato than I had anticipated. I achieved similar results with dairy milk too.

That being said, it's worth mentioning that the type of milk used can have a significant impact on frothing performance. If you’re using non-dairy varieties, it’s always recommended to use barista-style versions, as these are generally formulated to produce a more stable foam.

I still prefer the results I can achieve with a traditional steam wand and, while I haven't had the chance to use it myself, a version of the De’Longhi Magnifica Start is available with one. A manual wand gives me far greater control over how much air I introduce into the milk, allowing me to create the finer, silkier microfoam I typically prefer for a flat white.

But manual frothing also requires more skill and effort, and that's where the LatteCrema system makes a strong case for itself. For anyone who values convenience over having complete control of their milk texture, it's a capable set-and-forget solution that produces pleasing results with minimal input.

• Performance score: 4 / 5

Should you buy the De'Longhi Magnifica Start?De'Longhi Magnifica Start scorecard

Attribute

Notes

Score

Value

One of the more affordable automatic coffee machines I’ve tested, although it’s possible to find alternatives that offer features for not much extra cash.

4 / 5

Design

A smart-looking, compact machine that will fit in most kitchens, but its controls will take some time to learn.

4 / 5

Performance

Consistently good espresso after some grind adjustment, quick preparation and impressive automatic milk frothing, although customization could be more intuitive.

4 / 5

Buy it if...

You want a straightforward selection of coffee drinks

If you primarily drink espresso, black coffee or latte macchiato, the Magnifica Start offers those essentials without overwhelming you with dozens of options.

You want automatic milk frothing

The LatteCrema system takes care of frothing milk for you, and its removable carafe has measurements to help minimize waste.

You want a coffee machine that's easy to clean

An automatic milk-system cleaning function and dishwasher-safe components should make routine maintenance easier.

Don't buy it if...

You enjoy a wide variety of coffee drinks

With no dedicated cappuccino, flat white or standalone hot-milk function, this particular Magnifica Start is one of the more limited automatic machines I've tested.

You expect completely intuitive controls

The buttons look simple enough, but understanding how to adjust drink strength and serving sizes requires a little patience.

You want plenty of drink customization

While you can adjust coffee strength and drink length, you don't get the extensive personalization available on more expensive automatic coffee machines.

De'Longhi Magnifica Start review: Also consider

KitchenAid KF2
The KF2 is just as compact as the De'Longhi, and also has a limited selection of drinks, but I found it easier to use. The steam wand is more reliable for producing thick, velvety foam too.

Read my full KitchenAid KF2 review

Ninja Luxe Café
This 3-in-1 machine from Ninja can do espresso, cold brew and drip coffee, all for a similar price as the De'Longhi. It does require more manual input than the fully automatic Magnifica Start, but it's near-foolproof control system will have you experimenting with your morning brew in no time.

Read our full Ninja Luxe Café review

How I tested the De'Longhi Magnifica Start

I tested the De'Longhi Magnifica Start in the TechRadar Australia office kitchen, using it to prepare coffee with Campos Superior beans, a medium-dark blend that’s roasted locally in Sydney, Australia, where I’m based.

I prepared multiple espresso and milk-based drinks to assess extraction consistency, flavour and milk texture, using both dairy milk and barista-style oat milk. I also experimented with the grinder settings to determine their effect on espresso flavour.

I evaluated how straightforward the machine was to set up and use, paying particular attention to its control panel and customization options. I used a measuring cup to check that customized drink volumes were remembered correctly, and recorded the time taken to prepare an espresso, along with noise levels during grinding and brewing.

Read more about how we test

First tested October 2026

• Russia appears to be using civilian vessels to spy on critical undersea cables between the US and Europe
• The UK relies on the cables for around economic activity that amounts to £65 billion a year
• Maritime law severely limits engagement with civilian vessels in international waters

Russian civilian vessels are being used to map undersea cables linking the UK and Europe with the United States, according to an investigation by The Telegraph, which adds that fishing trawlers are performing espionage in the waters around Britain.

Analysis by the publication has found evidence of over 500 incidents carried out by what are described as “commercial proxies”, the use of which appears to sit within a 2022 maritime doctrine approved by Russian President Vladimir Putin aimed at mobilizing fishing and other civilian vessels.

If the information was used aggressively, undersea cables could be targeted and disrupt banking, transport, and even trans-continental mobile phone data.

Commercial proxies

In response to the investigation, the British government has announced a security crackdown, with sentencing and fines for anyone proven to have sabotaged undersea cables.

Fishing vessels conducting undercover undersea operations may seem like something straight out of a Tom Clancy book or a James Bond movie, but with over 500 recorded incidents, it appears to be happening.

The Telegraph’s analysis found several repeated actions in the movement of civilian vessels around undersea cables, and while their general path is publicly available, is is believed that the surveillance sought to establish specific routes. With this information, the undersea cables could be more accurately targeted by saboteurs.

“We’ve been pretty clear, and the head of MI5 has been pretty clear, that Russia is starting to use commercial proxies in order to do some of their work for them in that space", noted Britain’s telecoms minister Ian Murray, adding the publication of the investigation may “deter some of those commercial proxies that might be doing the work for hostile state actors.”

Active monitoring

Some 17 vessels were identified by the investigation, with one spending 113 hours apparently surveying nine cables, and another repeatedly crossing over cables. Photography of the vessels concerned raised eyebrows, with a senior naval officer observing of one: “The hold could be easily used for other activities to store an uncrewed surface vehicle (USV) or remotely operated vehicles (ROVs).”

Tethered ROVs could potentially map the precise location of undersea cables, according to naval experts. Additionally, vessels travelling at slow sped could use sonar to map the seabed. One civilian craft spent 42 minutes around the trans-Atlantic Hibernia Express cable, moving at under two knots.

The British government has introduced proposals that will replace its outdated Submarine Telegraph Act 1885, with intentional damage of undersea cables carrying a maximum 14 prison sentence. Unlimited fines are also planned.

The Royal Navy has sought to reassure the British public, with a source telling The Telegraph that “We’re clearly watching Russia, watching what they’re doing for the security of the nation. We are actively monitoring them at sea.”

