lets take this paragraph by paragraphNot trying to be a dick here, seriously, but could you explain to me what functionality (beyond the squeeze firing and, bar lights, and maybe screen placement) the X Cube has over any DNA200? I'm not talking interface here, just pure functionality.
And lets face it, people complaining about needing to spend time in eScribe probably have to spend at least as much time either diddling with the X Cube's menu (and waiting on the menu time outs) or using the app to get a good vape in TC mode, and they have to repeat that every time a variable changes. There's no memory functionality for TCR changes.
On top of that, one single TCR value that you can input on the X Cube doesn't match the actual TCR curve you can implement on the DNA200 (or the multitude of curves you can have via eScribe and on-device presets). That part of the DNA200 feature set alone crushes the X Cube in terms of functionality. The difference in vape quality is tangible between the two, you have to try it yourself to truly appreciate how much better it is.
Don't get me wrong, I'm anything BUT an Evolv fanboy, it's just that the DNA200 is markedly superior to the X Cube II in every respect but price.
I'd say a DNA200 is easily worth at least twice what the X Cube sells for just for the superior vape alone. Anything over that, you're paying a premium for the enclosure (and some are more worth that premium than others).
- the interface is an important feature on the device. sorry cant leave that out. you are also forgetting being able to modify temp coefficients on the fly. bluetooth. a mobile app. not being leashed to a pc. those are some pretty good features right there.
- not once did i say that escribe wasnt powerful. not even once. however, you MUST use it. you can save profiles using an app on the xcube as well just as you would use escribe on a DNA200. however, you have the option to change it on your device as well although they cant be saved. in addition, phone app. although not as powerful as escribe, it is more convenient.
- i already said that the implementation of TC on the DNA200 is better. you do need to fiddle with it on the xcube. however, that is not as feature. it is the execution of a feature.
- i agree that the DNA200 is better in quality and performance than the xcube. i dont think you would find anyone who would disagree with that. i even said that if you could get a decent DNA200 mod for about $100 i would. that isnt the case. as i have said before i would have a difficult time justifying paying 3-4 times as much for a DNA200.
also, i think you need to read what people are actually writing. a device having a feature isnt qualitative its quantitative. it has it or it doesnt. the xcube has more features than any DNA200 mod. the implementation of some of their features leaves much to be desired. these are facts. it is also a fact that the feature set on the xcube is better for the very same reasons. it is just as true that the DNA200 performs better. you would be hard pressed to find anyone in this thread who would disagree with that. now, personal opinion comes into play when you talk about value. i do not feel that the value of that added performance is 3-4x greater than the xcube. you are of the opinion that it is. i do not have any issue with that. as i said, it is all personal opinion.
personally i want to see what happens with the evolution of the DNA200. i believe that in about 6 months they will have a second revision which will expand the feature set of the DNA200 chip while maintaining its performance. i am going to wait to see if that is true. for the time being, i have chosen my xcube.