Hi Venson,<BR><BR>Agreed, having a laugh is not blaspheme.<BR><BR>Steve Jobs once said... “Give people what they want most.” ... it is the “most” part that vac manufacturers have not quite figured out. Dyson did.<BR><BR>DIB
People love clean graphics and a high tech commercials! ....oh... that's not what you were reffering to....sorry. LOL
Steve Jobs once said... “Give people what they want most.” ... it is the “most” part that vac manufacturers have not quite figured out. Dyson did.
DIB
Lucky1 wrote:
People love clean graphics and a high tech commercials! ....oh... that's not what you were reffering to....sorry. LOL
Lucky1,
When Dyson says “Bags clog.”, consumers can identify with this and [some] buy Dyson. Sales are based on the function, not form. What else would explain the Dyson technology adoption rate (copying) by other manufacturers? DIB
This message was modified Jan 21, 2009 by DysonInventsBig
When Dyson says “Bags clog.”, consumers can identify with this and [some] buy Dyson. Sales are based on the function, not form. What else would explain the Dyson technology adoption rate (copying) by other manufacturers? DIB
Hello DIB:
"Bag clogging" is a very miniscule factor. Bag "buying" [and even possibly "expense" to a much lesser extent] accounted for the initial rash of bagless [dyson] buying. It's a nuisance. Takes time and effort. If there's no new bag, what does the user do? Stuck.
Dyson bagless came on the scene and was marketed specifically to these bagged consumers as THE panacea. It was all about convenience [cost to a lesser extent]. Not technology. Dyson's fault, among others, was pricing bagless technology [read: convenience] too high. [Recall dyson's DC15 ball for $599. You paid $300]. Industry competitors picked up to this and copied dyson for less. Their bagless convenience was cheaper. Nothing to do with technology. Price and convenience rule in the market price.
Carmine D.
This message was modified Jan 22, 2009 by CarmineD
Dyson sees off rival Samsung - "A win for engineers and inventors." Reply #499 Jan 22, 2009 1:56 pm
Vacuum cleaner tycoon Sir James Dyson, whose bagless machine has conquered the world, today saw off a rival Korean product after a battle in the High Court...
Model2, Samsung has many many many multi-cyclonic's that have not been challenged by Dyson (demonstrating Dyson does not enjoy taking people to court as some say here). Samsung has a patent/s on sequential separation. Dyson Core + Root combination pre-date Samsung’s. If you look in the European patent office you'll see Samsung's sequential separators or large separators then downstream are smaller separators.- I'm 95% sure this is the infringing patent.
On second thought, maybe the infringement is over the dual cyclone. Who knows.
Moose, Thanks for the article. It is good to see Sir James find another superior innovation that’s insured and fortified by a strong patent. Sequential separators should out perform I'll previous separators. Not to mention what a great use of space the Core + Root were made to fit.
DIB
P.S. It is nice to see the little guy take on another monster sized corporation. It's equally nice to see Sir James again (as he always does) praise his people vice taking credit all to himself.
This message was modified Jan 22, 2009 by DysonInventsBig
Dyson dumb. Bit off his nose to spite his face [read: ego]. After the US, Japan is probably dyson's most lucrative market. Spin this story anyway you want, but the bottom line is this: No other consumer market is more loyal to its heritage than the Japanese. Dyson just lost the Japanese market. Mark my words.
Dyson dumb. Bit off his nose to spite his face [read: ego]. After the US, Japan is probably dyson's most lucrative market. Spin this story anyway you want, but the bottom line is this: No other consumer market is more loyal to its heritage than the Japanese. Dyson just lost the Japanese market. Mark my words.
Carmine D.
Hello Carmine,
You're entitled to your opinion, as always, but I disagree with you on this point.
No one was more surprised than Dyson that they have become established in the Japanese market in the face of strong domestic competition, in such a short time. Their product's small size, high technology and attention to detail have made them a top seller. In their marketing they proudly state their vacs are 'Designed in the UK' - presumably because the fact that it's foreign product appeals to a lot of people buying the machines.
I'm not dismissing the prospect that the Samsung patent case *could* have a negative impact on sales. But clearly, a competitor having a machine which infringes on their patents and in a stroke, removes all the hard work and expense that's gone in to giving it this USP shouldn't be tolerated either.
If this case *was* to get any publicity in Japan, I'd like to think that Japanese people are clear minded enough to see it's a simple business resolution that went to court and happened to be awarded in favour of Dyson.
My prediction: Nothing major will come of this, mark my words.