Google's latest AI model can untangle millions of lines of code and accelerate quantum computing research, which is great if you happen to spend your afternoons debugging enormous software projects or advancing theoretical physics. For the average Gemini user, the sheer power of the new Gemini 4 Argon model begs the question: why do you need it?

Google has made Gemini 4 Argon readily available in the Gemini app for Google AI Pro or Ultra subscribers. Simply pick it from the list of models available at the top of the conversation. Google brags about the model's advanced reasoning, multi-step problem-solving, and other improvements provided by the sophisticated AI, but it's a little much for helping write an email.

Whether Argon can outperform its predecessors on complicated benchmarks is less interesting than figuring out what to do with all this additional AI power. As AI models become increasingly specialized, we may be approaching a point where the technology is advancing faster than people's ability to understand why they need it.

Give the big model a big problem

(Image credit: Shutterstock/mundissima)

Gemini 4 Argon certainly has potential uses, for instance, in analyzing complicated information scattered across several files. Imagine comparing three health insurance policies with different deductibles, premiums, coverage exclusions, and out-of-pocket limits. A regular Gemini model can already summarize the policies, but Argon's advanced reasoning could become valuable when calculating how different combinations of medical expenses would affect the total annual cost. It would be great at navigating all kinds of potential healthcare scenarios, tracking multiple interacting variables, identifying relevant exceptions, and calculating their consequences.

The same principle applies to any other complicated project, like renovating a house and asking the model to evaluate contractor estimates, material costs, and architectural plans for inconsistencies and potential price overruns. Argon 4 might help when determining how a delayed electrical inspection affects several subsequent jobs and the overall budget.

It could also be useful in learning complicated academic subjects that incorporate a lot of interconnected concepts, such as advanced math. All of that is still only potentially better than simply using the less powerful models. It might be as complicated to work out when Argon 4 is necessary as the very projects for which the model is best suited.

Overthinking AI

It sometimes feels ridiculous how Google is building models capable of tackling extraordinary scientific and engineering challenges, then placing them in the same interface people use to request pancake recipes. The technology is becoming increasingly sophisticated, yet the reasons to choose one model over another remain vague.

This is hardly unique to Google. OpenAI and Anthropic have their own incredibly powerful models that seem ill-suited to the average user. The most powerful model isn't always going to be the most useful. Asking Gemini to rewrite an email or suggest dinner ideas probably doesn't require Argon's additional reasoning capabilities. A faster model might deliver an equally useful answer faster. Even the more complicated examples aren't necessarily beyond ordinary Gemini models. Argon's advantage would need to come from handling unusually complicated combinations of constraints.

The challenge for Google is that users can't easily recognize which assignments justify a more powerful model. In that case, the model picker becomes an annoyance and not a feature.

Right now, most Gemini users should stick to the less intense models and reserve Gemini 4 Argon for assignments where they would struggle. Argon 4 is apparently a remarkable technical achievement with huge possible benefits in some research, but I don't need something capable of solving quantum computing problems on an everyday basis. AI developers have become very good at building models capable of extraordinary work, but the most impressive feat would be explaining when ordinary people actually need them.

• Former Pegasus spyware company head urges governments to reduce reliance on US AI firms
• Governments should focus more on sovereign AI and national security that the infrastructure provided by external entities
• Pegasus spyware was used to monitor politicians, journalists, business heads, and more

Don’t trust US AI companies with your data and work towards creating sovereign AI, the former chief executive and co-founder of Israeli spyware organization NSO Group, Shalev Hulio, has said.

Hulio was responsible for the creation of the Pegasus spyware used to target politicians, top business leaders, and journalists around the world - marking a change in career that accompanies Hulio’s founding of AI cyber defence firm, Dream.

The former commercial spyware company head wants governments to host and develop their own AI models rather than hand over data relating to national security to US AI firms.

Spyware head to sovereign AI evangelist

“Every government should have their own model,” Hulio told the Financial Times. “They should not take the risk that somebody will wake up one day and shut their model because AI is a critical infrastructure. You want to control your own AI.”

An interesting perspective from the founder of a commercial spyware company that was blacklisted by the US government and continues to receive criticism from the UN and EU over its involvement in deploying Pegasus on thousands of devices by exploiting a WhatsApp flaw.

“Despite the public opinion, governments managed to prevent terror attacks and managed to save hundreds of thousands of lives along the years using NSO products,” Hulio told FT, adding, “Governments really appreciate, I think, the relationship that we had before.”

Dream was co-founded by Hulio and former Austrian chancellor Sebastian Kurz in 2022. The company initially sought to provide AI-enabled cyber defense tools to governments. The company has been credited with detecting the world's first autonomous AI end-to-end attack in which Chinese hackers used open-source AI models to discover and chain vulnerabilities to crack into Taiwan government agencies - including the nuclear safety agency.

Now, Dream is offering a portfolio of products that includes an AI-enhanced national-scale cyber defense system, an AI-powered software vulnerability discovery platform, and an AI platform that helps governments set up sovereign AI models that are not reliant on external infrastructure.

The models Dream offers are also bespoke for government use and trained on their customers' data to help refine the model more tightly to government needs, helping to keep costs down. “We are saying to entities within the government, you should have a very narrow but very smart model that can run very fast on one or two or three GPUs,” Hulio said.

Dream has raised $400 million in funding and investment, and was valued at $3 billion earlier this year. The company has so far sold its products to over a dozen countries across Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.

Amazon Kindle (2026): Two-minute review

When Amazon announced its 2026 range of Kindles on October 1, I balked at the prices, particularly for the entry-level model. Then again, I should have expected it, given the current cost of components. The days of Kindles being the affordable ereader are long gone now.

Yet the 2026 entry-level Kindle does go some way in justifying its higher price compared to its predecessor thanks to all new hardware that includes new colors — now also in an aluminum chassis that gets you double the storage (32GB) — as well as a thinner and even lighter design. The power button being moved to the right edge is also a welcome change that made my colleague Lance Ulanoff especially happy.

The design changes also include the screen now lying flush with the bezels and the display offering better contrast that improves text sharpness. However, I noticed a tiny bit of light bleeding on the top edge of the screen when reading in dark mode, which Amazon has acknowledge is a flaw, and the slim bezels don't offer enough space for the thumb to rest, thus triggering accidental page turns.

