Gimmick

Well, it highly depends on what you already have at home. My personal situation and opinion: I already had a XBox gamepad, smartphone, I know how to use the app-store, I'm interested in coding (pybricks, PU), I like to experiment with technical things, I bought a cheap PoweredUp remote on bricklink ... I do not go outside and "race" with lego models, I do not actively play hours in a row.... I don't care, that I have to use pybricks (copy/paste code) or a smartphone as "hub device". I can use touchinterface, gamepads, Lego controller,... -> I like it, because it fits my needs. If you want the old "less functions simple to use" feeling from PF, buy a PoweredUp remote invest 30 min once to understand how you can simply copy the pybricks examples https://pybricks.com/projects/sets/technic/42129-mercedes-benz-zetros/powered-up-remote/ They simply applied the brick-concept to the motors. Which may not be performance oriented, but it supports building.

Classic communication problem: "Medium Linear Motor" -> 88008 -> https://www.lego.com/en-us/product/medium-linear-motor-88008 -> has relative position encoding "Simple Medium Linear Motor" -> 45303 -> https://www.lego.com/en-us/product/simple-medium-linear-motor-45303 -> no encoding.

It's like @Toastie said. The 0° position in L/XL-Motors is "somewhere" and you need to read the abs. angle "by hand". But if you know, that '103°' for example is a mechanical relevant position, you can calculate other positions - maybe for a gearbox or steering. That's useless if you have to turn the motor more than one of course :D

Medium linear motors only have relative positioning, that's why Powered Up recalibrates every time by default (and why Lego models include mechanical stops). With abs. positioning, you do not have to recalibrate (and you do not have to use mechanical stops) since the abs. angle for the center-position does not change. If Buwizz uses this information, only Technic/Mindstorms/Spike motors will work.

I guess wanting everything monochrome and calling even the slightest color "color vomit" is as much over the top as "including every color we can find". Do the 2L beams realy have to be in lime? Do you realy need those 2L double pinhole things in blue? :D The bodywork is very good so doesn't matter much I guess. But I have to admit, that there are more homogeneous colored sets available like the CAT, and I wonder if they wanted this set to be especially easy if possible since some parts seem to be tricky for beginners anyway.

Sounds like a unified software/firmware base. Not something like we usually think of, when we hear "OS".

A 42145 can be as flagshipy as a 42114... Maybe they just thought a supercar plus a giant 'normal' set is too expensive. So they keep going as they did the past years: Car, big set, car,... On the other hand: There are now 'wave releases' in january, march, august, october,..... no one knows what is going to happen, it's anarchy!! Aaaaargh ;)

That definitely applies to a lot of things, but not to critics that targets the very basic concept of a model. And although I absolutely do agree that it's hard to directly compair a "normal consumer set" with "MOC sets", "it's a MOC..." can become too much of a free pass, if a company sells it as set. Sometimes it feels like 'reviewers' have a problem with the lack of a fitting drawer for sets and the critics are more about not fitting expectations and less about a set (no matter the company). :D The topic of "how complex should instructions be" is a 'closed book' for me. For some people decrypting instrunctions is the main and fun part, on the other hand... instructions should be clear, because it's an instruction, right? :D I don't care about that, but I think the Cada masters-series fills a gap that definetly exists/ed, which is good.

No idea what you are talking about. I was not talking about this thread or that Cada is 'anti Lego' and I do not want to be critical about sets or tear them apart. If it sounds like that to you - maybe it's you :p I just observed, that there are medias and users on platforms like blogs, yt, forums,... who published very negative reviews/opinions about some sets from Lego but not about Cada-sets eventough they share the critical properties like "direct motor-> function control" for example. Same property -> different opinion -> sounds biased to me. And to make it clear again: That's not a Cada-problem, it's a perception problem. And to repeat it again: I do not critisize Cada for that, it's just a response to "but bonfires only burn that long" because you have to be carefull if you try to analyse reasons of a success - new things are only new once and if I may make a wild guess: It seems like the "company that dominated the market for decates" mentioned in the blog-entry is Lego :D And I think it's interesting to see that Cada (no critic! puh...that was close) mentions "new innovations" eventough I think the present/previous community is very skeptical when it comes to new things, I've always found the community to be very conservative. And I would be careful to reduce the strategy of lego to "focus on licenses". They do focus on licenses, but that seems to be the result of the strategy, not the strategy itself. And Cada (no critics) should do the same: Repeat the evaluation of why the things they do are successful and not repeat the things themself.

