Abby's Guide to Vacuum Cleaners
Username Password
Home Discussions Reviews More Guides
Abby’s Guide > Vacuum Cleaners > Discussions > “Anything” Dyson that makes news.

Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Search For:
DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Original Message   Jun 28, 2008 12:41 am

Dyson is in the news frequently and so a dedicated thread.

.

This message was modified Aug 2, 2008 by DysonInventsBig



Replies: 356 - 365 of 624Next page of topicsPreviousNextNext page of topicsAllView as Outline
DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Reply #356   Nov 10, 2008 2:38 pm
mole wrote:
Aerus/Electrolux,has had an easy steer powerhead since 1993, it came out on the 6500 series canister,I will say its the biggest problemmatic piece they ever made,Quite frankly its 40% of my repair business.


I hope Dyson knows about the durability factor  of his set up.

GOOD LUCK

MOLE

 Mole,

Are you talking about the simple swivel bend/union like on pn's and floor nozzles or something more?  Dyson could of and should of produced an interesting and helpful turning mechanism on their DC21 but it failed for many reasons (IMO).

DIB
This message was modified Nov 10, 2008 by DysonInventsBig



DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Reply #357   Nov 10, 2008 4:57 pm
DysonInventsBig wrote:
Moose,

 If you go to the bottom of the front page of the Dyson application, you will see a lengthy description. As you can see/experience firsthand the United States government in my opinion has made searching patents difficult or more difficult than need be. Patent images they are in the TIFF format. Assuming you’re using a Macintosh I provided a free tiff viewer plug-in link below.

 You’re right, the dispenser could be both commercial and residential. I did not read but just a few paragraphs on the patent, I did see one of the major components is the ability to retract or telescope the dispenser nozzle back into the appliance itself which is space-saving (per the Dyson patent app.)

DIB

www.acordex.com/browseProd/VTplugin.html

M00seUK wrote:
Thanks DIB, I installed the plug-in, although I couldn't see anything that wasn't in the other patent write up.

What I think is *shocking* is that US patent site requiring people to download an  obscure browser plug-in to view those TIFF images. I mean, storing documents as TIFFs is perfectly fine, but serving them up on a web site, when web browsers don't supporting them by default is terrible! Given US citizens file a large number patents, they deserve better.

Although I'm being all self-righteous because my own web site goes to great lengths to automatically convert images in to easily readable formats! :-p

Thanks DIB, I installed the plug-in, although I couldn't see anything that wasn't in the other patent write up.

What I think is *shocking* is that US patent site requiring people to download an  obscure browser plug-in to view those TIFF images. I mean, storing documents as TIFFs is perfectly fine, but serving them up on a web site, when web browsers don't supporting them by default is terrible! Given US citizens file a large number patents, they deserve better.

Although I'm being all self-righteous because my own web site goes to great lengths to automatically convert images in to easily readable formats! :-p


Moose,

 Patents on file at the USPTO are nothing more than archived documents. It is my strong belief that the US government has made patent searching much more difficult than need be. - Which certainly favors the patent lawyer industry, the wealthy or wealthy and powerful corporations (i.e. keeps competing inventions down to a minimum). I can see the logic behind not wanting novice patent filings and wasting patent office man hours on such. I do not see the logic, fairness or how our nation is benefited by making patent searching difficult. Our country needs backyard inventors to see if they have a patentable widget and who the competition is (if any) and what they have patented. Many, many, many, huge corporations started out or started with a backyard inventor which ultimately prospered creating much wealth and jobs.  Turning the “backyard inventor faucet” off (by making the invention process hard) is pure stupidity for our nations overall success.   DIB 
This message was modified Nov 10, 2008 by DysonInventsBig



CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #358   Nov 10, 2008 5:16 pm
DIB replies:     Resorting to psychology? -- nice try. You have "run the boards" and have so for years with your unending complaints of your very short lived and use of the Dyson DC07. Out of curiosity how long did you own and/or use this machine? And why didn't you tweak it to make it work great on your carpets? Certainly tweaking a vacuum would be more fun than all the part swapping you've done, don't you think?

Hi DIB:

No pschology save past experience in the business with customers.  Vacuum buyers anxious to purchase the latest and greatest typically "relegate" the current user to the upstairs, downstairs and/or garage for convenience.  It is a legitimate excuse [convenience] to upgrade if you only have one vacuum.  Most US households have more than one vacuum.

WRT dyson 07 pink, I've addressed the questions and concerns you ask here in the past.  Not in the Reviews, but in  posts.  I'll summarize for you here again.  If you have further questions you can message me offline.  I'll be happy to provide more details.  The design and function of the DC07 is not suited for my current rugs.  This was confirmed by the dyson helpline and technicians in several telephone calls who told me to return it to TARGET.  [Also confimed by my home builder and floor coverings sub contractor employed by the builder].  I "tweaked" the vacuum based on the several recommendations of the dyson techs.  But it would never perform properly on my rugs due to several shortcomings unrelated to air flow and steerability.  It was "fun" working with the dyson techs.  But fun alone did not solve the problems. 