The page-turn speed here hasn't visibly improved over the 2024 model, but general navigation has. Amazon says the 2026 base Kindle is 30% faster than the previous model and, while that's hard to measure, I can attest that many other functions on the latter, like opening books, accessing the Kindle Store and going through settings, and are definitely faster.

(Image credit: Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar)

That's all that's new here, though, which is why I said the 2026 Kindle only goes 'some' way in justifying its cost. At launch, when I began my testing of this Kindle, there were no new software features to distinguish it from previous generations. However, Amazon released a new firmware just a couple of days before the publication of this review that has made a small change to how some books appear in the library tab — all titles within a series are now grouped together. This software update has also been rolled out to the previous Kindle generation, so you really aren't missing much if you don't upgrade... except for the slight increase in speed and the new screen.

There is still no warm light or auto-adjusting brightness for evening reading, and neither is there any waterproofing, not even on the aluminum version which has a screwed on back panel rather than the plastic one's pop-off option.

Yes, the rear panels can be removed now to allow users to change the battery when needed, in compliance with EU regulations, but I haven't seen any official battery packs being sold as yet. Battery life, however, is lackluster compared to the Kindle Paperwhite (both 2024 and the newer release) — it's practically half, which makes the aluminum Kindle especially harder to recommend over the 2026 Paperwhite as the prices aren't all that different.

So while I can appreciate that a new Kindle would cost more, I'm struggling to find value in it, more so because the Kobo Clara BW comes with waterproofing and warm light temperatures at a similar price to the plastic 16GB Kindle, albeit in a now two-year-old device.

(Image credit: Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar)Amazon Kindle (2026) review: price & availability

• First announced October 2026
• Available in major markets, including the US, UK and Australia
• List price from $149.99 / £134.99 / AU$279

With a starting price of $149.99 / £134.99 in the US and the UK for the ad-supported 16GB plastic Kindle, it's still a cheaper option compared to the 2024 release of the Kobo Clara BW that retails for $159.99 / £149.99. However, you get a few more features with the latter that the new 2026 release of the entry-level Kindle still doesn't get you — namely, warm light and waterproofing.

If you don't want the ads, then you need to tack on another $20 / £15 to that cost, which shifts the price dynamic between the Kindle and its Kobo counterpart.

In Australia, only the ad-free version of the Kindles has always been available and the starting price is now AU$279, which is AU$10 more than the Kobo Clara BW.

The 32GB Kindle Aluminum (yes, that's what Amazon is calling it in the US and is the model sent to TechRadar for this review) is ad-free by default and will set you back $189.99 / £169.99 / AU$299. Given the 2026 Kindle Paperwhite costs just another $10 / £15 / AU$50 (with ads in the US and UK), I'm struggling to see the value in the shiny new aluminum Kindle.

• Value score: 3 / 5

(Image credit: Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar)Amazon Kindle (2026) review: specs

Display type:

E Ink (possibly Carta 1300)

Screen size:

6 inches

Resolution:

300ppi

Processor:

unknown

Frontlight:

Yes, white light only

Storage:

16GB / 32GB

Battery:

up to 6 weeks (capacity unknown)

Water protection:

None

Software:

Linux based

Connectivity:

Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, USB-C

File support:

6 natively; 1 audio

Dimensions:

108 x 152.8 x 6.85 mm (4.3 x 6.0 x 0.3 inches)

Weight:

140g (4.9 oz) for plastic finish; 162g (5.7 oz) for aluminum

Amazon Kindle (2026) review: Design & display

• Shiny, new hardware, including fresh colors and a new aluminum model
• Thinner, lighter and more compact than before
• Gorgeous new display with better contrast and sharper text

I might have been disappointed with the 2024 edition of the base Kindle, saying it wasn't really an 'upgrade' just because it came in a lovely new color, but that's not the case with the 2026 release. This time, the entry-level Kindle truly is a worthwhile upgrade — at least in terms of hardware. Nearly everything about it is brand-spanking new and I love it.

The most obvious difference between the previous Kindle generations and the 2026 model(s) is the new chassis. Now available in two finishes — plastic and aluminum — and lovely new colors (Ube and the usual Graphite for the former, Alpine Sky and Seaglass Green for the latter), there's more choice where the base Kindle is concerned.

The other point of difference, and not just between generations but also between the two finishes, is that the aluminum version comes with 32GB of storage (like the Signature Editions of the Paperwhite and Colorsoft) and is ad-free by default in the US and the UK.

(Image credit: Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar)

While I personally didn't mind the power/sleep button on the bottom edge of the Kindle, now having it just below the top right corner is a good move, putting the cheapest Kindle in the new range on a similar design footing as the current Kindle Scribes.

The flush screen on both the plastic and metal Kindles makes it look modern and more premium, although the thin side bezels triggered numerous accidental page turns during my testing. I also noticed a small amount of light bleed on the top edge of the review unit sent to me, visible in dark mode. This has been discussed on Reddit and Amazon has acknowledged there is a flaw and is ready to exchange any units with such issues.

Impressively, though, the screen and the aluminum body aren't fingerprint magnets, which is my biggest relief compared to, say, the 2024 edition of the Kindle Paperwhite that showed off every oily smudge on the front and back.

(Image credit: Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar)

Another hardware difference — and a first for Amazon — is the replaceable battery. On the plastic model, the rear panel just pops open, but you will need tiny hex screwdriver to remove the aluminum panel if you ever need to change the battery. This is accordance to EU regulations, but I am yet to see official replacement batteries being listed on Amazon. It's early days yet, and a Kindle battery typically lasts about 10 years, so I'd expect to see official listings down the line.

In comparison, though, Kobo's 2024 ereaders — namely, the Libra Colour, Clara BW and Clara Colour — have even better repairability, with screens and motherboards also replaceable. So if longevity is important to you, Amazon still has a way to go to impress its Kindle users.

(Image credit: Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar)

As much as I love the new colors, the star of the show here is the upgraded display. The entry-level Kindle finally gets the E Ink Carta 1300 screen tech that the 2024 model missed out on.

Admittedly it still lacks warm LEDs, which is disappointing, but despite that it's the sharpest display on the entry-level Kindle that I've seen to date. It also boasts better contrast where blacks are blacker, even the background in dark mode, and that gives text better clarity overall.