It's all fun until someone has to take responsibility. New parts, (I'm still a bit rofl-ing and facepalm-ing about 'new part inventions' like 1x5 plate from Lego and flip-flop-beams from cada - especially because cada made a video about it xD), colors, prints, all very creative, no superior system.... reminds me of someone who almost went bankrupt in early 2000. Currently [that's just my impression based on mostly german content] Cada still has some kind of puppy protection. A weird situation where often only positive sides get very emphasized. I guess the reasons are maybe, that it's 'new' and 'different' and that there still is some basic 'anti lego wibe' on ze webs. But 'new' and 'different' are very short living properties - by definition. If I remember what lego-sets were already destroyed for in reviews and for what reasons sets should have been "no Technic" anymore and apply those reasons on cada-sets... But I see a permantly available market for that - just not a large one, because you cannot handle mainstream problems with this strategy. Which is fine from my point of view. In most hobbies you reach a point where you leave the mainstream because some nerds out there have the stuff you realy need ;D

He doesn't mean the sets, but the chargeable batteries. There are/were (I'm not up-to-date) reports of destructive problems (same with YC, MK) if you didn't use the original charger or classic USB ports (and a while ago it seemed like there was a construction error in the connector - switched wires iirc, but that is fixed I guess). So if anyone owns a few battery boxes: Use a modern USB charger and plug it in with different cables - for science :D It should work and take the same time to be fully charged. Do they even include chargers nowdays? If smartphone manufacturers don't include them anymore, why should toy companies do it? :D

The "push-in" markers in on the boxes are on the back :X

Maybe outsourcing the PU development was a mistake. I'm still curious when the next update will be released - it was announced almost a year ago :< If it takes that long there must be more than updated graphics. [I hope :D]

Delayed or not delayed.... that's why leaks suck... if there is no announcement it cannot be delayed :X

As kids my friend and I had those flippable RC 6x6 cars and it was a lot of fun. Therefore: Looks like a good toy, I like it.

Even the osprey rotorblades were used as panels in car-models. I'm very optimistic, that the new panels will appear in different models, too.

I guess the difference is, that in late 90s they tried to establish a lot of own trade-marks and themes with very theme-specific parts and kept going even though it did not sell well, but "now" it's mostly about licenses, the new parts are still a lot more versitile and bad running products get removed more quickly. It's much more market oriented now - for the good and the bad...

;(

Maybe it's because of the color settings in the video - but it looks nice. So even though I won't buy it -> I'm sure I get new desktop wallpapers from your review :X

Ahh from the top - I'm stupid... :D

Not sure if I got that. If you push an axle through the diff - the diff is not a diff anymore. And you cannot lock the axle from the inside. Maybe you can use the 5.5(?) axle from one side. But again, I do not see the benefits as you can use axles with stop on this side anyway. :|

In theory this got better because everything has the same plug now, right? :D They realy should update the firmwares more regularly. A technic set with a motor, that does not work in PU for months is rediculous :<

It depends. If programs or target groups are diffrent enough it makes sense to deploy different programs and therefore reduce complexity and size. But... Since PU has fixed programs for the Krokodil or Piano I would say: It does not make sense to implement fixed profiles into the program, that is made for editing and creating your own programs. Everything inside PU should be accessible. C+ as seperate addition is completely ok from my view.

yep, 42139/40/41 -> looks like there is something for everyone. But this model get's so much attention -> will sell like 'geschnitten Brot' [ger] :X

Price, stickers,... basically the same model? :D