Vacuum Cleaners Discussions |
|
DysonInventsBig
Location: USA
Joined: Jul 31, 2007
Points: 1454
![]()
|
 |
Original Message Mar 1, 2009 5:50 pm |
|
|
Venson
Joined: Jul 23, 2007
Points: 1900
![]()
|
 |
Reply #32 Apr 14, 2009 6:31 pm |
|
Why would Oreck and JC Penney’s introduce a product that looks old and that Dyson demonstrates to many as old?<BR> <BR> <BR> DIB
DIB, "No brainer" design has a large audience. You have overlooked that everyone may not be ready for or in want of the "new" and may actually be put off by things they see as to modern. In this day and age I know a truckload of adults that still aren't ready for computers yet. Here we are in the 21st century and things haven't changed much save for paths of thought. Lots of radical redesigns for this century were foretold since way back but thank God we're not all parading around in the spandex suits the Jetsons wore. Ultrasonic dishwashers are still basically a nice idea for the future and even Segways are considered way cool but I know no one who owns one. Many everyday shoppers are highly influenced by familiarity by reason of the sense of security (well-founded or not)it renders, by perceptions that an item that resembles or is the same brand as the last one they owned may be just as good or that the item resembles by look or type what other friends or family use and found satisfactory. (If it's good enough for Mom, it's good enough for me.) Besides which, Oreck is a company with a "name" and names can get away with a lot more than newbies can. Other vacuums like Kirby, Rainbow, Filter Queen, etc., that have been around for years don't actually change all that much but continue to sell. Why? Because there are people who actually prefer them and who won't be sold anything else for all the tea in China. Venson
|
CarmineD
Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894
![]()
|
|
|
Reply #33 Apr 15, 2009 7:44 am |
|
DIB,
"No brainer" design has a large audience. You have overlooked that everyone may not be ready for or in want of the "new" and may actually be put off by things they see as to modern. In this day and age I know a truckload of adults that still aren't ready for computers yet.
Here we are in the 21st century and things haven't changed much save for paths of thought. Lots of radical redesigns for this century were foretold since way back but thank God we're not all parading around in the spandex suits the Jetsons wore. Ultrasonic dishwashers are still basically a nice idea for the future and even Segways are considered way cool but I know no one who owns one.
Many everyday shoppers are highly influenced by familiarity by reason of the sense of security (well-founded or not)it renders, by perceptions that an item that resembles or is the same brand as the last one they owned may be just as good or that the item resembles by look or type what other friends or family use and found satisfactory. (If it's good enough for Mom, it's good enough for me.)
Besides which, Oreck is a company with a "name" and names can get away with a lot more than newbies can. Other vacuums like Kirby, Rainbow, Filter Queen, etc., that have been around for years don't actually change all that much but continue to sell. Why? Because there are people who actually prefer them and who won't be sold anything else for all the tea in China.
Venson
Hi Venson:
The GM Segway vehicle rickshaw showed off at the NY Auto Show last week is the latest in whimsical show-mobiles. Shows that the traditional big 3 car makers can think outside the box. But they have little connection to what consumers will see coming to the showrooms in 2, 5, 10 years from now. Big car makers have learned that it takes as long as 10 years to get significant new technology ready for mass market deployment. Why? Cost. So what do they do? Incremental improvement. Less expensive. Most cars can get 10-15 percent better fuel mileage improvement for an additional $500 per vehicle. Vice a hybrid fuel efficient model that can cost $3000-$5000 more per model. At $2 a gallon, demand for the higher mileage high priced hybrids is waning by US car buyers. A big worry for car makers who invested billions in hybrids. Carmine D.
|
Venson
Joined: Jul 23, 2007
Points: 1900
![]()
|
|
|
Reply #37 Apr 15, 2009 1:17 pm |
|
Hi Venson:</p><p>The GM Segway vehicle rickshaw showed off at the NY Auto Show last week is the latest in whimsical show-mobiles. Shows that the traditional big 3 car makers can think outside the box. But they have little connection to what consumers will see coming to the showrooms in 2, 5, 10 years from now.</p><p>Big car makers have learned that it takes as long as 10 years to get significant new technology ready for mass market deployment. Why? Cost. So what do they do? Incremental improvement. Less expensive.</p><p>Most cars can get 10-15 percent better fuel mileage improvement for an additional $500 per vehicle. Vice a hybrid fuel efficient model that can cost $3000-$5000 more per model. At $2 a gallon, demand for the higher mileage high priced hybrids is waning by US car buyers. A big worry for car makers who invested billions in hybrids.</p><p>Carmine D.
