Vacuum cleaner exam :P
- Thread starter parwaz786
- Start date
Help Support VacuumLand:
ncovert
Well-known member
That's a good idea, and it sounds really fun!
thekirbylover
Well-known member
that would be cool
I always wanted that to happen to however because we know so much more than everyone else we will be bored
I always wanted that to happen to however because we know so much more than everyone else we will be bored
hi-loswitch98
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2013
- Messages
- 1,123
About as exciting as History in School got...
In Year 9 we were talking about Company shares, so my history teacher started talking about Dyson & everyone in the class was shouting 'they make Hoovers sir' & he was saying about James Dyson going around all of the other Vacuum companies & how they rejected his design & then he said about him going to Japan & people buying shares etc. & how thid got him where he is today.
I was there like 'I have so much to tell & it was hard not to burst out in class 'It's not a hoover it's a Vacuum Cleaner' but I resisted. Anyway that was probably the best History Lesson I had ever had.
What no one in the class knew was that Dyson used to make Washing Machines! (I did say that though
)
In Year 9 we were talking about Company shares, so my history teacher started talking about Dyson & everyone in the class was shouting 'they make Hoovers sir' & he was saying about James Dyson going around all of the other Vacuum companies & how they rejected his design & then he said about him going to Japan & people buying shares etc. & how thid got him where he is today.
I was there like 'I have so much to tell & it was hard not to burst out in class 'It's not a hoover it's a Vacuum Cleaner' but I resisted. Anyway that was probably the best History Lesson I had ever had.
What no one in the class knew was that Dyson used to make Washing Machines! (I did say that though
)vintagerepairer
Well-known member
And thanks to your history teacher they may well think that ever idea one could think of could be (A) taken to an existing manufacturer, and (B) could be put into production despite being rejected by all and sundry.
James Dyson is a chapter of history in itself. He had so much self belief in his invention that was determined to do whatever it took to get it to where he believed it would be. He took a gamble of immeasurable dimensions, and of course as we know, it paid off.
However, what often gets lost in translation is that the Dyson story is the exception to the norm, and whilst it was James Dyson's self-belief and determination which got the cleaner into production, he was 'lucky' if I may call it that, that his invention was an improvement on an almost consumable, everyday object owned by practically every householder countrywide. This, added to the fact that vacuum cleaners had seen few dramatic changes since their invention (and what changes were made were subtle and phased in gradually), meant that consumers were hungry for a drastic change -any change at all.
With their brand-new 3-in-1 cleaner, Vax had dipped their toes in the water already so far as bold changes went, targeting those who liked a change and / or a gimmick. They had been so very successful, but the thrill of their cleaners was finite because as time progressed it became clear to consumers that the ability to wash their carpets was not quite the adventure they had thought it might be. By the time Dyson cleaners were really getting noticed, a lot of Vax owners were getting ready to change their vacuum cleaner for a new one, and in my mind I will always believe that Dyson owes a lot of it's sales to the Vax story. His [Dysons] timing was impeccable.
But the difference between Vax and Dyson is that Vax continued to be just a manufacturer of finished goods, where as Dyson has gone on to become a cult, or, as I do believe it to be known in today's world, a 'brand'. Dyson says it is because their products are the best, that they perform better, and have all the modern technology and research lavished upon them. What he never says, of course, is that there is a whole load of clever marketing going on too. You only have to look at the build quality of a Dyson and then look at the price tag to see they've managed to achieve what few others can; a below average quality product which works well and sells for the highest price possible. Twenty years ago a cleaner with plastic tubes was considered to be leaning on the lower end of the market. Dyson has turned that point alone on it's head.
James Dyson is a chapter of history in itself. He had so much self belief in his invention that was determined to do whatever it took to get it to where he believed it would be. He took a gamble of immeasurable dimensions, and of course as we know, it paid off.
However, what often gets lost in translation is that the Dyson story is the exception to the norm, and whilst it was James Dyson's self-belief and determination which got the cleaner into production, he was 'lucky' if I may call it that, that his invention was an improvement on an almost consumable, everyday object owned by practically every householder countrywide. This, added to the fact that vacuum cleaners had seen few dramatic changes since their invention (and what changes were made were subtle and phased in gradually), meant that consumers were hungry for a drastic change -any change at all.
