On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 09:48:12 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
The Other Mike wrote:
I thought the ball idea rubbish. It doesn't work on a wheelbarrow, so
why is it suddenly a good idea on a vacuum cleaner?

OAP's that are ancient but still active enough to vacuum clean their
carpets love 'ball' Dysons like the lightweight DC24, as they are far
easier to push around and easy to carry up and down the stairs.

Lightweight simply means it will break easier.

Over 4 years use, and I would suspect nearly every day, nothing broken. As the
'operator' has had multiple joint replacements they probably woiuldn't be able
to use *any* of the alternatives.


--

On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 19:32:46 -0400, S Viemeister
wrote:

I had an old one, given to me by my mother-in-law over 30 years ago. It
was used several times a week, for bread, mincing, shredding, etc. It's
never needed service, although I have had to replace the dough hook a
couple of times - no matter what anyone says, they should NOT go in the
dishwasher...

The mixer or the dough hook?


--

On 8/29/2012 7:13 PM, The Other Mike wrote:
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 19:32:46 -0400, S Viemeister
wrote:

I had an old one, given to me by my mother-in-law over 30 years ago. It
was used several times a week, for bread, mincing, shredding, etc. It's
never needed service, although I have had to replace the dough hook a
couple of times - no matter what anyone says, they should NOT go in the
dishwasher...

The mixer or the dough hook?


Yes.

On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 20:53:51 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

I've spent most of my working life selling cleaning machines & have
experience of every type of vacuum you could imagine - and some you
couldn't. Based on that experience Die Soons don't pick up very well
at all.

For a domestic machine they are near the top of the list and against a
bagged machine don't lose suction.

The biggest vacuum I've used was a semi-industrial one that Dad hired
when we wanted to remove 50+ years of accumulated dirt and dust before
boarding out the loft. Two motors, individually switched, they had to be
as turning both on together blew the plug top fuse. This thing would pick
up full sized bricks...

--
Cheers
Dave.

"Huge" wrote in message
...
On 2012-08-30, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 20:53:51 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

I've spent most of my working life selling cleaning machines & have
experience of every type of vacuum you could imagine - and some you
couldn't. Based on that experience Die Soons don't pick up very well
at all.

For a domestic machine they are near the top of the list and against a
bagged machine don't lose suction.

My Sebo doesn't lose suction.

Yes it does.
but not by much.
The bags last ages, mine is about three years old and I am on my 6th bag.
I prefer a vac where you don't have to empty it every day like you need to
with dysons.
The only issue is the vac gets heavier as the bag fills and it can hold a
kilo or three of dirt.

Richard Russell wrote on Aug 28, 2012:

On Aug 28, 7:14*pm, rbel wrote:
As a matter of interest where do Sebo appear in the ratings?

At the very top (94%).

Richard.
http://www.rtrussell.co.uk/


That's for upright vacuum cleaners. For cylinders Miele came top, just above
Numatic and Bosch

--
Mike Lane
UK North Yorkshire
mike_lane at mac dot com

On 30/08/2012 01:00, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 20:53:51 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

I've spent most of my working life selling cleaning machines & have
experience of every type of vacuum you could imagine - and some you
couldn't. Based on that experience Die Soons don't pick up very well
at all.

For a domestic machine they are near the top of the list and against a
bagged machine don't lose suction.

The point here is what suction do the machines start out with?

I reckon a Henry with a half full bag would still out perform a Die Soon.

The biggest vacuum I've used was a semi-industrial one that Dad hired
when we wanted to remove 50+ years of accumulated dirt and dust before
boarding out the loft. Two motors, individually switched, they had to be
as turning both on together blew the plug top fuse. This thing would pick
up full sized bricks...



--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On Thu, 30 Aug 2012 09:28:44 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

For a domestic machine they are near the top of the list and against a
bagged machine don't lose suction.

The point here is what suction do the machines start out with?

