Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Following is a link to a news article regarding the up and down sides for Electrolux during this year's first quarter.

http://www.centredaily.com/business/technology/story/553091.html

Best,

Venson

Well at least the slothful can claim something originated from them and not Dyson.        DIB

Hello Mole:

As a fan and daily reader of Scott Adams, you would be impugning Dilbert and overly complimenting Tom Gasko.

Carmine D.

Here is some more useless knowledge for you to ponder maybe since Vax which is owned by TTI,you know the same company that owns Dirt devil royal,regina,etc.The top end dirt devils carried a 6 year parts and labour oh i used the jolly good chaps version of labor, warranty for many years now,tti said what the heck the dirt devil cruiser is just as much junk as the Vax and Dyson, lets level the playing field out and tell the customers our junk is as good as their junk,except ours is in expensive junk,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Hey Gasko can i call you Dilbert Goldfarb,

sincerely

THE- MOLE

“More useless knowledge”?  Take it easy Sunshine.        DIB

Hi DIB,

Thanks for the patent clarification and proving that (once again) the Kenneth J. Weger patent has virtually no relevance on this thread (or concerning Dyson for that matter; two completely different machines).  I can see where the main body of the machine articulates, however, it does not appear that the nozzle can be easily steered as on the Dyson patent.  It's easy to tell why this lawsuit was thrown out; Dyson did not copy the patent but instead took the basic design and improved on it like they have done many times.  As for the name of his device, the "Ball Wheel Facilitator", I believe that is misleading because the term "ball wheel" implies that it is a single ball wheel, when it is instead two convex wheels that move with the articulated body of the cleaner.  Like you said, I do not see how this could be steered easily unless the nozzle floated somehow (since the nozzle is obviously not on a pivot itself), and even then I have to wonder how effective this steering mechanism would be.   Since Kenneth J. didn't actually produce a cleaner, we will have to leave it up to our own opinions.

As far as the Electrolux/Dyson issue with the recycled cleaner, do I predict it will be a huge blowup?  No, but something *will* happen eventually, most likely Electrolux removing their "world's first recycled vacuum cleaner" claim with a minimum of fanfare.

-MH (too far South to be my friend Tom G. lest you forget Carmine )

Hi Motorhead,

.

Thanks.

.

Don’t let Carmine rattle your cage (get you to doubt exactly how James will proceed or the spirit of your position) over what tools James may/may not use to remind competitors what is his, this includes using lawsuits.  Only after a filed lawsuit did Hoover U.S. abide by NAD’s ruling of – Do not use “No Loss of Suction” on their Fusion or Legacy vacuums and advertising that proved to indeed loose suction (after 10.5 oz. of dust).  I like underdogs and David vs. Goliath-like stories.  I put together a sampling of what James goes up against every day of his business life.        DIB

.

http://www.electrolux.com/company_overview.aspx

Hello DIB:

Good info.  Thank you but................You provided the Electrolux source for your data.  How about the dyson source? 

Interesting too that you like the David and Goliath stories and favor the underdog.  How then do you explain your liking for dyson against Kenneth J, an engineering student.  Dyson LTD and the slick NY city lawyers with 3 names and 3 piece suits.  Sounds like you were in Goliath's corner in that fight.  Against David.

I always say: Where people stand oftentimes depends on where they sit.

Carmine D.

Hello DIB:

This is very comforting to know.  Tom Gasko is locked up where he belongs.   

Carmine D.