Nothing like reading a manual to know exactly how well a product performs that you never saw in person and never used. CR testers actually buy, use, and test products before evaluating and expressing opinions. Big waste of time and money. You need only read between the lines to know. Amazing. Did you earn a BS or BA for mastering such a skill? Or are you self-taught? Perhaps with a mentor? Sir James? Do tell us your secret of success. Inquiring minds want to know.
So you’re saying the $550 Oreck is not a colossal innovative failure (as advertised), but instead (perhaps) a corporate ‘secret weapon’ packed full with life-changing, industry-changing innovations. And these innovations have been intentionally omitted from the Oreck marketing. I’ve got the time... we’ll see. Hilarious!
My sentiments exactly...........for dumb dyson and Sir James. Who in their right mind and pocket book would spend $550 on a weighty, ball wheeled, Malaysian contractor made, mediocre performing, over hyped/over hawked vacuum? Or spend $300 on a 10 inch fan? Or spend $1,400 on an electric hand dryer. Or spend $200 on a ball barrow? Or spend $5,000 on a contra rotating washer? Or $12 on a small package of dysolv rug cleaner that doesn't remove stains? History speaks for itself. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Or as Abraham Lincoln said: You can fool some of the people all of the time; all of the people some of the time; but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. There are alot of things one can say about his favorite hero's innovative product plunders. But, the honest thing to say is that they were incredibly bad ideas and he/company got it wrong [over and over again].
By eliminating (filtering out) the competing manufacturers to Dyson and their representatives (competing small time brick and mortar dealers) and eliminating the group that's not happy with themselves and their lack of real-accomplishments... then it turns out, Sir James has very few critics here in the US and UK - indeed.
Spending $550 on a vacuum that brings ZERO life-changing/industry-changing innovations, but instead brings a mirror-copy of his competitors vacuums (same use of tired-technologies) is hilarious. And spending $200 on a easy-to-choke ‘tired’ portable is funny too! I can’t wait to see how Dishonest Dave uses hype and gimmicks to sell this decades old contraption (chokes-like/works-like their competitors less expensive vacuums).
I commented /inquired about it.....i know nothing really beyond that. Out of curiousity id like to see it along with the other new oreck.
Will it outclean carpets better than a sanit-comm......that id have to see.
Kinda off topic...sorta....Acouple years ago a customer said she put pantyhose material around the shroud of a dyson 7....and said it kept things clean/cleanr in the cyclones and filter...that perf wasnt affected as long as you dumped daily w/some taps to the bin ....never saw it /but she did all her own service.....wonder howd that work on the shroud....or some type of thin filter media....? just thinking out loud.....
Sounds like something my mom would do (use a nylon thinking somehow this was a benefit when in reality it’s more trouble than it’s worth). The Dyson shrouds are the most imitated, I’d assume this means they are ‘best in class.’ The fly screen had been used by Euro Pro and the newer Fantom, but it’s a choke point and forces the user to maintain (get dusty). Not good. If hair makes it past the shroud then perhaps she was filling to high or airflow is interrupted (often).
Dishonest Dave Oreck loves demonstrating that it's impossible (for him and his team) to empty a bagless without getting dust everywhere and in ones lungs. Dyson sued him twice over this falsehood. Now Dishonest is going bagless - too funny.