On Sat, 24 Sep 2016 21:21:50 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"James Wilkinson" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 23 Sep 2016 20:25:19 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 23/09/2016 19:16, James Wilkinson wrote:
On Fri, 23 Sep 2016 09:22:08 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 23/09/2016 08:59, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 23/09/16 08:17, Bod wrote:


Had our Dyson coming up to 13 years and still works as good as new.

Well that's not a particularly high bar to clear is it?

No, but it makes James Wilkinson's claim that they fall to bits not
true.

I know about 10 people locally with Dysons. 9 of them said they're ****
and that important parts fell off or seized up (usually the motor or
clutch fails catastrophically). The 1 that likes them has a husband who
is constantly repairing it! I saw it once, it was covered in tape and
clamps to hold it together. And it's only 4 years old.

How strange that everyone here has had the opposite effect.

I think all the people I know have kids and pets and use them a lot. But
normal vacuums for a fifth of the price don't wear out like that.

And it's you that's unusual: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3688983.stm

"The Dyson vacuum cleaner - famous for its bagless technology - is the
least reliable of all upright and cylinder brands, a consumer magazine has
said.
A quarter of 5,100 upright vacuum cleaner owners surveyed by Which? failed
to give their Dyson an all-clear on performance after six years' use.

Nearly a fifth of Dyson cylinder users also reported issues.

Despite the problems, Dyson owners remain the most likely to recommend the
machine to a friend, Which? reported."

So like Apple users, they have lots of problems

Far fewer problems than android users in fact.

In spades with Samsung users.

and just keep on coming back.

Because they have fewer problems than the alternatives do.

But when you spend three times as much replacing it....

Morons....

Corse you didn't end up with 4 dysons yourself, eh ?

I got them free. If something is free I don't care how unreliable it is.

--
In 1961, 87-year-old Harry Meadows, a resident at the Haslemere home for the elderly in Great Yarmouth, England, achieved late-in-life notoriety when he accidentally killed another 3 residents of his care home by dressing up as the grim reaper and peering through the residents' lounge window whilst holding a scythe.

The year before Harry's performance, another resident of the same home, the then 81-year-old Gladys Elton, for reasons best known to herself, had conceived the idea of performing a striptease for her fellow residents of the home; unfortunately such was the effect of Elton's performance that it caused the death of one resident by way of a cardiac arrest and the treatment for shock of five other residents.