I reckon a Henry with a half full bag would still out perform a Die
Soon.

Well having actually owned a Henry and a DC04 the DC04 has more suction
than the Henry even with a brand new bag in the Henry. Even the Earlex
wet 'n dry has more suction than the Henry(*), has a capacity at least
double the Henry and costs half as much and will do wet if required.

(*) When the filter is clean, plaster or wood sanding dust will clog it
but will also clog the bag in the Henry. Henry bags aren't reuseable with
a fair bit of faffing about. ie no clip holding an end closed so they can
be emptied.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Aug 29, 6:41*pm, Richard Russell wrote:

As far as unreliability is concerned I haven't personally found that
to be the case, but I accept that a sample of size of 4 is far too
small to conclude anything meaningful.

I've just bought my fourth Henry(ish). Apart from one lost in a
burglary, they're all still working. Two have lasted over ten years so
far. The only repairs have been new filters and one new hose where
someone drove over it. One caught fire(!) and apart from a burned
filter, it survived.

Parents went through two Dysons within a year.

On Aug 30, 10:13*am, "Dave Liquorice"
wrote:
Even the Earlex
wet 'n dry has more suction than the Henry(*), has a capacity at least
double the Henry and costs half as much and will do wet if required.

I never use my Earlex wet. The filter rots a week afterwards.
Otherwise it's a decent workshop vac.

The vacuum I have most of is the Aldi fireplace emptier (three of
those). Tin bucket and decent build quality, it's excellent for
building into a router table or bandsaw as per-machine dust
collection, especially if you give it a cyclone up front. Maybe a bit
noisy for bandsaws.

In article
,
Andy Dingley wrote:
I never use my Earlex wet. The filter rots a week afterwards.
Otherwise it's a decent workshop vac.

On my ancient Rowenta W&D, you remove the bag and filter before using it
wet. It has a float which prevents water getting into the actual motor.
Why would you need a filter when lifting water?

--
*Bigamy is having one wife too many - monogamy is the same

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 29/08/2012 11:16, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
wrote:
Indeed. Whenever I've read one of their reports about something I feel I
know something about I've come away wondering whether they really know
their stuff or not. Almost like their reviewers are not experts in any
particular field, but merely 'generally pretty knowledgeable' about a
variety of subjects.

Sounds like you've not read the full reports - merely a summary.

This has undermined my faith and confidence in them in fields I know
nothing/little about, and it's not like I have any reason to be cynical
about them - I want a source of recommendations I can trust but I can't
help but feel that Which? is not it.

'Experts' on all sorts of hobby things like Hi-Fi or cameras or even cars
are unlikely to agree among themselves. As so much is down to personal
preference. So all Which attempts to do is guide those who simply want a
good value product which does what it says on the tin.

I've bought several of their 'best buys' over the years and never been
disappointed. But these are generally household goods I'm not particularly
interested in - other than them doing what they're meant to reliably. And
vacuum cleaners definitely fit this group. I don't much care what it looks
like, within reason.


The only current Which? Best Buys for vacs are Miele (14 models), Bosch
(3), Dyson (7) and Sebo (1).

Rob

"Tim Streater" wrote in message
...


Ah, you prefer a vac that doesn't pick up very much, then. If the Dyson
needs emptying, it's because it's picked a lot of stuff up, geddit?
Simples!

I prefer one that picks stuff up and doesn't then spread it about.

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher writes:
sheesh. My mums constellation did 20 years with NO service costs at all.

I still have my parents one, and still works fine - over 50 years
and never serviced, although very rarely used now.

What did tend to happen to these is that the various seals gradually
started leaking, resulting in progressively less suction over time,
but that hasn't happened to this one, and it still hovers nicely
like a hovercraft. At some point, a new hose was bought, because I
have two of them, one having been repaired.