Alongside the lack of warm hues for the frontlight, the entry-level Kindle still doesn't have waterproofing, which is probably for the best at least for the plastic model where the rear pops right off to access the battery. However, it would have been nice if Amazon had deigned to provide at least one of these missing features on the aluminum version to justify the higher price tag, especially since there are hardly any new software features to speak of here.

Design & display score: 4.5 / 5

(Image credit: Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar)Amazon Kindle (2026) review: Software

• Books in a series are now grouped together in the Library tab
• Additional wallpapers are nice
• Not much else is new with the latest software release

If you've been using an older Kindle, you'll be intimately familiar with navigating around the 2026 release as well. At the start of my two-week testing of the new Kindle, seemingly nothing had changed with the release of the software version 5.20.1.0.1. However, just a day before this review was published, Amazon released firmware 5.20.1.02 and the only new feature here that I've come across is books in a series being grouped together in the Library tab.

There is, however, a caveat here — only items purchased or borrowed from the Kindle Store (or from Kindle+, previous Kindle Unlimited) are arranged this way. If you've sideloaded books in a series via, say, the Send To Kindle platform, they will still appear as individual titles.

This latest firmware at the time of writing has also been rolled out to the 2024 11th-generation Kindle, so this new feature will also be available on the older model.

(Image credit: Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar)

I do appreciate that Amazon has added more wallpapers now, some which debuted on the 2025 releases of the Kindle Scribe. You can still choose to show the book covers if you don't want to cycle through the wallpapers when the device is sleeping.

The lack of significant new features on the Kindle is not a bad thing, although it would have been nice to have something different — perhaps reading stats like Kobo offers. However, the Kindle UX remains very simple to navigate around even if you're a first-time user — there is just the home screen and the library tabs, with the rest of the features and settings accessible by swiping down from the top edge of the screen.

Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadarSharmishta Sarkar / TechRadarSharmishta Sarkar / TechRadarSharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar

I still find the home screen to be too wound up in Amazon's ecosystem and looks quite cluttered compared to Kobo's homepage setup, but it at least makes it easy to find your next read if you source your content from the Kindle Store. In the same vein, if you are a Prime member or have a Kindle+ subscription, you'll be able to find something new right from the homepage based on your previous reading habits.

Audible support is no longer restricted to select countries at launch, like it was for the 2024 Kindles. Meaning if you're in, say, Australia, you can absolutely listen to Audible audiobooks by pairing the Kindle to a set of wireless headphones or earbuds (or even a Bluetooth speaker).

WhisperSync will continue narration on any Alexa-supported speaker too if you prefer to move on from using the Kindle, like when you're perhaps fixing dinner and, in a similar vein, if you ever change your Kindle to a newer device, your entire library is already available the moment you sign into your Amazon account (something I wish Kobo would offer).

• Software score: 4 / 5

(Image credit: Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar)Amazon Kindle (2026) review: Performance

• Excellent reading experience
• General navigation is faster compared to previous generation
• Same battery life as previous model, which is disappointing compared to the Paperwhite

New hardware aside, the overall performance from the 2026 Kindle is also better, making it a true upgrade that I was expecting to see in 2024. Amazon, however, hasn't revealed whether there's an upgraded processor under the hood but I suspect there would be, even if it's a small update.

While page-turn speed is more or less the same on the 2024 and 2026 Kindles, all other navigation and functionality happens just that much quicker on the latter, including ebook load times. Even automatic screen refreshes are so quick that I barely registered most of them — similar to what I experienced in my 3rd-generation Kindle Scribe (2025) review.

This speedy performance adds to the excellent reading experience, where the darker background in both regular and dark mode adds better contrast and makes text look sharper.

That said, I personally find 6-inch ereaders too small, and prefer the 7-inch or 8-inch ones — the sweet spot in terms of screen real estate, not too small and not too large. If you prefer larger fonts, you'll end up turning pages more often and that will then eat into the battery life of the Kindle.

Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadarSharmishta Sarkar / TechRadarSharmishta Sarkar / TechRadarSharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar

And that has not changed from the 2024 model. Battery life is still up to 6 weeks according to Amazon, based on just 30 minutes of reading per day. That is doable, if you leave Bluetooth and Wi-Fi off, switch off the frontlight completely and don't keep browsing the Kindle Store or doing anything else except read.

In my testing, where I read for 4-5 hours a day for two weeks, had Wi-Fi always on and screen brightness set to level 7 in regular mode (relatively low), I had to charge the Kindle every 2 to 3 days, which got a little annoying considering the 2024 Kindle Paperwhite I have gives me double the battery life.

Charging the battery is quick, though, with the device going from 11% to full in just about an hour when plugged into a 25W USB-C outlet and using a good-quality C-to-C cable. Three attempts at topping from 10% or 11% battery gave me the same results.

• Performance score: 4 / 5

(Image credit: Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar)Should I buy the Amazon Kindle (2026)?

Attribute

Notes

Score

Value

As lovely as the new hardware is, the 2026 Paperwhite isn't much more expensive than the 2026 Kindle (especially the aluminum version), making it a hard sell.

3 / 5

Design & display

A full revamp of the hardware and an updated screen makes this a good upgrade from an aging Kindle.

4.5 / 5

Software

Not much has changed here, so it's still an easy-to-use interface. But the lack of new software features is still disappointing.

4 / 5

Performance

Overall navigation and speed of loading books is visibly quicker compared to older generations. Battery life could have been better though.

4 / 5

Buy it if...

You're using a very old Kindle that now feels slow and clunky

For its entry-level model, Amazon has definitely done a good job with making the 2026 Kindle a worthy upgrade, if you can handle the higher price.

You want the most compact, lightest Kindle made to date

The entry-level Kindles have always been the most portable options in Amazon's ereader range, but the 2026 editions are smaller still, although the aluminum version isn't quite the lightest.

You care about device longevity

It may not be as repairable as Kobo's more popular ereaders, but at least being able to change out the battery — if official stock is made available globally — ensures your ereader will last way longer than the usual 10 years.

Don't buy it if...

Value for money is important

Admittedly the new hardware makes the 2026 Kindle a worthy upgrade over the 2024 model but, the latter — as long as it's available to buy — is cheaper and will continue getting new software features that are released for its successor, at least for a few years longer. Moreover, Kobo offers more features for around the same price, making the 2026 Kindle harder to recommend.

