Talk:Dyson (company)

The claim of 900mph is incorrect. I have put a note in the main body but I don't have time to reference it. Dyson has stopped using the claim but unfortunately the 900mph claim continues to kick around. I understand that the claim is referenced but the reference is in error. Wikipedia is only perpetuating the claim.

Maybe not so original?

So, how is this any different from the Fantom bagless vacuum cleaner, which preceeded Dyson? --Quicksilver^{T @} 09:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC) Umm because Fantom bought right to manufacture their bagless vacuum, they used Dysons Dual Cyclone Technology and Fantom no longer is in buissness and only Dyson makes the true Root Cyclone Vacuum.Locust43 23:42, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Absolutely not the first centrifugal vacuum cleaner

We have a shop dust collector that does this that's from the 50s. In fact WIKIPEDIA HAS AN ARTICLE ON THIS! Dust Collector.

DC07 with clutch?

Does anybody know if the DC07 has two models, one with a clutch and one without? and if so, what the clutch is actually for?

Yes, there seem to be some DC07 models without clutch: [1] You can see the missing knob on the left bottom of the vacuum cleaner (e.g the Standard, the Indepenent, the Origin are without clutch).

The clutch lets you switch the brush bar on and off. You need the brush bar to better clean carpets, but on wooden floors one should switch the brush bar off in order to be more gentle to the wooden floor. On models without clutch, the brush bar is always on. Ccwelt 19:17, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Products AfD

I am recommending the deletion of the articles (mostly stubs anyway) about specific Dyson appliances, on the grounds that they are less article and more advertisement. Please see the AfD pages I am creating for those articles. If you see any information there that should be preserved, consider moving it to this article.

agreed. it reads like an advert and even has links in the article main text on specific products to dyson web page.

Criticism

There have been studies that say it performs no better than other vacuum cleaners, as well as other things like: not really being ergonomic, and not worth it for the money. [2]70.111.251.203 21:18, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Dyson Font?

Hello, does anyone know the name of the font that the dyson logo uses?

Dapablue 15:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC) Like many large corporate identities, it is a font designed specially for Dyson. However, there may well be copycat fonts available.

1. ITC Bauhaus Demi is closest.

1. But why are they do expensive - they're just fonts?!

What year?

I think that the merge with Dyson Root Cyclone is a good idea, but there's a lot of conflicting information in them. Anyone have a good source for what year the G-force came out? -- Kaszeta 13:05, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, I found few citations and corrected the date. -- Kaszeta 13:19, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Various comments

Much of the article does read like Dyson promotional material. I'm not convinced that the precise difference between each machine is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. If the details are wanted the perhaps they could be moved to a new page Dyson cleaners or Dyson technology (which could incorporate the existing Dyson Root Cyclone page. The Dyson (company) page would then be used for more general background. Pontificake 18:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Number jump

Why no DC13?

>A few numbers have been missed for products that are still in development, were trialled but didn't succeeed, and privated or are products suffering from not being able to obtain patents.

One example is the DC06. This was to be a robotic cleaner but was never released because it offered no value financially.

Centrifugal Force? No such thing...

As many physics teachers will smugly tell you. And I am now smugly repeating. Definite no-no to using that in the "how it works" section, although as a quote it is acceptable.

Positive pressure design?

I have a suspicion that Dyson vacuums use a positive pressure system. I have also read reports of Dyson vacuums that leak dirty air. Can anyone confirm this? Does the fan pressurize the air before it reaches the cyclones? I am concerned because leaks in a positive pressure system will result in particulates being ejected into the air.

This video demonstrates a Dyson leaking dirty air: [3] The relevant portion is between 4:30 and 5:15

In the YouTube video, he is measuring at the exhaust of the Dyson. There is no leak, the guy is talking bullshit and I wouldn't be surprised if he had removed the filters from the Dyson. The Dyson does not have what you call a "positive pressure design'. Ccwelt 19:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Some reviews indicate similar leaks: [4] and [5]

I once got a severe coughing attack from 5 minutes with a Kirby vacuum. Upon examination I found a cracked plastic pipe that was leaking dirty air. The Kirby was indeed a positive pressure system.

Here is an Oreck leaking, quite dramatically: [6] The Oreck is obviously a positive pressure system since the air bag is pressurized against the outside air.

Needless to say I find the use of positive pressure designs quite troubling.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpheym (talk • contribs) 21:35, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

wireless charging technology???

"The DC03 was the first Dyson to use wireless charging technology, which has continued on all newer models."

This ain't right, is it? Ccwelt 18:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Wireless charging technology could mean electrostatic charging

The Dyson cyclones only spin the dust and air past the plastic parts to put electrostatic charge on the particles. You can see this when you turn the cleaner off. The finest dust sticks to the plastic parts. Some animal hair, carpet fibres and big (0.1 mm) particles collide with baffles inside the container, and drop out of the air flow.

So if Dyson company claims "wireless charging", maybe they are referring to electrostatic charging of the plastic cones and dust particles? Richardh9935 (talk) 06:00, 26 December 2007 (UTC)