With their brand-new 3-in-1 cleaner, Vax had dipped their toes in the water already so far as bold changes went, targeting those who liked a change and / or a gimmick. They had been so very successful, but the thrill of their cleaners was finite because as time progressed it became clear to consumers that the ability to wash their carpets was not quite the adventure they had thought it might be. By the time Dyson cleaners were really getting noticed, a lot of Vax owners were getting ready to change their vacuum cleaner for a new one, and in my mind I will always believe that Dyson owes a lot of it's sales to the Vax story. His [Dysons] timing was impeccable.
But the difference between Vax and Dyson is that Vax continued to be just a manufacturer of finished goods, where as Dyson has gone on to become a cult, or, as I do believe it to be known in today's world, a 'brand'. Dyson says it is because their products are the best, that they perform better, and have all the modern technology and research lavished upon them. What he never says, of course, is that there is a whole load of clever marketing going on too. You only have to look at the build quality of a Dyson and then look at the price tag to see they've managed to achieve what few others can; a below average quality product which works well and sells for the highest price possible. Twenty years ago a cleaner with plastic tubes was considered to be leaning on the lower end of the market. Dyson has turned that point alone on it's head.
turbo500
Well-known member
Well said, Benny. Not slagging off Dyson cleaners in anyway here, but the success of the company lies purely in grabbing onto a niche in the market and clinging on for dear life.
Lets not forget that disposable paper bags were added to vacuums to make them easier to empty, instead of the old cloth shake out bags. Through clever marketing, James Dyson created a problem that people never even knew they had, which is what a good marketing strategy should do - it puts ideas into peoples heads.
The DC01 wasn't actually that good, especially when compared with what other cleaners were on offer at the time. So the success of the company is not to do with the actual product, but rather a very clever marketing strategy.
Lets not forget that disposable paper bags were added to vacuums to make them easier to empty, instead of the old cloth shake out bags. Through clever marketing, James Dyson created a problem that people never even knew they had, which is what a good marketing strategy should do - it puts ideas into peoples heads.
The DC01 wasn't actually that good, especially when compared with what other cleaners were on offer at the time. So the success of the company is not to do with the actual product, but rather a very clever marketing strategy.
hi-loswitch98
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2013
- Messages
- 1,123
People just think because it's Dyson that it's excellent & that nothing compares to it. Well, to be honest after seeing a DC02 suck up hair & break, whereas Henry could suck up hair till it's bag is full not clog I thought that Dysons were rubbish. I was only 5 at the time.
Try vacuuming hair with a DC08 or Dc05, it wont break, plus they are better, Dc02 is a fat crappy thing with a straight suction floor tool, it only has 90 AW, a DC01 is MUCH better by miles
Plus I love henrys, I used to hate them till I used my Auntie's eco Henry, its brill!
Plus I love henrys, I used to hate them till I used my Auntie's eco Henry, its brill!
vintagerepairer
Well-known member
When one considers the lower suction power of the DC01 and also the floor tool supplied with the original yellow & grey cleaner, it is a wonder as many people bought them as they did. Granted that some consumers may not know all this beforehand, but certainly many must have made their purchases based on existing customer recommendation. I sold a good deal of new floor tools to DC02 customers who came to me to buy only the filters. One mention of the floor tool and I had the chance to sell them a better one.
vintagerepairer
Well-known member
Sorry, the whole of my post is about the DC02. I wrote "01" in error.
hi-loswitch98
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2013
- Messages
- 1,123
It was a DC02 & it was sucking up Human hair after mum had given dad a haircut. Plus the Mini Turbine Head wasn't launched then.
Dyson's are much better now, Dc02 is crap, the second crappest Dyson made. the DC08 is the best cylinder dyson made in terms of suction, but the best performing is the DC23/DC21 motorhead, DC05 was good, but why did they stop the handle control feature? :/
vintagerepairer
Well-known member
handle control feature
Possibly because it was found to be faulty and had the potential to burn the user. Also, electrically powered heads bring their own problems to the table as it requires a wired hose, the likes of which have always been more prone to failure.
http://www.dyson.co.uk/support/dc05Notice.asp
Possibly because it was found to be faulty and had the potential to burn the user. Also, electrically powered heads bring their own problems to the table as it requires a wired hose, the likes of which have always been more prone to failure.
http://www.dyson.co.uk/support/dc05Notice.asp
sebo_fan
Well-known member
Some very good points, but lets not forget, Dyson did not make his mark on vacuum cleaners to begin with. He was "lucky" to be considered serious at all with the ball barrow wheel barrow.