The only thing wrong is the cable grommet and strain relief is made
of some type of rubber which is going crumbly, but that's just
cosmetic. It has the odd scratch and dent, some due to myself and
my brother using it as a large frictionless puck to propel up and
down the parents long hallway when we were children.

Even used to empty the bags and reuse em

You can still get them, and the motor inlet filter sheets, or at
least you could quite recently.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
But as I keep on saying, 'experts' with these hobby things very rarely
agree about anything - leaving a non expert confused.

It's not a question of them "agreeing". In the course of the discussions
the newbie can learn what the salient points are and make their own mind
up based on what suits them.

That may be the case for some, but others will simply be confused and want
more positive guidance. The sort Which provides.

I've bought several of their 'best buys' over the years and never
been disappointed. But these are generally household goods I'm not
particularly interested in - other than them doing what they're
meant to reliably. And vacuum cleaners definitely fit this group.
I don't much care what it looks like, within reason.

Neither do I. To me, the Dysons look fugly, unlike the sleek sexy
models you get from most vendors. However I'm uninfluenced by that,
just as I'd never buy B&O hi-fi.

B&O usually performs perfectly adequately,

Not in my book it doesn't.

I don't know much about their present stuff, but it was certainly once the
case. I recently repaired one of their '70s tuner/amps and it performed
extremely well.

--
*Preserve wildlife - Go pickle a squirrel*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 11:24:05 AM UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

Indeed. Whenever I've read one of their reports about something I feel I
know something about I've come away wondering whether they really know
their stuff or not.

Sounds like you've not read the full reports - merely a summary.

To be fair, that might be the case. As I am not a subscriber that could well be all I have had visibility of.

Mathew

On Aug 30, 11:24*am, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
In article
,
* *Andy Dingley wrote:

I never use my Earlex wet. The filter rots a week afterwards.
Otherwise it's a decent workshop vac.

On my ancient Rowenta W&D,

I've got one of those too. Ought to scrap it though - noisiest vacuum
I've ever had. It used to run the cyclone in my router table (now
replaced by an Aldi) and I could hear it over the router.

you remove the bag and filter before using it
wet. It has a float which prevents water getting into the actual motor.
Why would you need a filter when lifting water?

For lifting water I have pumps. I use a wet vacuum to lift stripped
wallpaper, manky leaves or other damp solids. These need a filter too.

In article , The Medway Handyman
writes

Like buy a new Henry?

:-) I think a beer or two takes priority.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

On 30/08/2012 11:24, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article
,
Andy Dingley wrote:
I never use my Earlex wet. The filter rots a week afterwards.
Otherwise it's a decent workshop vac.

On my ancient Rowenta W&D, you remove the bag and filter before using it
wet. It has a float which prevents water getting into the actual motor.
Why would you need a filter when lifting water?

To stop any muck in the water contaminating the float & preventing it
from shutting.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

wrote in message
...
On Wednesday, August 29, 2012 11:24:05 AM UTC+1, Dave Plowman (News)
wrote:

Indeed. Whenever I've read one of their reports about something I feel
I
know something about I've come away wondering whether they really know
their stuff or not.

Sounds like you've not read the full reports - merely a summary.

To be fair, that might be the case. As I am not a subscriber that could
well be all I have had visibility of.

I used to read Which? many years ago.
Once you got to know an area well you realised the Which? reports just
glossed over the subject and you couldn't rely on their recommendations.
I don't think they have changed much since.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote:
But as I keep on saying, 'experts' with these hobby things very rarely
agree about anything - leaving a non expert confused.

It's not a question of them "agreeing". In the course of the discussions
the newbie can learn what the salient points are and make their own mind
up based on what suits them.

That may be the case for some, but others will simply be confused and want
more positive guidance. The sort Which provides.

