In article 3102061f-816c-4c65-9463-888a76fc1f48
@z19g2000yqb.googlegroups.com, says...

On Jan 19, 2:04*am, "SonomaProducts.com" wrote:
*And I really

don't fault the sawstop inventor. He was turned down by all the companies.

The whirlwind may succeed, since the manufactures missed the boat once.
They won't twice.
- Show quoted text -

Actually the Sawstop inventor had the deck stacked against him,
somewhat by himself.

3. The current manufacturers lawyers killed any consideration because
if you add this, you are admitting the thousands of saws you sold
without it are dangerous. And if you offer it on one saw and not
another, even worse when you get sued from someone who bought the one
without it.

I seriously doubt if this is accurate. Automakers offered anti lock
brakes on many cars, luxury, before offering it on all cars. And it
was an option on cars, not mandatory. I'm pretty sure there are many
tests showing anti lock brakes are safer than non anti lock brakes.
They stop you quicker.

No, they don't. At least not on dry pavement--there's no discernible
distance between typical stopping distances for ABS and no ABS. They
can beat most drivers most of the time on wet pavement though.

But ABS was not initially sold as a safety feature, it was a performance
enhancement.

Automakers were not sued out of existence
because they sold some cars that were safer than other cars.