It's good to see an alternative for ASUS RoG Swift. Also... with all that blue light movement, I failed to find any reliable scientific source claiming that blue led backlight will hurt your sight. It makes me question the whole idea, especially with the visible sun output being orders of magnitude higher. Staring at clear LEDs is bad for your eyes, but so is staring at any bright source of light. The only blue light related thing I found scientists to kinda agree about is that if you have a surgery replacing your natural eye lens with a synthetic, it should have a blue and uv filters similar to ones in the natural lens or else your eye may experience rapid aging symptoms. And even that wasn't 100% certain. I'd like to find a credible paper, and until that, I call it woo woo. I'm not a great fan of spreading fear to sell stuff.

It's good to see an alternative for ASUS RoG Swift. Also... with all that blue light movement, I failed to find any reliable scientific source claiming that blue led backlight will hurt your sight. It makes me question the whole idea, especially with the visible sun output being orders of magnitude higher. Staring at clear LEDs is bad for your eyes, but so is staring at any bright source of light. The only blue light related thing I found scientists to kinda agree about is that if you have a surgery replacing your natural eye lens with a synthetic, it should have a blue and uv filters similar to ones in the natural lens or else your eye may experience rapid aging symptoms. And even that wasn't 100% certain. I'd like to find a credible paper, and until that, I call it woo woo. I'm not a great fan of spreading fear to sell stuff.

It doesn't hurt your eyesight. The wavelength of light which you perceive as blue triggers melatonin production in the eye. Melatonin is a hormone that affects sleep. If you keep looking at a monitor that is excessively blue late at night, you will not feel sleepy as fast as if you were looking at a monitor that has a lower color temperature, tending towards yellow. Also, you get eye fatigue and some people report their eyes getting red when staring too long at a computer monitor. Apparently, the solution for some is to go for yellow-tinted glasses or use F.Lux. I carried out a little experiment with a friend whereby I calibrated his >8500K color temperature laptop display to 6500K. He no longer seems to suffer from eye fatigue. I made 5000K, 5500K, and 6000K color profiles for my laptop display in addition to the reference 6500K profile. I actually yawned and wanted to fall asleep when I was using the 5000K profile in bed; this never used to happen when the laptop was at 6500K. I get disturbed whenever I am using monitors that are even slightly above 6500K nowadays, after I have spent so much time using my calibrated displays (desktop @ 6500K, laptop @ 6500K, and Xperia Z2 phone @ 6500K). My laptop seemed to have an annoying blue tinge last time I was studying, and I had lent my colorimeter (i1DP) to someone. Had to use a 6000K profile in the meantime to feel right back at home. Got my sensor back and it turns out the display had drifted to 6750K. Made a new profile and all was fine again. This also explains why office lighting tends to be bluish; night lights tend to be yellowish and allow one to relax; sunlight at midday is 6500K, which contains enough 'blue' to trigger some good melatonin production and keep you well awake. No woo woo at all concerning these established facts.

It doesn't hurt your eyesight. The wavelength of light which you perceive as blue triggers melatonin production in the eye. Melatonin is a hormone that affects sleep. If you keep looking at a monitor that is excessively blue late at night, you will not feel sleepy as fast as if you were looking at a monitor that has a lower color temperature, tending towards yellow. Also, you get eye fatigue and some people report their eyes getting red when staring too long at a computer monitor. Apparently, the solution for some is to go for yellow-tinted glasses or use F.Lux. I carried out a little experiment with a friend whereby I calibrated his >8500K color temperature laptop display to 6500K. He no longer seems to suffer from eye fatigue. I made 5000K, 5500K, and 6000K color profiles for my laptop display in addition to the reference 6500K profile. I actually yawned and wanted to fall asleep when I was using the 5000K profile in bed; this never used to happen when the laptop was at 6500K. I get disturbed whenever I am using monitors that are even slightly above 6500K nowadays, after I have spent so much time using my calibrated displays (desktop @ 6500K, laptop @ 6500K, and Xperia Z2 phone @ 6500K). My laptop seemed to have an annoying blue tinge last time I was studying, and I had lent my colorimeter (i1DP) to someone. Had to use a 6000K profile in the meantime to feel right back at home. Got my sensor back and it turns out the display had drifted to 6750K. Made a new profile and all was fine again. This also explains why office lighting tends to be bluish; night lights tend to be yellowish and allow one to relax; sunlight at midday is 6500K, which contains enough 'blue' to trigger some good melatonin production and keep you well awake. No woo woo at all concerning these established facts.

Thanks for the info. I found various articles about how it (wavelengths of around 430nm) damages eyes, causes cancer etc, which were disturbing. Eg today's CodeProject newsletter link: http://gigaom.com/2014/09/01/what-is-the-blue-light-from-our-screens-really-doing-to-our-eyes/ When manufacturers claim blue light reduction, it's mostly about decreasing the peak output at this blue-purple spectrum without shifting overall white point. I have displays with both CCFL backlight, which is said to include peaks in that spectrum, and GB-LED, which has peaks outside of that range, both calibrated and I don't really think that the old CCFL one is evil. The only fatigue I can report is when I have to use monitor with poor viewing angles and bad color reproduction. I can feel that it takes way more effort to process the image, and the difference is clearly visible after working for longer periods. Regarding sleep, I had an opportunity to experiment with that a few years ago when I was working from home in EU for a company in US. As I had to stay up late, I got some 6000K lights, as well as 2700K ones. If I had to work overnight, I was using the white ones, then turning them off and using the yellow-orange ones around 1-2 hours before going to bed. It was really effective, as such combination was letting me to work for longer periods without sleepiness, at the same time allowing me to sleep comfortably after work. Also, I've been using f.lux too, when I was reading for longer periods in the evening, when it had little to do with my work. Combined with adjusting color of light in room, it seemed to help. On the other hand when I was sleeping in periods which didn't vary from day to day, I didn't need any extra helpers and white room light and no f.lux was fine. There was time when I was convinced that this light color really affects my sleepiness until I switched to dark theme in Visual Studio to find out later that it had no effect on how sleepy I am when coding at night. It wasn't a conscious decision and wasn't done on purpose to verify blue light thing. I just gave it a try and it stayed like that, as it seems to causes less eye fatigue, at least in my case. But perhaps there were other conditions that might affect how I felt at that time. I can't exclude them, making it an anecdotal proof. Human body is so complicated and there are so many factors, that proving and disproving health-related claims is extremely difficult. I'd like to see some reliable research in this area. I've seen papers saying that it works for some mammals, but not for humans too. And by reliable I mean a large population with a test group that can't tell who's tested and how, and a meaningful way to measure the outcome, which is well defined before the experiment starts, not research like linked here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Melatonin#Light_dependence with a subjective opinion in a group of 20 people. In my eyes, such experiment is a waste of time, as it's unreliable. After learning so much about statistics, data mining, survey sampling, and having several doctors in family, I'm skeptical. I don't say I could prove that it's wrong, but that there's not enough proof how it works, and the experiments were frequently dodgy, even with samples of 6 people. If f.lux seems to work for some people, that's fine. If someone prefers different lighting for early and late evening, that's fine. I don't ask to throw f.lux, tinted glasses and monitors with reduced blue light away. I even switched to orange lights around 2 hours ago. But the blue light (peak wavelength without shifting white point) reduction fear-inducing campaign is just wrong and evil in my opinion. There's money behind that, as fear sells products that remedy it. If hardware manufacturers are really concerned with health, be it eye damage, or sleep disorders, or whatever - they should invest some money in reliable research, so they could either keep people healthier or find out that the claims were unjustified, so they could spend the rest of R&D money in other areas.