You prefer reading with larger fonts

Given its limited battery life and smaller screen size, you'll be better off opting for a 7-inch or 8-inch ereader with better battery capacity to support more frequent page turns.

You read a lot on holiday, by the pool or in the bath

I wouldn't recommend dropping any ereader in the ocean as salt water corrodes, but if you do read on the beach, by the pool, in the bath or just by the kitchen sink (hey, maybe you do), I'd recommend opting for an ereader that has waterproofing.

Amazon Kindle (2026) review: Alternatives

The 2026 edition of the base Amazon Kindle is good — a very worthy upgrade. However, its price might make you stop and think. So if you're keen on alternatives, I would consider the 2026 Kindle Paperwhite better value than the Kindle Aluminum, for example. I haven't tested the new Paperwhite yet, but from the existing crop of tried and tested models, the below two options are my top picks and are still some of the best ereaders you can buy.

Kobo Clara BW

As I've already mentioned earlier in this review, this 6-inch counterpart to the Kindle offers more features for around the same price as the 2026 release and is far more repairable than any Kindle. It might feel slower compared to the 2026 Kindle because it's now over two years old (at the time of publication of this review), but it's still a fabulous E Ink tablet with very good per-dollar value.
Read my full Kobo Clara BW review for more information

Amazon Kindle Paperwhite (2024)

For as long as this model is on the market, it's the better buy. You get a larger screen, waterproofing, warm LEDs, auto-adjusting screen light, a very good screen, excellent performance and better battery life than the 2026 Kindle.
Read my in-depth Amazon Kindle Paperwhite (2024) review to learn more

How I tested the Amazon Kindle (2026)

(Image credit: Sharmishta Sarkar / TechRadar)

No matter the circumstances, I generally read for at least a few hours a day, so it wasn't much different when it came to testing the 2026 Kindle. I used it for two and a half weeks, reading every single day for 4 to 5 hours.

While I already have an Amazon library accessible on any Kindle as soon as I sign in, I also used the Send To Kindle app to add a few more titles for good measure. Most of the titles I read on the 2026 Kindle were borrowed from Kindle+ though. This also allowed me to try out audiobooks on the device. I paired the Bose QuietComfort Ultra Headphones to the Kindle and also a JBL Charge 5 speaker for this purpose.

During testing, I changed screen brightness regularly to see how much affect it had on battery life, while also noting how browsing the Kindle Store affected the same. I also made a note of how much battery was lost when the device was sleeping.

Unfortunately I couldn't find the right screwdriver to access the battery under the Kindle Aluminum sent for this review, so I can't speak to how easy it would be to swap out an old pack for a new one.

Read more about how we test

[First published October 2026]

Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC: one-minute review

The Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC is simply a fantastic version of an already world-beating wireless gaming headset. While it shares an awful lot with the ‘original’ Audeze Maxwell 2 that launched earlier this year, the addition of genuinely excellent active noise cancellation (ANC) means that it offers an enhanced experience compared to its brethren.

The design and build remain very similar to that older model, with the big, weighty earcups sitting comfortably over your ears while the leather headstrap keeps things secure. Controls are also nearly identical, bar the addition of the ANC button on the front of the left cup. It’s a sturdy and robust build which gives great confidence, but if you’re in any way wary of weighty sets, then the Maxwell 2 ANC might be a bit much for you — it’s a chonker at 19.75oz / 560g.

However, the heft is unequivocally worth it in my opinion: when it comes to performance, the Maxwell 2 is absolutely fantastic. The non-ANC Maxwell 2 is my pick for the best-sounding gaming headset money can buy right now, and the ANC variant sounds just as brilliant in all scenarios across different platforms.

The ANC itself is a welcome addition and a genuinely impressive one, blocking out all exterior noise in my testing, as well as offering a transparency mode. The quality of the ANC makes it perfect for busy environments, or just achieving maximal immersion in your games.

This is up there with the absolute best in the premium ANC business — like the SteelSeries Arctis Nova Pro Omni and Nova Elite I tested in recent months — and I can’t recommend it more if it fits in your budget.

(Image credit: Future/Rob Dwiar)Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC: Price and availability

• List price: $429 / £429 / AU$699
• Chunky increase in price over the non-ANC model
• Priced alongside competitors from the likes of SteelSeries, but above other wireless contenders

The Maxwell 2 ANC is more expensive than its ‘regular’ counterpart: it’s $100 / £90 / AU$130 more. With only a few features that are different from its non-ANC brother, its value proposition will be called into question.

For that price, it’s above the likes of the SteelSeries Arctis Nova Pro Omni (a direct competitor to the Maxwell 2), which is a headset with excellent ANC and one I really would recommend as well.

More broadly, you can still get models such as the brilliant Turtle Beach Stealth Pro 2 headset for comfortably less, and other planar magnetic driver gaming headsets like the wired Asus ROG Kithara are cheaper still (though aren’t quite like-for-like).

As a result, the Audeze Maxwell 2 is a premium headset package, and the combination of its awesome planar magnetic driver audio and the great ANC makes it a sizable investment in the gaming headset market — though still much less than the SteelSeries Arctis Nova Elite. If the best gaming audio and ANC are both must-have features for you, then the Maxwell 2 ANC will still offer what you want and earn its price tag.

(Image credit: Future/Rob Dwiar)Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC: Specs

Price

$429 / £429 / AU$699

Weight

19.75oz / 560g

Drivers

90mm Planar Magnetic

Compatibility

PlayStation or Xbox, Nintendo Switch, Nintendo Switch 2, PC, Mac, Mobile

Connection type

Wireless (2.4Ghz via dongle), Wired (USB-C & audio jack), Bluetooth 5.3 (Auracast, LE Audio, LC3, LC3plus, LDAC, AAC, SBC, Multipoint)

Battery life

ANC off: 40 hours; ANC on: 35 hours

Features

“Aviation-grade” ANC with dual dedicated 1.4W amplifiers, 24-bit/96kHz high-resolution audio, SLAM acoustic management technology, detachable hypercardioid mic, beamforming mic with physical and AI reduction, FILTER™ Noise Reduction Technology, embedded Dolby Atmos license (Xbox)

Software

Audeze App (PC & mobile)

Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC: Design & features

• Robust build with a great feature set that builds on predecessor
• A little heavier than the non-ANC headset
• Weaker battery life

The Maxwell 2 ANC gives great confidence with its build. It feels robust, solid, and able to withstand a knock or a drop (something I can attest to), and a lot of that comes from its weightiness. Some folks might immediately associate ‘heavy gaming headset’ with ‘bad,’ but I really think that is a grave misconception and something drilled into us by the marketing of other brands.