I puchased the DC07 pink on a Labor Day sale from TARGET in 2006.  I kept it for several weeks and attempted to use regularly but to no avail.  Why?  The clutch would constantly make the ratcheting noise and the brush bar would stop.  All the while making calls and emailing dyson with the results [the fun part].  I could not pass over an area of my rugs 4/5 times w/o the clutch engaging and disabling the brush bar.  Toward the Holidays of 2006, I exchanged my dyson DC07 pink with my daughter's HOOVER Soft and Light upright [about 7 years old].  She had a home at the time that had carpets more suitable for this dyson.  She used it on the main level while using a HOOVER V2 [5 years old] on the top level.  In June 2007, after having a second baby, she and my son-in-law bought/moved into a larger house with carpets similar to my home.  The dyson was useless again.  Performing exactly the same as it did for me.

Having purchased my new ORECK Classic XL upright in April 2007, and my daughter liking it, I bought a new ORECK upright and gifted to her in July 2007.  She uses it on the main level, and the HOOVER Dual V on the second floor.  She relegated her dyson to a closet in one of her unused spare bedrooms.  She gifted the dyson away to a needy Church family during the 2007 Holidays.  Unfortunately it didn't work for the donee, who returned it to her.   It's still unused and awaiting another home where it can be used and hopefully appreciated. 

I trust this adequately addresses your concerns/questions.

Carmine D.

PS:  The clutch and brush bar shut off are flawed features [overengineering] on dysons for "some" USA carpets.  I'm sure the reason in large part that these features are no longer used on dyson models.  On a positive note, $45 from the sale was donated by dyson, according to its claims, to the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation.  A reason in part I bought it and never returned it.

This message was modified Nov 11, 2008 by CarmineD
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #359   Nov 11, 2008 6:53 am
DysonInventsBig wrote:
 Also...   have you seen David Oreck's latest XL Platinum television commercial? He is attempting to make it look as if this antiquated chassis (Murray Spangler-type) has steering.  He "borrowed" the Dave Shimkus demonstration where Dave twists and turns Dyson steerable's over hard surfaces littered with coffee grounds. Certainly Dave Shimkus is not the first to vacuum up coffee grounds. He is the world's first to leave a clean slalom-like or s-shaped path through coffee grounds using the world's only highly reactive steerable (a nozzle that reacts in concert to  "wrist steer"; that is, Dyson's Ball line and Slim).

You will see Oreck make a swivelable and many others too, due to the Dyson DC15 but mostly due to the Slim proving out/carving out this new "steerable" and profitable market.

DIB


Hello DIB:

I have not seen the new ORECK TV commercial, but nice to know Dave still likes to stay engaged in vacuum battles and forays with bagless, by-pass, and now steerable contenders.  Dave Oreck's sales essence is his fatherly figure status.  It is not what he says, but his presence and demeanor when saying it.  He exudes trust.

Carmine D.

This message was modified Nov 11, 2008 by CarmineD
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #360   Nov 11, 2008 7:13 am
DysonInventsBig wrote:
Moose,

 Patents on file at the USPTO are nothing more than archived documents. It is my strong belief that the US government has made patent searching much more difficult than need be. - Which certainly favors the patent lawyer industry, the wealthy or wealthy and powerful corporations (i.e. keeps competing inventions down to a minimum). I can see the logic behind not wanting novice patent filings and wasting patent office man hours on such. I do not see the logic, fairness or how our nation is benefited by making patent searching difficult. Our country needs backyard inventors to see if they have a patentable widget and who the competition is (if any) and what they have patented. Many, many, many, huge corporations started out or started with a backyard inventor which ultimately prospered creating much wealth and jobs.  Turning the “backyard inventor faucet” off (by making the invention process hard) is pure stupidity for our nations overall success.   DIB 

Hello DIB:

Most definitely.  The USPTO is filled with lawyers and government bureacrats.  A product of years of Republican style politics in Washington which speak of less government involvement/regulation but do the opposite.  From 1968 until 2008, 40 years during which the patent office flourished, the USA had 28 years of Republican Presidents and 12 years of Democrats.  Too bad the US hasn't embraced Ben Franklin's advice. 

Carmine D.

This message was modified Nov 11, 2008 by CarmineD
DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Reply #361   Nov 12, 2008 4:16 pm
DysonInventsBig wrote:
Moose,

 Patents on file at the USPTO are nothing more than archived documents. It is my strong belief that the US government has made patent searching much more difficult than need be. - Which certainly favors the patent lawyer industry, the wealthy or wealthy and powerful corporations (i.e. keeps competing inventions down to a minimum). I can see the logic behind not wanting novice patent filings and wasting patent office man hours on such. I do not see the logic, fairness or how our nation is benefited by making patent searching difficult. Our country needs backyard inventors to see if they have a patentable widget and who the competition is (if any) and what they have patented. Many, many, many, huge corporations started out or started with a backyard inventor which ultimately prospered creating much wealth and jobs.  Turning the “backyard inventor faucet” off (by making the invention process hard) is pure stupidity for our nations overall success.   DIB

Carmine wrote:

Hello DIB:

Most definitely.  The USPTO is filled with lawyers and government bureacrats.  A product of years of Republican style politics in Washington which speak of less government involvement/regulation but do the opposite.  From 1968 until 2008, 40 years during which the patent office flourished, the USA had 28 years of Republican Presidents and 12 years of Democrats.  Too bad the US hasn't embraced Ben Franklin's advice. 

