5 ms·

Nothing grinds my gears more than Dyson products. Oh sure I'll spend £400 on an insanely complicated vacuum with hundreds of springs and hinges and clips that b

by retube 14y ago

Nothing grinds my gears more than Dyson products. Oh sure I'll spend £400 on an insanely complicated vacuum with hundreds of springs and hinges and clips that breaks 6 months later and does no better job than a simple, virtually indestructable Henry that cost just 1/4 the price. Or £300 on a FAN. And just what the FUCK is a digital motor? http://www.dyson.co.uk/vacuumcleaners/ddm.aspx http://www.dyson.co.uk/vacuumcleaners/ddm.aspx Over-priced, over-engineered, completely unnecessary rip-off bullshit.

3amOpsGuy 14y ago
>> digital motor Just another way of saying brushless.
- njharman 14y ago
  Not "just" a rip-off bullshit (aka marketing) way of saying brushless. No one pays 1x let alone 2x for something lacking brushes! But digital, big improvement over analog, 2x is a bargain!!!
  - ndonnellan 14y ago
    Brushless motor, not brushless vacuum - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushless_DC_electric_motor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushless_DC_electric_motor As opposed to a brushed DC motor: - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushed_DC_motor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushed_DC_motor
VLM 14y ago
"digital motor" = marketing name for a brushless motor. Very light, very high power, very expensive, very cool. Think of something like a cross between the mechanics and wiring of a 3 phase motor and the operational action of the worlds fastest stepper motor, all scaled down to a tiny little thing. Better called an electronic motor than a digital motor in that all you really need is a herd of opamps to synthesize the rather complicated driving waveforms, but most folks do that in a digital microcontroller now so thats where the marketing name comes from. Not a complete misnomer. I guess you could say an old fashioned universal brush motor that you're probably familiar with is kind of like a single bit single speed simplification of a brushless motor.
glogla 14y ago
While I woudn't say it with as much rigor as you would, I kind of agree. 1.4 kilowatt motor to dry hands seems kind of excessive. EDIT: also, how do the fans even work?
Zimahl 14y ago
My wife and I have 3 Dyson vacuums. We purchased one and then acquired a couple more over the years. Two are standard room/floor vacuums and another is more like a carpet/floor 'broom'. They are expensive but all have worked flawlessly. One we've owned for more than 8 years and it's in perfect condition. No bag and it sucks up pet hair like you wouldn't believe. Better than any other vacuum I've ever owned. As for the Henry vacuums, I'm not sure you'd get the same power for 1/4 the price. There appear to be some models that are that price differential but once you get up to the higher power models it's still cheaper but about 3/4 the price. Dyson is a lot like Apple. They make dependable, designed products that simply work. You can get by with something else but it will most likely be inferior in form and function.
- cubicle67 14y ago
  Dyson is a lot like Apple. ... people tend to have strong opinions about them even if they've never had much to do with them :) another data point - we have a single dyson we bought over 7 years ago and it's still going strong. Thing's built like a tank and works better than any other vacuum I've ever used (not that many, to be honest)
ChuckMcM 14y ago
Interesting rant, I don't disagree but I see the same forces at work in Dyson that I see in Apple in terms of functional design. And charging a premium for that. Dyson's biggest contribution to the vacuum market was figuring out how to vacuum without a bag. That was a pretty big deal since vacuum bags were the 'ink cartridges' of the home appliance industry as far as I can tell. That said, the fake geek speak marketing also rubs me the wrong way.
- bane 14y ago
  Just a quick correction, I've definitely had bagless vacuums long before the Dyson company was around. I'm fine with Dysons as vacuums, they look interesting and do good work. I think you're spot on with the Apple comparison though since Dyson products seem to generate a similar amount of smug.
  - cubicle67 14y ago
    [Updated below] Just a quick correction, I've definitely had bagless vacuums long before the Dyson company was around. pretty sure you're mistaken. From memory Dyson was unable to get the money together to manufacture vacuums under his own brand, and Hoover et al didn't want him around at all (vacuum cleaner bags are like razor blades), but he was able to licence his design to a Japanese company and also an American one. There's quite a bit on the internet about the Japanese licenced Dyson - the G-Force - but I can't find anything yet on the American one. It was, I think, sold initially as a carpet shampoo machine, came with a powder you sprinkled on, and then as an industrial upright. I think these were sold in the US for many years before the Dyson brand made it there due to some sort of legal problem I'll update if I can find the info I'm looking for [edit: the keyword Google needed was Amway. Read this http://www.amquix.info/amway_dyson.html http://www.amquix.info/amway_dyson.html In short, Amway entered into negotiations to licence Dyson's design in '84, withdrew after some time then launched their own copy. Lawyers got rich all the way to 1990 when things were resolved and Amway agreed to pay royalties to Dyson. Not mentioned in this article, but I think part of the agreement was Dyson say out of the market for a certain time]
    - 14y ago
venus 14y ago
I'll be the first to agree Dyson is somewhat overpriced but I don't think their products warrant this level of animosity. Those vacuums may be expensive, but they work very well. I've not encountered this "Henry" unit but I've used Miele and Nilfisk and now just use a Dyson. If it breaks in 6 months get a warranty replacement. And I agree $400 for a fan is ridiculous but what is the alternative? I admit I've got a couple of those fans and I would have liked not to pay that much but it was that or a $15 chinese piece of junk, or a gigantic industrial looking chrome thing. Show me a company making well designed, innovative high tech domestic electrical equipment and selling them at reasonable prices and I'm sold. Until then, we have Dyson.