I've bought several of their 'best buys' over the years and never
been disappointed. But these are generally household goods I'm not
particularly interested in - other than them doing what they're
meant to reliably. And vacuum cleaners definitely fit this group.
I don't much care what it looks like, within reason.
Neither do I. To me, the Dysons look fugly, unlike the sleek sexy
models you get from most vendors. However I'm uninfluenced by that,
just as I'd never buy B&O hi-fi.
B&O usually performs perfectly adequately,

Not in my book it doesn't.

I don't know much about their present stuff, but it was certainly once the
case. I recently repaired one of their '70s tuner/amps and it performed
extremely well.


A tested B & O once. Conclusion? Absolutely bog standard not very good
circuit, dressed up in a fancy styled box and with average to crap speakers.

Mind you leak and Quad* were no better at that time. You needed to go to
unheard of companies like ARCAM to do better.

* The electrostatics were however pretty nice.


--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

In article ,
The Medway Handyman writes:
On 30/08/2012 01:00, Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 20:53:51 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

I've spent most of my working life selling cleaning machines & have
experience of every type of vacuum you could imagine - and some you
couldn't. Based on that experience Die Soons don't pick up very well
at all.

For a domestic machine they are near the top of the list and against a
bagged machine don't lose suction.

The point here is what suction do the machines start out with?

I reckon a Henry with a half full bag would still out perform a Die Soon.

A Henry with a plaster chaser lasts less than 10 seconds before
it's clogged so the airflow has dropped too low to consume the
dust.

Dyson is the only thing I've found that can consume the dust from
a plaster chaser without failing, and subject to pauses for
emptying, just keeps right on going. And not a scrap of dust in
the post-motor filter, but as it filters down to 50 microns
whilst maintaining full flow (something which no other domestic
cleaner comes close to, and is completely impossible with a bag
which would fit in a domestic cleaner, and impossible with a
bag of any size for any length of time), that's what I'd expect.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In article ,
The Natural Philosopher writes:
Alan Braggins wrote:

Also, they're distinctive and colorful so stand out even when there are
other things around, and they are overpriced^W expensive enough to be worth
breaking for parts instead of just throwing the whole thing in a skip,
so show up more at tips where stuff is segregated.

But "Dyson owners are more likely to be fashion victims than users of
other makes" isn't really a good reason to buy them....

They are designed to be attractive to women. Not to work.
Their sole advantage is that even a woman can tell when one needs emptying.

Funny, but that's wrong on both counts.
It's actually the bloke who normally chooses and buys the vacuum
cleaner (even if he'll never use it). Secondly, most of the problems
with Dysons are caused by the user not emptying it when it needs
emptying.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

In article ,
writes:
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012 9:06:54 PM UTC+1, Tim Streater wrote:
Well you might be influenced by Which reports. I'm not. Their typical
in-depth analysis of, say, DSLRs, usually says: "Takes great photos" or the
equivalent.
Indeed. Whenever I've read one of their reports about something I feel I know something about I've come away wondering whether they really know their stuff or not. Almost like their reviewers are not experts in any particular field, but merely 'generally pretty knowledgeable' about a variety of subjects.
This has undermined my faith and confidence in them in fields I know nothing/little about, and it's not like I have any reason to be cynical about them - I want a source of recommendations I can trust but I can't help but feel that Which? is not it.

+1

Actually, I had to do a double-take and check the From: field, as I'm
pretty sure I've written exactly the same, but didn't recall doing so
recently!

My parents get it, and sometimes thrust some review they think I'll
find interesting under my nose, but I'm left cringing as they invarably
completely miss the key points. I used to enjoy reading the two back
cover readers legal issues they took up each month, but I think that
section went many years ago.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 14:00:46 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Mike Tomlinson wrote:
Yes, it sucks but won't pick up.

DC07. Loads of suction at the wand hose and underneath at the flexible
hose that connects to the shoe. Beater bar rotates fine.

Just won't pick anything up. Googled and this seems to be a common
fault.

Any ideas please?

they don't cope very well with dust and fluff. Clogs em up. Strip and clean.

