Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

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

.

Hello M00seUK:

I thank you for the link too!  I read it and the other posts here about the matter.  I talked with some legal experts.  And I talked also with several patent lawyers who work for the PO in Washington, DC.  I suspect having just been adjudicated in December 2008, the fall out from the subject case will have repercussions that take time to be sorted out.   We'll have to wait and see how it goes and what happens.  To think this is the end of it is rather naive from both a business and legal perspective.  Japanese are relentless.  Like you said we have different opinions on the matter.  That's why there are courts with judges who decide on the legality of such matters.

Carmine D. 

The existence of prior art and infringing the claims of prior art are distinct and separate matters.  It must be assumed Sanyo, nor individuals nor corporations attacked successfully any of Dyson’s [G-Force] Japanese patent/s.  Dyson’s licensee freely manufactured, advertised and sold $20m worth of Dyson technologies in a highly competitive market... Japan.

DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Hi DIB:

Assuming is risky business because one doesn't know the facts.  Assuming takes the facts out of context which leads to a pretext.  A pretext conceals the truth. 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Carmine,

I simply followed your lead...  assuming is something you've ran with here.   If assumptions were removed from these many posts, I'd say at minimum, 40%-50% of your posting would have to go.  Take it easy and get off the Holier-Than-Thou soap box, we let you speak much and back up little.


DIB

Hello DIB:

As usual your conclusion is logically inconsistent.  You impugn me but follow my lead.  Thank you.  Words of advice:  Before you complain about the splinter in my eye, remove the log in yours! 

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:
Carmine,

The number one reason I come here is to hear you spread Dyson falsehoods.  Some I take on as a challenge.  You have made my Dyson game better and in the process I am reminded (by way of research) what an antiquated appliance the vacuum cleaner was until Dyson.

Dyson interviewed in Readers Digest (Feb, 2009), in it he says he made under $1b last year.  Does this make you happy?


DIB

DysonInventsBig wrote:

Hi DIB:

Ah....for you, it's a game.  Too bad.  For me, it's a vocation.  One that makes me very happy.  Thanks for asking.

Carmine D.

DysonInventsBig wrote:
     

HARDSELL wrote:

As usual HS, you can't ever make up your mind!  Is it DC07 ?, Royal Emminence ?, Kirby ?, EUREKA BOSS Smart Vac,  HOOVER FUSION, HOOVER WT, REXAIR/RAINBOW, HOOVER Whisper.........did I leave any out?

What to buy?  What to choose?  What to keep?  What to use?  So many choices!  Freedom of choice is a difficult thing.  Try the ORECK again.  You'll change your mind [again].

Carmine D.

 All of this ballyhoo over a vacuum cleaner that is now all but one more chapter in history?

James Dyson is a brillant conceptual engineer, but he is not a design engineer to nearly the same degree. He designed a new concept around a vacuum cleaner. What his imitators are doing now is designing their vacuum cleaners around what is now a commonplace concept.  Mr. Dyson made vacuums that are novel, and admittedly fuctional in that they maintain their cleaning power much longer than vacuums equipped with the paper bags of approximately 20 years ago. However, by no stretch of the imagination did he build vacuum cleaners which are attractive (downright fanny ugly) nor convenient, not compared to many he had to compete against. To avoid having a height adjustment he designed a failure-prone clutch assembly which is not inexpensive to repair. (Oh ye who dibelieve, talk to the vac shops waiting on repair parts on back order from Dyson) The hose/wand is inconvenient (Actually his imitator, Amway, had the optimum solution, a lever to switch suction from floor to hose, and a short stetch hose with a crevice tool on board. The addition of a telescopic wand, dust brush, and upholstery tool on board would have allowed the operator to vacuum with the vacuum handle in one hand, and the hose/wand in the other and switch from one to the other with the flick of a toe. The Sharp bagless had this arrangement, and it is the most convenient upright to use simultaneuoslty with OBT of any that have ever been manufactured. Eureka/Lux has a few BUT, the switch from floor to above-the-floor is acheived with a dial which must be operated by hand.

The important issue to remember is that the bagless concept has now been rendered obsolete by the new bags made from 3M Filtrete paper/cloth. They have been proved in Miele, Sanitaire, Kirby and other brands to maintain nealy 100% of their initial cleaning power as they fill with dirt. The dirt in these bags is compacted as the bag fills, in the bagless machines it is fluffed and looks like more than it really is. If you don't have to change the bags as often as you would have to empty a dirt container, and if the bags are more sanitary and convenient, what are the advantages of a bagless unit, even a Dyson? Cost? It is just paper, not hide flayed from anyone's back. Does anyone track how much bathroom tissue, facial tissue, paper plates and paper towels they use annually? If not, what is all the fuss and to-do about the cost of 6 to 8 bags a year? Nothing but hype, and it is ludicrous. James Dyson you have had your 15min of fame, is that all you've got?