by retube 14y ago

3amOpsGuy 14y ago

>> digital motor Just another way of saying brushless.

njharman 14y ago
Not "just" a rip-off bullshit (aka marketing) way of saying brushless. No one pays 1x let alone 2x for something lacking brushes! But digital, big improvement over analog, 2x is a bargain!!!
- ndonnellan 14y ago
  Brushless motor, not brushless vacuum - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushless_DC_electric_motor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushless_DC_electric_motor As opposed to a brushed DC motor: - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushed_DC_motor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brushed_DC_motor

VLM 14y ago

"digital motor" = marketing name for a brushless motor. Very light, very high power, very expensive, very cool. Think of something like a cross between the mechanics and wiring of a 3 phase motor and the operational action of the worlds fastest stepper motor, all scaled down to a tiny little thing. Better called an electronic motor than a digital motor in that all you really need is a herd of opamps to synthesize the rather complicated driving waveforms, but most folks do that in a digital microcontroller now so thats where the marketing name comes from. Not a complete misnomer. I guess you could say an old fashioned universal brush motor that you're probably familiar with is kind of like a single bit single speed simplification of a brushless motor.

glogla 14y ago

While I woudn't say it with as much rigor as you would, I kind of agree. 1.4 kilowatt motor to dry hands seems kind of excessive. EDIT: also, how do the fans even work?

Zimahl 14y ago

My wife and I have 3 Dyson vacuums. We purchased one and then acquired a couple more over the years. Two are standard room/floor vacuums and another is more like a carpet/floor 'broom'. They are expensive but all have worked flawlessly. One we've owned for more than 8 years and it's in perfect condition. No bag and it sucks up pet hair like you wouldn't believe. Better than any other vacuum I've ever owned. As for the Henry vacuums, I'm not sure you'd get the same power for 1/4 the price. There appear to be some models that are that price differential but once you get up to the higher power models it's still cheaper but about 3/4 the price. Dyson is a lot like Apple. They make dependable, designed products that simply work. You can get by with something else but it will most likely be inferior in form and function.

cubicle67 14y ago
Dyson is a lot like Apple. ... people tend to have strong opinions about them even if they've never had much to do with them :) another data point - we have a single dyson we bought over 7 years ago and it's still going strong. Thing's built like a tank and works better than any other vacuum I've ever used (not that many, to be honest)

ChuckMcM 14y ago

Interesting rant, I don't disagree but I see the same forces at work in Dyson that I see in Apple in terms of functional design. And charging a premium for that. Dyson's biggest contribution to the vacuum market was figuring out how to vacuum without a bag. That was a pretty big deal since vacuum bags were the 'ink cartridges' of the home appliance industry as far as I can tell. That said, the fake geek speak marketing also rubs me the wrong way.

bane 14y ago
Just a quick correction, I've definitely had bagless vacuums long before the Dyson company was around. I'm fine with Dysons as vacuums, they look interesting and do good work. I think you're spot on with the Apple comparison though since Dyson products seem to generate a similar amount of smug.
- cubicle67 14y ago
  [Updated below] Just a quick correction, I've definitely had bagless vacuums long before the Dyson company was around. pretty sure you're mistaken. From memory Dyson was unable to get the money together to manufacture vacuums under his own brand, and Hoover et al didn't want him around at all (vacuum cleaner bags are like razor blades), but he was able to licence his design to a Japanese company and also an American one. There's quite a bit on the internet about the Japanese licenced Dyson - the G-Force - but I can't find anything yet on the American one. It was, I think, sold initially as a carpet shampoo machine, came with a powder you sprinkled on, and then as an industrial upright. I think these were sold in the US for many years before the Dyson brand made it there due to some sort of legal problem I'll update if I can find the info I'm looking for [edit: the keyword Google needed was Amway. Read this http://www.amquix.info/amway_dyson.html http://www.amquix.info/amway_dyson.html In short, Amway entered into negotiations to licence Dyson's design in '84, withdrew after some time then launched their own copy. Lawyers got rich all the way to 1990 when things were resolved and Amway agreed to pay royalties to Dyson. Not mentioned in this article, but I think part of the agreement was Dyson say out of the market for a certain time]
  - 14y ago

venus 14y ago

I'll be the first to agree Dyson is somewhat overpriced but I don't think their products warrant this level of animosity. Those vacuums may be expensive, but they work very well. I've not encountered this "Henry" unit but I've used Miele and Nilfisk and now just use a Dyson. If it breaks in 6 months get a warranty replacement. And I agree $400 for a fan is ridiculous but what is the alternative? I admit I've got a couple of those fans and I would have liked not to pay that much but it was that or a $15 chinese piece of junk, or a gigantic industrial looking chrome thing. Show me a company making well designed, innovative high tech domestic electrical equipment and selling them at reasonable prices and I'm sold. Until then, we have Dyson.