I don't consider Dyson as a company who make vacuum cleaners and that's it. From the Contra-washing machine, to the hand fans, to the loop fan heater and now taps which have an air blade built in, the company build their inspiration from existing things that people "don't know much about," or didn't think an improvement could be bettered, added etc to make life easier.
As I did own a DC01 a very long time ago, I do consider it to be an alright vacuum cleaner. Like the Vax Mach Air, any bagless upright with a brush roll is crucial if you have daily pick up required in a home full of pets. It doesn't matter that "no small turbo brush" came with the DC01 originally - thanks to the 32mm sizing, you can simply jam on an aftermarket mini turbo brush by any one company and for example Wilco's/Electrolux pet hair tool.
The biggest ploy for marketing wasn't just the suction system but for the fact that you could literally see the dust that other vacuums left behind, again playing on the bag principle. Had Dyson just used a generic, conventional upright and cylinder design as well, I don't think many buyers would have gone for the brand or its models - in his book he does refer that early DC01's had dark bins which buyers didn't want, too.
He 's not only reinvented several key points of vacuum cleaner design - but quite literally continues to turn design on its head - thus also cashing in on a niche market, with patents along the way to secure that new design in the first place. A reason to why Dyson has taken to Samsung to court with Samsung's latest cylinder vacs.
I don't consider Dyson as a company who make vacuum cleaners and that's it. From the Contra-washing machine, to the hand fans, to the loop fan heater and now taps which have an air blade built in, the company build their inspiration from existing things that people "don't know much about," or didn't think an improvement could be bettered, added etc to make life easier.
As I did own a DC01 a very long time ago, I do consider it to be an alright vacuum cleaner. Like the Vax Mach Air, any bagless upright with a brush roll is crucial if you have daily pick up required in a home full of pets. It doesn't matter that "no small turbo brush" came with the DC01 originally - thanks to the 32mm sizing, you can simply jam on an aftermarket mini turbo brush by any one company and for example Wilco's/Electrolux pet hair tool.
The biggest ploy for marketing wasn't just the suction system but for the fact that you could literally see the dust that other vacuums left behind, again playing on the bag principle. Had Dyson just used a generic, conventional upright and cylinder design as well, I don't think many buyers would have gone for the brand or its models - in his book he does refer that early DC01's had dark bins which buyers didn't want, too.
He 's not only reinvented several key points of vacuum cleaner design - but quite literally continues to turn design on its head - thus also cashing in on a niche market, with patents along the way to secure that new design in the first place. A reason to why Dyson has taken to Samsung to court with Samsung's latest cylinder vacs.
vintagerepairer
Well-known member
Sebo fan, you have nailed it. However, when functional goods are changed for the sake of style, I do have to question the point of any of it. Dyson has made a number of useful chnages to make a cleaner which works better. But in doing so, style has played a massive part to, often to the cost of functional parts being changed for the sake only of style, and to the cost that certain aspects of the cleaner are rather impractical.
I am not saying design should never be challenged, but a little consideration as to why things are how they always have been would not go a miss. A kettle which is safe to hold when full of freshly boiled water is a casing point as so many today are stylish but not so practical. It depends of course why one buys something to begin with, and yes, with a kettle it has to look good as well as perform well. But a vacuum cleaner? Never did someone tell me they bought one "for show".
I am not saying design should never be challenged, but a little consideration as to why things are how they always have been would not go a miss. A kettle which is safe to hold when full of freshly boiled water is a casing point as so many today are stylish but not so practical. It depends of course why one buys something to begin with, and yes, with a kettle it has to look good as well as perform well. But a vacuum cleaner? Never did someone tell me they bought one "for show".
sebo_fan
Well-known member
Well, whilst I can see your point Benny, you only have to look at uprights from the period before - with reference to Hoover's soft bag uprights with so many different colours and patterns. Same kind of thing in my view. There was always a neighbour or someone who had a Hoover "Deluxe," or a Hoover Senior "in green" as opposed to the blue colour. Hoover certainly cashed in on the colours, there, not to mention the different bag designs etc and of course the rare House of Frasers/Allander versions.
Then those fabulous hard box uprights like the Hoover Junior and then the Deluxe/Starlight.
Then those fabulous hard box uprights like the Hoover Junior and then the Deluxe/Starlight.
vintagerepairer
Well-known member
True, but they were designed to be functional still.
sebo_fan
Well-known member
Yes they were, but its a pity that they were never made to withstand rips etc. When replaced by hard boxes, it is not as if brands all stuck to the same colour, they continued with the Deluxe and Super editions etc. Dyson has simply followed route in this respect.