In reality, the design and build are so nicely done that it offsets the weight, and the comfort too — largely down to its new memory foam cushions and ventilated leather head strap — means that I’ve never really noticed wearing the Maxwell 2 ANC for even the longest sessions.

In terms of on-board controls, the left cup houses the volume dial, the game-chat mix dial, an audio jack, a USB-C port, a mic port, and the new ANC button. The right cup has the mic mute switch and the power button, which also doubles up as the Bluetooth pairing button. Simple. The dual microphone is very welcome, and means you can deploy the Maxwell 2 ANC for entertainment and music, and still rely on something for comms, without plugging in the detachable boom mic.

(Image credit: Future/Rob Dwiar)

Small improvements are also present and welcome. One of which is that the wireless dongle is much shorter than the lollipop stick found with the non-ANC model, and makes for a much tidier look on the front of a PS5 or PC. The head tracking features provided by Embody Immerse Gaming Hive and Dolby Atmos Rendered compatibility are fun and a novelty, though they still feel a little niche for me.

The most notable thing in the features of the Maxwell 2 ANC, however, sadly, is that the battery life has taken a dive compared to the regular Maxwell 2. While the non-ANC version could get you 80-odd hours of use, the ANC version is limited to about half of that with ANC off, and 35 hours with ANC on.

It’s perfectly serviceable and still provides you with comfortably more than a full day, but it is a shame the difference is so massive.

(Image credit: Future/Rob Dwiar)Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC: Performance

• Incredible audio quality across all games
• Excellent ANC performance that doesn’t kill bass
• Comfortable to wear, plus a really solid mic

The Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC is simply fantastic when put to the test. The gaming audio it provides is every bit as good as the audio I love from the regular Maxwell 2.

No matter what I’ve been playing, the Maxwell 2 ANC provides thumping combat sounds, beautifully crisp environmental audio, and rich, rounded soundtracks. It’s a joy to use as a media and entertainment pair of headphones too, with music singing clearly into my ears. Planar magnetic driver audio really is something else.

Backing this up is the microphone combo, which ensures I’m clear and crisp with my teammates even in the most frantic of online multiplayer battles.

Key to the audio sounding so good all the time is that the main USP of the headset, the ANC, doesn’t kill bass like almost every other ANC I’ve tried in my years of testing.

This means that you really are getting uncompromising audio, and some very effective ANC too; it’s excellent for immersion, and even in a busy household with a few people, I’ve been unbothered by external noise. This is undoubtedly aided by Audeze’s SLAM (Symmetric Linear Acoustic Modulator) tech, which is proven to assist in bass performance.

(Image credit: Future/Rob Dwiar)

The weight of the headset doesn’t impact the performance of the Maxwell 2 ANC from a comfort perspective either. It might be heavier than other headsets, sure, but it’s never been uncomfortable on my head, even in the longest of sessions. I've almost come to prefer it over lightweight models you totally forget you’re wearing.

Elsewhere, I will say that by default the Maxwell 2 ANC can be quite quiet, which was a mild annoyance, though easily solved on PC or PS5 by manually adjusting the volume. The companion Audeze app on desktop and mobile has also been handy, facilitating firmware updates and allowing for EQ tinkering.

All in all, the Maxwell 2 ANC has all that is great about the non-ANC variant and adds excellent ANC. If you have to have the latter and are eyeing up the best version of the best-sounding headset, then this is the one to get.

(Image credit: Future/Rob Dwiar)Should I buy the Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC?Buy it if...

You want the best version of the best-sounding gaming headset going
If you’re on the hunt for the best-sounding gaming headset money can buy right now, and want to make sure you get the most up-to-date variant, then the Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC is the one for you.

You need excellent ANC in a gaming headset
If ANC is at the top of your desired feature list, then what’s on offer here in the Maxwell 2 ANC - combined with its sheer audio quality and prowess - is certainly something to take notice of.

You’re an audiophile gamer chasing the best in audio from specialist drivers
If you’re someone who really, really cares about your gaming audio and wants something extra special that’s geared toward audio lovers, then the Maxwell 2 ANC’s planar magnetic drivers, in conjunction with its ANC and other features, are perfect for you.

You’re on one, maybe two, platforms only
While it can’t connect to lots of devices simultaneously like some of the competition, if you’re looking for one of the best gaming headsets money can buy for a small number of platforms, then this version of the Audeze Maxwell 2 needs to be considered.

Don't buy it if...

You’re wary of weighty headsets
Personally, I think this is a grossly overstated ‘con’ of gaming headsets, but the fact remains: if you’ve grown used to lightweight headsets, then the Maxwell 2 ANC won’t be for you.

You already have a Maxwell 2
As great as the ANC is on this new version of the Maxwell 2, if it’s a feature you can do without, then I’d recommend the normal version of the Maxwell 2 to save some cash but still get that supreme audio experience.

Also consider...

If the Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC doesn’t feel like it’s going to hit the mark for you, then these are the two alternatives I’d look to right now.

Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC

Audeze Maxwell 2

SteelSeries Arctis Nova Pro Omni

Price

$429 / £429 / AU$699

$329 / £339 / AU$569

$399.99 / £349.99 / AU$799

Weight

19.75oz / 560g

17.3oz / 490g

11.95oz / 339g

Drivers

90mm Planar Magnetic

90mm Planar Magnetic

Custom 40 mm Neodymium Magnetic (Hi-Res)

Compatibility

PlayStation or Xbox, Nintendo Switch, Nintendo Switch 2, PC, Mac, Mobile

PlayStation or Xbox, Nintendo Switch, Nintendo Switch 2, PC, Mac, Mobile

PS5, PS4, Xbox Series X|S, Nintendo Switch 2, Nintendo Switch, PC, Mac, Mobile, Meta Quest 2/3

Connection type

Wireless (2.4Ghz via dongle), Wired (USB-C & audio jack), Bluetooth 5.3 (Auracast, LE Audio, LC3, LC3plus, LDAC, AAC, SBC, Multipoint)

Wireless (2.4Ghz via dongle), Wired (USB-C & audio jack), Bluetooth 5.3 (Auracast, LE Audio, LC3, LC3plus, LDAC, AAC, SBC, Multipoint)

Hi-Res wireless (2.4Ghz via dongle), Wired (audio jack), Bluetooth 5.3 + LE Audio (SBC with MultiPoint support for up to 10 devices; LC3, LC3+ for LE Audio)

Battery life

ANC off: 40 hours; ANC on: 35 hours

80+ hours

Up to 60 hours (2 x fully-charged batteries), Infinite Power System

Features

“Aviation-grade” ANC with dual dedicated 1.4W amplifiers, 24-bit/96kHz high-resolution audio, SLAM acoustic management technology, detachable hypercardioid mic, beamforming mic with physical and AI reduction, FILTER™ Noise Reduction Technology, embedded Dolby Atmos license (Xbox)

24-bit/96kHz high-resolution audio, SLAM acoustic management technology, detachable hypercardioid mic, beamforming mic with physical and AI reduction, FILTER™ Noise Reduction Technology, embedded Dolby Atmos license (Xbox)

Simultaneous four-source audio via Omni GameHub; certified Hi-Res audio (96kHz/24-bit), ClearCast Pro - Retractable Boom Microphone with onboard AI Noise Rejection, ANC, Arctis Companion App compatibility

Software

Audeze App (PC & mobile)

Audeze App (PC & mobile)

SteelSeries GG/Sonar, SteelSeries Arctis Companion App (iOS & Android)

(Image credit: Future/Rob Dwiar)How I tested the Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC

• Tested over the course of a few months
• Compared with other headsets, including the non-ANC version
• Used across PS5 and PC games, on mobile, and for music, work, and entertainment

I’ve used the Audeze Maxwell 2 ANC as my go-to PS5 headset for a few months now, playing the likes of Assassin’s Creed Black Flag Resynced, Resonance: A Plague Tale Legacy, Marvel’s Wolverine, and Tom Clancy's The Division 2 and Warhammer 40,000 Space Marine 2 with friends online, as well as regularly using it on my PC when not using my SteelSeries Arctis Nova Pro Omni headset — a competing headset that has been great for comparison.

On my Acer Predator Orion 5000 gaming PC (supplied by Acer), I’ve tested the Maxwell 2 ANC not only with everyday usage like work calls, music, and TV, but also with games like Cyberpunk 2077, Frostpunk 2, Crusader Kings 3, and a preview of a game or two under embargo.

First reviewed July-October 2026

Read more about how we test

As a lover of all things NBN, I’m no stranger to the latest internet deals in Australia. More often than not, it’s the same handful of internet service providers that jostle for my top recommendation — those being Exetel, Kogan Internet, Superloop and Spintel, to name a few. One provider that, if my memory serves correctly, has never popped up on my radar is Telstra.

Yes, despite dominating the NBN landscape with a 35.2% market share, Telstra isn’t exactly known for its affordability. In actuality, the nation’s flagship telco is often the most expensive of the 30 or so providers I monitor on a regular basis.

Imagine my surprise when I learned that Telstra, of all companies, had actual deals on its NBN lineup, with up to AU$240 in savings over six months! And while they still don’t offer the cheapest NBN plans, they’re still worth shouting about if you’re in the market for a new NBN plan.

What’s more, Belong, a generally more affordable NBN provider 100% owned by Telstra, also has some attractive deals right now, including laying claim to the cheapest introductory cost on the NBN 100/500 tier at AU$59/m.

Do note that the most affordable Telstra NBN plans require you to BYO modem. If you want a Telstra Smart Modem 4, you’ll not only need to pay more each month, but you’ll also need to pay any remaining device payments if you cancel your plan within 24 months. Alternatively, you can buy the Telstra modem for a one-off fee of AU$360. However, for that money, I would recommend seeking out one of the best mesh Wi-Fi systems in Australia instead.

Telstra Premium | 500Mbps TES | AU$69/m (first 6 months, then AU$99/m)

Shaving AU$30 off each month for the first six months, Telstra’s NBN 500 becomes a lot more attractive. Yes, it’s possible to spend less, but the fact that it comes in under the current average introductory cost of AU$74 is something to take notice of. Plus, the ongoing cost of AU$99 is roughly on par with the AU$95 average.

• AU$69 minimum cost
• AU$1,008 first year cost
• AU$1,188 ongoing yearly costView Deal

Belong NBN Fast | 500Mbps TES | AU$59/m (first 6 months, then AU$95/m)

Alternatively, for AU$10 less each month for the first half-year, you can get Belong’s NBN 500 plan. This is the current cheapest introductory cost of any provider, and it even includes a free SIM card to access the Telstra Wholesale network, loaded with AU$80 credit.

• AU$59 minimum cost
• AU$924 first year cost
• AU$1,140 ongoing yearly costView Deal

Belong NBN Standard | 50Mbps TES | AU$55/m (first 6 months, then AU$91/m)

The other speed tier where Belong claims the cheapest introductory cost is NBN 50, making it a tempting proposition for anyone who can comfortably get by with a slower connection. Of course, for just AU$4 more you could get the NBN 500 plan above (or NBN 100 if that’s the maximum available to you), which only highlights how much of a good deal it is.

• AU$55 minimum cost
• AU$876 first year cost
• AU$1,092 ongoing yearly costView Deal

Telstra vs Belong: what’s the difference?

Belong is 100% owned by Telstra and is a lower-cost alternative to the flagship brand. To offer more affordable mobile and NBN plans compared to Telstra, it makes some compromises where features and network coverage are concerned.

In the case of mobile, Belong uses the Telstra Wholesale Network, which is said to cover around 98.8% of the population, compared to the full Telstra network that enjoys 99.7% coverage.

In the case of NBN, however, both providers use the same underlying fixed-line network, so coverage isn't a differentiating factor. Actual speeds can still vary between providers, depending on how much capacity they have available and how their networks are managed, particularly during busier periods. However, there's no guarantee Telstra will deliver faster speeds than Belong on an equivalent plan.

