Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Dyson helping and encouraging others to think outside of the box is my point for this link above.  I did not know this (book?) existed.  If anyone doubts James' sincerely and resolve in helping and encouraging kids and others to think outside of the box so to hopefully make a big impact on society, need only to look at his body of work (books, lectures, etc).        DIB

CarmineD wrote:

 

 Carmine, personally I do not care which model vac he used as a recycled vacuum.  Dates (pre-dating all others) and/or doing it first is what I look at when determining pioneers.        DIB

 

 Carmine, personally I do not care which model vac he used as a recycled vacuum.  Dates (pre-dating all others) and/or doing it first is what I look at when determining pioneers.        DIB

Hello DIB:

I agree in theory [thinking outside the box] to a degree. 

What I disagree with and criticize dyson for is the reckless abandon of discounting the "tried and tested designs" [to quote Trilobite's recent words].  These are the features that define the vacuum industry's progress in the last 50 years.  For example: Brushrolls and rug height adjustments. 

For years dyson fans [Mr. Gasko included and still now] argued that the dyson brush bars in the DC07 and DC14 were just as good as the US industry standard brush rolls.  It is an asinine argument.   Some, like Tom, still poudly maintain this position.  Although dyson has revamped and improved the brush roll designs on all its vacuums after the DC07/DC14.  Why?  Obviously to meet and compete with US vacuum industry standards/performance.  Dah!

You need a practical approach of creativity and conformity to that which works the best.  You want to improve what is already agreed works the best.   

Carmine D. 

CarmineD wrote:

Hi,

I have posted this many times on this forum.  I believe James is his own worst enemy at times.  I wonder is his generals and alike are afraid to say "no, this does not work or work better than what the competitors have."  I absolutely hate the wand, hose and power head on my DC21, I'll go as far as saying it is stupid.  Dyson simply needs to copy what is working on other vacuums.  Do you think the Eureka Boss (CR's #1 pic) has some sort of secret sauce or proprietary invention in it's brush roll or nozzle design?  Start there, Dyson should copy this and not feel guilty, after all these old inventions are in the public domain.        DIB

Hello DIB:

See, proof positive that in fact we do agree sometimes.

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Hello DIB:

The EUREKA BOSS Smart vacuum has long been a Consumer Reports' Best Buy and the number one recommended upright with on-board tools.  A bagged vacuum.  Made in China.  Retails for $140.  Rarely if ever advertised by retailers let alone on sale.  [Although the CR March 2008 excluded it from its review.] 

All the big box retailers carry and sell this vacuum, in large part, because it is well worth the money and a stalwart in the vacuum industry of disposables.  It has two tried and tested vacuum features: An industry standard brush roll and a manual rug height adjustment [CR is a stickler for the latter].

I take exception to your use of the words above.  Preferring instead the words Trilobite uses:  Tried and tested.  Old in our culture has a very negative connotation.  Tried and tested and seasoned are much nicer sounding.

Carmine D.

And lets not forget that EUREKA'S younger brother  SANITAIRE is the best bang for the buck vacuum on the planet..............

mole

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Hello DIB:

While that answer may suffice on a forum, unfortunately it won't hold up in a court of law and/or with a judge.  Both are looking for facts that can be proven and verified.  It's not what one personally thinks that matters.  It's what one can prove. 

A lawyer for a defendant in a lawsuit/arbitration hearing with dyson would have a field day with the obvious contradiction by dyson on which model is "the World's First."  My sense is the lawyer for the defense will respond something to the effect as this:  Your Honor/Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury:  If dyson can't say for sure which of its own models is the World's First, then how and why should you expect my poor client to know?

Result: Case dismissed. 

My sense is that if dyson goes the NAD route, which in all likelihood it will just for general principle, Electrolux will make the same defense.  Dyson can't call 2 separate and distinct models the World's First, then object when another company claims its own as the World's First and expect immunity for its own actions.  

Dyson puts itself into the untenable position of defending its World' First claim for the DC02 ReCyclone against itself.  The DC03 users manual that Tom Gasko cited can't be used as proof.  Dyson is estopped from using the DC03 proof because it contradicts dyson's World's First claim for the DC02 ReCyclone. 

The reason I personally and professionally believe that the vacuum makers would enjoy seeing dyson take Electrolux to court. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

Hello DIB:

Do I gather from the lack of response, that we can say this dyson/Electrolux case is closed?  At least here and now?

As an answer to your earlier question to me, I'd say that Electrolux did its homework and research much better than dyson.  Would you aree?

Carmine D.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1025043/Spin-dry-The-washing-machine-needs-just-cup-water.html

A proposed method for a washing machine that does a load on a cup of water. Is hyped as doing for the washing machine, what Dyson did for vacuum cleaners.

Hello M00seUK:

Interesting article.  But what does it sell for?

Carmine D.