Paul Fuller wrote:
> On 6/06/2010 12:58 PM, Sabrina Kilian wrote:
>>
>> Jump to new topic: Dyson's patents may have run out, but I haven't seen
>> any bagged or bag-less vac that beats the old Rainbows. Similar concept,
>> impel the air into a cyclone; only the rainbows used a cyclone of water.
>>
> 
> I have seen but not used water based vacs.  More tagged as 'carpet
> cleaning'.  You could hire them from shops at one point.  Maybe they
> were the 'Rainbow' mode that you mentioned?
> 

The ones I have seen at shops, or more specifically adverts for cleaning
shops, are ones that push water onto the carpet and then pull it back
off again. Used with water, they are called carpet shampooers around
here. The vac I used worked like a normal vacuum, but instead of a bag
or bin it just funneled the air into a container of water. Absolutely
disgusting to watch water turn from clear to filled with the stuff one
house could hold on the floor in a week. Worked better than HEPA
filters, though.

>> Back to topic: I saw one of the Dyson fans at a big store, I was
>> impressed by the design. It does hit "Oh, shiny" quite well. But I will
>> still wait for the cheap knock-offs, I can't afford $300 for
>> mass-produced art.
> 
> Same here.  Doesn't seem like a big enough problem to warrant the
> expense (assuming that they are indeed better).  I've never bought
> things for cool factor alone.

Oh, I would and have. Just not pop-art.

> Plus I would almost never buy V1 of something radically new.  Even the
> original Dyson vac looks relatively primitive and lacks a lot of the
> refinements of the newer generations.

Also a good reason. However, I can not see many directions to take the
fan concept. Higher speeds, maybe, or floor stands.

Now, if they made a humidifier version, and added blue LEDs inside the
turbine to make the mist glow, then I might get one.

Post a reply to this message