Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

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

.

I believe Rainbow has been using a clear bin for a very long time - long before Dyson.  It is ridiculous to argue about a clear dirt container.  Clear containers have been used for food containers and other applications for years.  Who knows where James Dyson "stole" the idea for a clear container originated - it's irrelevant.  

James Dyson is trained as a graphics artist.  He accomplished 2 things - the no loss of suction dirt collection container, and he made a vacuum that has a unique trendy look.  His vacuums don't clean any better than other vacuums, because of design flaws unrelated to constant air flow.  When Dyson finds a cure for cancer, artificial limbs, an artificial heart/lungs, or cure for some other disease, perhaps the rest of us will hoist him up on your pedestal. 

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Hello HARDSELL/DIB:

I beg to differ with you HS.  If the vacuum thieves had superior intelligence and were bright, as you say, they would figure out a way to take $50 vacuums and sell them for $400.   Not the other way around.  James did the former.   He's bright.  He does it legally.  Very good marketing and cheap [Mal] ASIAN  labor.  

The thieves in these stories are doing the latter.  Stealing $400 plus vacuums with all the risks and legal consequences to sell for $50 to $100 [your prices].  Probably asking prices.  More like $25-$50 cash in these hard economic times, if and when the thieves can find buyers.  Especially with the dyson refurb market legally pricing for $150 plus on the Internet.  The risk now legally is not worth the little reward.   Especially for vacuums!  No resale/entertainment value!   

Sorry dyson campers, I don't impute/conclude any esoteric motives and meanings to the vacuum thefts as you like to do.  To me, just stupidity and the gullibility of the thieves who are also duped by all the hawking/hyping to risk life and limb for chump change. 

Here's my conclusions on the thefts:  James Dyson has single handedly spawned a brand new criminal enterprise in fenced dysons by selling overpriced vacuums in big box retail stores.  What is he/dyson doing to preempt the pilferage?  Surely, a smart man and company with billions will not let itself be outwitted by a few dumb desperate felons.

Carmine D.

Actually, my friend you're not [very bright].  Here's a true answer to your question.  Think....I live in the desert.  Grass doesn't grow in the desert.  There's no rain/water.  My yard is sand, rock, and stones.  I don't own a lawnmower.  I own a shovel.  So, the thief by default would have to steal the shovel.  

Actually Carmine there was never any doubt that you live under a rock.

Correct my friend: The Rock of Ages!  

Carmine D.

Pax tecum.

Carmine D.

Glad to hear you found the perfect niche for a 3 year old, discountinued, discounted DC15 dyson ball: The garage.   I find irony in this.  Why?  Garages are for autos which share the quintessential feature that you like to talk up so much about all dyson ball models: Steerability! 

Carmine D.

I believe Rainbow has been using a clear bin for a very long time - long before Dyson.  It is ridiculous to argue about a clear dirt container.  Clear containers have been used for food containers and other applications for years.  Who knows where James Dyson "stole" the idea for a clear container originated - it's irrelevant.  

DIB replies:   Instead of  "believing", why not belly up with some photos. I'm no collector but you are, as your buddies are too, it should be easy to locate this vacuum that predates Dyson's clear low efficiency cyclonic bin. To suggest food containers (or alike) could be a source that Dyson "stole" is lame. - This is an excuse to print "Dyson" and "stole" in the same line.  The only thing ridiculous is the amount of money Dyson made from being smart and smarter than every manufacturer on the planet when he included his clear low efficiency cyclonic bin. And it is ridiculously wild to see how widely and globally this bin was eventually adapted and now is a standard.  Globally, vacuum manufacturers are running Dyson-like bins and not running jam jars.

 Re: irrelevant. Carmen made a claim Dyson was a niche product and that he predicted it back in 2002. I expounded on the definition of niche. Carmen responded. And you say it's irrelevant. I guess we should all stop, go back, ponder and relive your boomerang Bissell stick post.  Certainly there is much revelant there and is more revelvant than talking of the global adoption of Dyson success.

James Dyson is trained as a graphics artist.  He accomplished 2 things - the no loss of suction dirt collection container, and he made a vacuum that has a unique trendy look.  His vacuums don't clean any better than other vacuums, because of design flaws unrelated to constant air flow.  When Dyson finds a cure for cancer, artificial limbs, an artificial heart/lungs, or cure for some other disease, perhaps the rest of us will hoist him up on your pedestal. 

DIB replies:   Look, many (not all) vacuum collectors typically get bent out of shape over Dyson's success. I say they're envious, what say you?

DysonInventsBig wrote:

 You write: "Dyson was a niche product".   A Freudian slip/prophesy? 

Niche product is nice.  Not derogatory as you and some other dyson campers like to infer.  No umbrage should be taken.   Several successful and storied vacuum brands are niches:  Filter Queen, Rainbow, and Kirby just to mention a few.  Of course, unlike your brand, these brands have been in business for many years and have weathered good and bad economic times and still.   At least so far.  A prerequisite for rightfully and correctly claiming success.  But things change as we witnessed with several of the financial icons on Wall Street.  Still as you, I would presume, would not want to be counted out/laid to rest while still having a pulse and heart beat, even if ever so faint/shallow, so it is true too, I believe, with your fave brand. 

Carmine D.

http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?KC=A&date=20081105&NR=2448934A&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_GB&CC=GB&FT=D

This details a product with a smaller profile, reduced manufacturing costs and low maintenance. It would seem almost certain this would involve a digital motor along the way.

I'd say there's a high probability of this product reaching market in the next 12 months. The technical illustrations for the patents show production quality parts - not simply theory on how they might do something.

I've noticed a steady increase of this type of appliance in people's homes over the last 5 years. I've considered it myself, but have been put off by perceived cost, energy and space considerations - so certainly, there's room for improvements.