Vacuum Cleaners Discussions |
|
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
|
DysonInventsBig
Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454
![]()
|
 |
Reply #349 Nov 9, 2008 1:21 pm |
|
Thanks - I can't see any more written detail on the US patent doc and the images are not showing for me, so I can't really add anything. I'm of the presumption that Dyson are of the thinking "What appliances use motors that might benefit a more efficient motor part?". I'm not at all familiar with drinks dispensers, but presumably you need a motor to create air pressure and also grind / mix ingredients. If a Dyson digital motor *was* to be used, it would like be a smaller than the version used on the Airblade drier. As you say, there might not be any benefit at all and they would simply use one off the shelf. So, what we're looking at is :- - Small, self-contained profile
- Grinder / milk foamier optional
- 1-2 selectable hoppers for coffee / coco ingredients
- Nozzle and cup shelf retract flush when not required
This is the type of product I'm thinking of:- http://www.comet.co.uk/shopcomet/product/290734/JURA-IMPRESSA-Z5 That is the top of the range model from this retailer, at 1595 GBP. An entry level version sells for 595 GBP. Certainly, they're getting ever popular, the margins are there and there's efficiencies to be made in terms of size. There's also market share potential in the commercial space. The café near my office is pushed for working space, with fair-sized espresso machine taking up room. At my local independent pub, coffee is made from a small machine with pre-prepared espresso 'capsules'. Again, they're pushed for space, but a machine of the design proposed by Dyson might work well. 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
This message was modified Nov 9, 2008 by DysonInventsBig
|
M00seUK
Joined: Aug 18, 2007
Points: 295
![]()
|
|
|
Reply #351 Nov 9, 2008 3:33 pm |
|
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.htmlThanks 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
|
CarmineD
Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894
![]()
|
|
|
Reply #353 Nov 10, 2008 7:13 am |
|
... that's true.
Hello DIB/HS:
Not!. I've posted here before, I believe, if not, here it is now. I typically run my ORECK upright over the garage floor [where I have both cement/rug coverings], apron to the driveway [cement], backyard patio [cement/rug coverings], and walkway from the front to side door of the house [cement save a huge front door indoor/outdoor welcome rug]. Why? It's an excellent barefloor cleaner with excellent edge cleaning. Beats cleaning these areas any other way. And voila, no problems steering! Last week, I performed some outdoor maintenence to the stucco finish my home. Repair/paint small cracks that developed after house settling. Typically these repairs cause excess stucco finish [read tiny cement bits and pieces] to fall off and down on the ground. To do the clean up on the walkway and patio, I went for my ORECK upright, which was the closest and handiest vacuum to get to! And works the best for this cleaning job. Simply amazing! Carmine D.
This message was modified Nov 10, 2008 by CarmineD
|
DysonInventsBig
Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454
![]()
|
|
|
Reply #354 Nov 10, 2008 2:03 pm |
|
Hello DIB: Sorry to misunderstand and misquote. DIB replies: No problem.
So it would appear if the discounted, 4 year old dyson DC15 ball is doing double duty, a new dyson ball model exclusively for household use is out of the question? I really thought with all honesty and good intentions that you "relegated" the DC15 to the garage so you could replace it with a new dyson in your home. Especially with the way you rave non-stop about the ball and steerability. I envisioned you upgrading the ball models with each new dyson entrant. As a dyson devotee like you would most likely want to do. I mistook your praise here for putting your money where your words are. My apologies.
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? Re: my DC15 pulling double duty... When I do not purchase all products from Dyson are you somehow trying to discount my sincerity of me supporting innovators such as Dyson? I never had the desire to own the DC18, DC24 or DC25. Why? Because I'm happy using my DC15 and I want to purposely use it for years only so I can discount others when they talk trash of Dyson durability in many (not all) of his great products. The Dyson Airblade easily proves out as the worlds best filtering/dryng hand dryer, yet I will not be purchasing this product either.
Carmine 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
|
mole
.
Location: earth
Joined: Sep 30, 2007
Points: 783
![]()
|
|
|
Reply #355 Nov 10, 2008 2:16 pm |
|
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
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
|
DysonInventsBig
Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454
![]()
|
|
|
Reply #356 Nov 10, 2008 2:38 pm |
|
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 |
|
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.htmlThanks 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
|
|
|