Carmine D.


Carmine,

Glad to hear others feel US patents are vital too. Greed is on both sides of the aisle. I am not a USPTO history buff but greed always raises its ugly head everywhere. You know Carmen, I don't think many, including politicians realize how vital patents are to our interests. Dyson himself is up against the same issue in England. Governments just don't get it, yet they want their taxes, their countries to grow stronger and independent (as possible), to be better prepared to stave off or to win wars and they want their people working and they want to do it without helping smart, independent inventors invent, -- go figure.        DIB


CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #362   Nov 12, 2008 5:29 pm
Hello DIB:

The essence of prudent Gov't regulation/oversight is balance.  Too much and/or too little are problematic.   Too much and you stymie private sector innovation.  Too little and you risk having no ethical/moral business boundaries.  Recent case in point.  Sarbanes Oxley.  For years, accounting firms were allowed to police themselves.  Result:  Oftentimes, the accounting firms were in bed with their clients, who paid them, and reported what their customers told them.  Hence: Enron, Global Crossing and host of other firms that went belly up with investors and stakeholders taking it on the chin.  All the while being audited/reviewed by accounting firms giving them clean [unqualified] opinions.  The best grade.  Gov't answer: Sarbanes/Oxley:  Over regulation.  Way too costly and time consuming.   Almost impossible to practically perform within the time constraints.  No better than having no regulation/oversight at all. 

Carmine D. 

This message was modified Nov 12, 2008 by CarmineD
M00seUK


Joined: Aug 18, 2007
Points: 295


Reply #363   Nov 16, 2008 6:05 pm
CarmineD


Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894


Reply #364   Nov 16, 2008 6:55 pm
Hello M00seUK:

Why is dyson posting financial results, tho cryptic and limited, for 2007 almost one year after the calendar year closed?  Generally this info is released within 90 days of the close of the calendar year, if not earlier.  This data is 325 days after the business year closed: December 31, 2007.  Long after most businesses reported for 2007 and paid out dividends.  Most businesses now are reporting interim results for 2008.  Why is James behind the curve and reporting so late? 

When it came to the UK capital gains tax increase, dyson had an emergency midnight Board of Directors meeting on March 31, 2008 right before the new tax law was to take effect.  James got board approval to make a hasty cash withdrawal [and avoid the new higher tax law rates].   What was it?  $260 MILLION.  He can act quickly when he wants.  Not so quickly otherwise. 

Dyson dividends cut in half in 2007 over 2006 by over 30 million GBP.  James reduced his salary by 60 percent in 2007 over 2006.  These are not the actions of a business that did well.  In fact, just the opposite.   This is not the full disclosure of financial results for dyson for 2007.  Just a few numbers tossed out to "paint" a rosie scenario.  Along with some other numbers, including extremely late year reporting, that raise alot of questions.   

Carmine D.

This message was modified Nov 17, 2008 by CarmineD
DysonInventsBig


Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454


Reply #365   Nov 17, 2008 1:08 pm
CarmineD wrote:
Hello M00seUK:

Why is dyson posting financial results, tho cryptic and limited, for 2007 almost one year after the calendar year closed?  Generally this info is released within 90 days of the close of the calendar year, if not earlier.  This data is 325 days after the business year closed: December 31, 2007.  Long after most businesses reported for 2007 and paid out dividends.  Most businesses now are reporting interim results for 2008.  Why is James behind the curve and reporting so late? 

When it came to the UK capital gains tax increase, dyson had an emergency midnight Board of Directors meeting on March 31, 2008 right before the new tax law was to take effect.  James got board approval to make a hasty cash withdrawal [and avoid the new higher tax law rates].   What was it?  $260 MILLION.  He can act quickly when he wants.  Not so quickly otherwise. 

Dyson dividends cut in half in 2007 over 2006 by over 30 million GBP.  James reduced his salary by 60 percent in 2007 over 2006.  These are not the actions of a business that did well.  In fact, just the opposite.   This is not the full disclosure of financial results for dyson for 2007.  Just a few numbers tossed out to "paint" a rosie scenario.  Along with some other numbers, including extremely late year reporting, that raise alot of questions.   

Carmine D.


 Take it easy Tom Clancy. First your HSN/Dyson conspiracy of selling 10,000 units of the DC07 in one day, now the above rubbish. Time to switch to decaf.        DIB


Replies: 356 - 365 of 624Next page of topicsPreviousNextNext page of topicsAllView as Outline
Vacuum Cleaners Guide   •   Discussions  Reviews  
AbbysGuide.com   About Us   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Contact Us
Copyright 1998-2024 AbbysGuide.com. All rights reserved.
Site by Take 42