Hacker News Reader

Comment by ax0n | Hacker News Reader

I don't see how it's really hack-a-day material. It's more of a rant, and someone using the wrong site for which to air one's grievances... but it's their site, not mine. And I'm known to rant off-topic a bit in my own little corners of the web, as puny and insignificant as they are.

Still, Dyson is a bit of a snake-oil salesman. He makes sleek, designer houseware and peddles it via the outlets frequented by those with disposable income whom are always looking out for sleek, designer houseware.

An impeller that leverages the venturi effect does not a visionary make. It just means the new, inefficiently-placed blades are going to be almost impossible to clean off once they become gunked up with allergens.

Dyson didn't pioneer vortex separation technology, either. That shit's been around for many decades, and is likely older than I am.

View on HN

>> "Still, Dyson is a bit of a snake-oil salesman. He makes sleek, designer houseware and peddles it via the outlets frequented by those with disposable income whom are always looking out for sleek, designer houseware."

That's BS. Having recently bought a new Dyson Vacuum cleaner, I'm still surprised just how well thought out, well put together it is. The attachment that uses the suction to spin round a brush for cleaning stairs/cars is impressive enough - the roller brush spins fast, but it still sucks up everything. Let alone all the other unique features. There simply isn't another manufacturer close (Even though they try to copy every feature).

Just because something also looks beautiful, don't assume that's the only reason it's successful. (Also see Apple).

My Hoover ( http://www.hoover.com/product.aspx?model=U5780900&ds=fal... ) does all that stuff too. It even has the roller brush for stairs, couches, etc. Even better -- it works!

I'm consistently not impressed with Dyson's BS.

Hoover were found guilty of deliberately copying patented Dyson technology

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1368860/Dyson-cleans-...

Hoover failed to innovate for decades, then Dyson came along, and Hoover just started copying them.

I'd rather have the original than an imitation personally. (Original being the co. that invented the stuff, patented it etc).

It might be a better vacuum cleaner, but it still sucks.

It's one thing to build the best vacuum cleaner or fan, but they are still vacuum cleaners and fans and to say they are something else is disingenuous.

I have got the date for cyclonic separation back to at least 1934

http://www.buellrefinery.com/

but as it says on Wikipedia Dyson has himself said he didn't invent cyclonic separation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_(company)

"During a visit to a local sawmill, Dyson noticed how the sawdust was removed from the air by large industrial cyclones. He conjectured the same principle might work, on a smaller scale, in a vacuum cleaner."

I agree with the "snake oil salesman" sentiment, while largely good products - I don't think not quite to standard so widely proclaimed by Dyson's marketing dept. and owners value wise..

That said, the Dyson Air Blade (public restroom hand driers) are by far the best I've used.

http://www.dysonairblade.co.uk/

I first saw these at (London) Victoria Station, and see them popping up more and more in the UK..

Reply on news.ycombinator.com