Belong keeps its costs lower by making some trade-offs, including giving customers the option to bring their own modem or purchase one separately. In either case, there’s no option for installation help. Telstra also supports BYO modems, but offers its own Smart Modem with 4G backup, a feature Belong doesn't provide.

There are also some differences with technical support. Telstra offers 24/7 phone support and live chat, and has physical stores. Belong works on a digital-only basis, with support limited to online chat or messages via the website or app. There is limited phone support should you need it.

• Sky Elements and Damoda launched 71,207 drones during the record attempt
• A formation of 10,183 drones created the record-breaking blue dragon
• Each performance involved approximately 10,200 drones flying several times daily

Sky Elements teamed up with Damoda America in rural Texas to secure two Guinness World Records, launching a total of 71,207 drones within one week.

That weekly total surpassed the previous record of 55,939 launches, set earlier in 2026 by Aerial Illuminations and UVify.

On September 28 2026, the teams used 10,183 drones to form a giant blue dragon, breaking the record for the largest mythical creature depicted by multirotors.

Shenzhen engineers bring charging launch trays

Damoda supplied the hardware and sent specialists from its Shenzhen base to work alongside American operators from Sky Elements throughout the three nights.

Sky Elements sought out Damoda for both titles because the manufacturer offers launch equipment that differs from regular setups in how each aircraft gets positioned.

Crews normally place each drone by hand, whereas Damoda units arrive in trays that store and charge them and receive each aircraft after landing.

The system simplifies transport and warehousing, since every aircraft departs from one dedicated tray and returns there after completing its flight.

Their assignment was to help the Texas crews handle faults as they arose during repeated launches of a fleet that exceeded 10,000 aircraft.

The dragon glowed in electric blue and served as the centrepiece of a programme that also featured oceanic scenes, two astronauts and a lion.

The entire event unfolded at a remote farm with few residents nearby, where the crews operated the whole fleet from one site.

Every performance involved about 10,200 drones, a volume that the crews found demanding because the fleet flew several times each day.

A thunderstorm struck after the opening show on 27 September, yet the remaining performances continued and ran through the closing night on 30 September.

“This was easily one of the most challenging drone attempts I’ve adjudicated, with the weather and the sheer scale of 10,000 drones flying multiple times a day,” said Michael Empric, the adjudicator who oversaw the attempts for Guinness.

“Yet after several very long nights (and early mornings), it was great to see everything finally come together with five successful shows on the final night.”

Fleet and Dragon breaks previous records

The dragon display broke a mark of 2,247 drones set on the final day of 2025 by an Emirati tourism authority and the emirate itself.

The new weekly total exceeded the earlier figure by 15,268 drones, while the dragon formation surpassed the Emirati mark by 7,936 aircraft.

Sky Elements already holds other titles, among them a gingerbread village built from 4,981 drones and a fictional figure made from 4,979.

Its other entries include a cowboy hat image made from 519 drones and an animation that lasted 30 minutes, the longest by unmanned aircraft.

Though an adjudicator attended the attempts, no independent data in the available account shows how reliably the tray system handles storms or daily launches.

I like the idea of AI taking care of boring tasks, including sorting through bills and financial paperwork. I can even see the appeal of it helping with shopping. But asking an AI assistant for financial advice and simply handing over the keys to your bank account are different, and this distinction is becoming a problem for some of America's biggest banks.

According to a new Axios report, financial institutions are encountering AI agents while they access customer accounts and seem to be doing more than requested by users. JPMorgan, Chase, Bank of America, and Morgan Stanley are all taking steps to protect their customers, but it's a sobering aspect of AI that raises real questions about how much to trust the tech in the world of finance.

While there's no confirmed epidemic of AI assistants emptying savings accounts and the reports don't establish any financial losses, it still makes me nervous to think that we've reached the point where banks are having to worry about whether an AI assistant has decided to improvise with somebody's money.

There's been a real push to encourage the use of ever-more independent AI agents. Every new demonstration seems to involve an assistant that can accomplish increasingly complicated tasks while its owner sits back and watches. That's impressive when the task is organizing a vacation itinerary, but less appealing when the assistant has access to the money that would pay for it.

AI experiments with money

It's notable that it isn't like AI agents are hacking their way into accounts, exactly. Customers might voluntarily share their login credentials with the AI to give the software access to financial information that banks have spent decades trying to protect. I've done it for my own tests, but it's always been simply a way for the AI to look at very specific elements of my finances, never to touch them.

Banking websites can be frustrating, financial paperwork is tedious, and managing money requires more attention than most of us would prefer to give it. An assistant that promises to handle the irritating parts sounds wonderful. But AI agents have a habit of interpreting instructions rather creatively. And while asking it to reduce your monthly expenses and getting a list of subscriptions you might want to cancel is great, giving that same assistant permission to make financial decisions means you're trusting its interpretation of a vague instruction with money you actually need.

(Image credit: Getty Images)

That should make people uncomfortable. These systems can misunderstand requests and make incorrect judgments. We've all seen chatbots produce an answer that sounds perfectly reasonable until you discover they've invented half of it, and adding the ability to take real-world actions makes those mistakes considerably more consequential. The fact that banks are already encountering agents whose behavior raises questions about authorization suggests that those limits deserve much more attention.

Keeping AI outside the vault

I wouldn't go so far as to say banks should block AI assistants altogether. There are plenty of good reasons to let people connect these tools to their accounts, and I don't particularly like the idea of banks deciding which services customers are allowed to use.

But I'd be much less comfortable letting that same assistant actually do anything with my money I don't ask for. I'd want it to ask permission every single time, with no room for interpreting something I said last Tuesday as authorization to make a transfer today.

(Image credit: Kaspersky)

That might defeat some of the appeal of autonomous AI agents, but I'm perfectly fine with that. Saving a few seconds isn't worth the possibility of discovering that an AI assistant has made an expensive decision on my behalf. Most importantly, someone needs to be responsible when an agent makes a mistake, because telling customers to take it up with the chatbot isn't going to cut it.

The frustrating thing is that none of this should come as a surprise. AI companies are racing to give their agents more independence, often before they've worked out how to prevent them from making mistakes. We're supposed to be impressed that an assistant can complete a task without asking for help, but that becomes much less impressive when it does something the user never wanted.