Hiya Carmine, How's it going? Point well taken but I think in this specific case we need a change right now and for such reason we might be best served to carry a grudge for a while. The next gas crunch could be around the corner. Purely my feeling but big business always has some ploy to lay a case against change or more appropriate pricing on. It's best to keep pushing for more highly fuel-efficient/low emission cars. They are much needed as a large part of the rest of the world wants what we want too -- a certain amount of convenience. An increase of "convenience" may prove hard for the planet to bear if everybody else becomes able to follow suit. For the time being war, disease and famine elsewhere have spared us much worry over our lot. Yet, as of late, we're being shown how close we are to the edge. Personally, I have no big stake in conservation or concern over Earth's ecosystem. When I'm gone -- I'll be gone. However, there are those with children and grand children who should think about what they are leaving behind. One's legacy is more than what he leaves in the bank. Money won't always be able to buy better air. Venson
|
CarmineD
Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894
![]()
|
|
|
Reply #38 Apr 16, 2009 8:43 am |
|
Hiya Carmine,
How's it going? Point well taken but I think in this specific case we need a change right now and for such reason we might be best served to carry a grudge for a while. The next gas crunch could be around the corner. Purely my feeling but big business always has some ploy to lay a case against change or more appropriate pricing on.
It's best to keep pushing for more highly fuel-efficient/low emission cars. They are much needed as a large part of the rest of the world wants what we want too -- a certain amount of convenience. An increase of "convenience" may prove hard for the planet to bear if everybody else becomes able to follow suit. For the time being war, disease and famine elsewhere have spared us much worry over our lot. Yet, as of late, we're being shown how close we are to the edge.
Personally, I have no big stake in conservation or concern over Earth's ecosystem. When I'm gone -- I'll be gone. However, there are those with children and grand children who should think about what they are leaving behind. One's legacy is more than what he leaves in the bank. Money won't always be able to buy better air.
Venson
Hi Venson:
I agree with a huge caveat. Like the Beatle's Song: It's getting better all the time. The internal gas combustion engine is improving [tho incrementally] and is now leaps and bounds over its early days design and function. It will be the mainstay of the auto industry for decades to come despite the hybrids. Like the direct path suction upright. Here forever. Sanitaire, KIRBY, ORECK ...................... Carmine D.
|
Venson
Joined: Jul 23, 2007
Points: 1900
![]()
|
|
|
Reply #39 Apr 16, 2009 2:17 pm |
|
Hi Venson:
I agree with a huge caveat. Like the Beatle's Song: It's getting better all the time. The internal gas combustion engine is improving [tho incrementally] and is now leaps and bounds over its early days design and function. It will be the mainstay of the auto industry for decades to come despite the hybrids. Like the direct path suction upright. Here forever. Sanitaire, KIRBY, ORECK ......................
Carmine D.
Hi Carmine, Yeah, but look what happened to John Lennon . . . I'd still like to see more forward movement toward alternative fuels whether man-produced or solar electricity or natural like ethanol and recycled cooking oil. Whatever works is fine by me and even better if it is minimally disruptive or destructive in regard to the environment. Oil's okay by me too but I should like to begin to feel no need to worry over hindrance from whoever has a hand on the valves in the oil fields. All we have to do is start thinking and acting before the well runs dry. Our problem here is that we are so used to simple luxury -- many of which the most simple, to the rest of the world, are just sweet dreams. We forget that the things we receive are not promised or ours by right but are purely blessings for which we have no guarantee. Unfortunately, that idea doesn't come to mind until we're lined up in our cars because of fuel rationing or facing exorbitant prices. I think it's better to bolster up the house BEFORE the inevitable storm than afterward. As for vacuums, there are some plain and design ideas that will remain around and giving good service a long time as well. Not everybody feels the need or want for the latest doo-dads. By the way, it just occurred to me that the Air-Rider canister is officially dead. True? Venson
|
CarmineD
Joined: Dec 31, 2007
Points: 5894
![]()
|
|
|
Reply #40 Apr 16, 2009 4:53 pm |
|
Hi Carmine,
Yeah, but look what happened to John Lennon . . .
I'd still like to see more forward movement toward alternative fuels whether man-produced or solar electricity or natural like ethanol and recycled cooking oil. Whatever works is fine by me and even better if it is minimally disruptive or destructive in regard to the environment. Oil's okay by me too but I should like to begin to feel no need to worry over hindrance from whoever has a hand on the valves in the oil fields. All we have to do is start thinking and acting before the well runs dry.
Our problem here is that we are so used to simple luxury -- many of which the most simple, to the rest of the world, are just sweet dreams. We forget that the things we receive are not promised or ours by right but are purely blessings for which we have no guarantee. Unfortunately, that idea doesn't come to mind until we're lined up in our cars because of fuel rationing or facing exorbitant prices. I think it's better to bolster up the house BEFORE the inevitable storm than afterward.
As for vacuums, there are some plain and design ideas that will remain around and giving good service a long time as well. Not everybody feels the need or want for the latest doo-dads. By the way, it just occurred to me that the Air-Rider canister is officially dead. True?
Venson
Hi Venson:
You should run for national office! I'd campaign and vote for you. WRT the Air Rider, I hadn't officially heard of its demise. But, in the current economic environment, I'm not the least surprised. More will go from niche to naught. Why? Consumers are "trading down" in the current hard times. As a result, they acquire frugal spending habits that last long after the good days return. It's a double whammy for high priced niche consumer goods, like the Air Rider. Carmine D.
|
|
|