Dysons look really pretty (if you like Fischer-Price), but appear to
be useless. Like WAGs.

MM

In article , Andrew Gabriel
writes

Secondly, most of the problems
with Dysons are caused by the user not emptying it when it needs
emptying.

Frequent filter changes are also a very good idea. Dirt cheap off ebay.

--
(\_/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

In article ,
Mike Tomlinson wrote:
Secondly, most of the problems
with Dysons are caused by the user not emptying it when it needs
emptying.

Frequent filter changes are also a very good idea. Dirt cheap off ebay.

Which somewhat negates the benefit of no bag.

--
*To steal ideas from *one* person is plagiarism; from many, research*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Aug 31, 9:52*am, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
In article , Andrew Gabriel
writes

Secondly, most of the problems
with Dysons are caused by the user not emptying it when it needs
emptying.

Frequent filter changes are also a very good idea. *Dirt cheap off ebay..

No need for replacements with our bagless VAX as they are washable.
Excellent customer service too.

MBQ

On Aug 31, 12:20*pm, "Man at B&Q" wrote:
No need for replacements with our bagless VAX as they are washable.

The DC24 filters are washable too (but it rarely gets done, with no
obvious loss of performance); I assume that is true of all current
Dysons. The DC03 filters are supposed to be replaced occasionally but
I don't think I've ever done so, again with no apparent deleterious
effect. I suspect the filters have little to do unless you try to
suck up something inappropriate.

Suggesting that changing filters is somehow comparable with changing a
bag is another example of the nonsense being spouted by the Dyson-
haters.

Richard.
http://www.rtrussell.co.uk/

In article
,
Richard Russell wrote:
Suggesting that changing filters is somehow comparable with changing a
bag is another example of the nonsense being spouted by the Dyson-
haters.

Indeed. Changing a bag (on a well designed machine) is more like emptying
the canister on a Dyson. Except that the dust stays in the bag...

--
*Stable Relationships Are For Horses. *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Aug 31, 1:37*pm, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:
Indeed. Changing a bag (on a well designed machine) is more like emptying
the canister on a Dyson. Except that the dust stays in the bag...

It used to on Dysons too. Whatever plastic they used was a near
perfect insulator, so it retained a huge static charge. When you
opened them to empty them, dust stuck all over them, outside and all.

On 31/08/2012 13:06, Richard Russell wrote:
On Aug 31, 12:20 pm, "Man at B&Q" wrote:
No need for replacements with our bagless VAX as they are washable.

The DC24 filters are washable too (but it rarely gets done, with no
obvious loss of performance); I assume that is true of all current
Dysons. The DC03 filters are supposed to be replaced occasionally but
I don't think I've ever done so, again with no apparent deleterious
effect. I suspect the filters have little to do unless you try to
suck up something inappropriate.

Suggesting that changing filters is somehow comparable with changing a
bag is another example of the nonsense being spouted by the Dyson-
haters.

Richard.
http://www.rtrussell.co.uk/

Are you from the Dyson Liberation Front?

:-)


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

In article ,
The Medway Handyman wrote:
Suggesting that changing filters is somehow comparable with changing a
bag is another example of the nonsense being spouted by the Dyson-
haters.


Are you from the Dyson Liberation Front?

Why is anyone who doesn't regard the Dyson as the answer to world problems
a Dyson hater?

I don't give a stuff if others hate every individual domestic appliance I
chose to buy.

When I talked about a Dyson cult, I was joking. Not so sure now.

--
*If a pig loses its voice, is it disgruntled?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Medway Handyman wrote:
Suggesting that changing filters is somehow comparable with changing a
bag is another example of the nonsense being spouted by the Dyson-
haters.

Are you from the Dyson Liberation Front?

Why is anyone who doesn't regard the Dyson as the answer to world problems
a Dyson hater?


Because te cult of Dyson will stuff them down your throat in a very
'Royal Nonesuch*' way which leads to a surfeit of dysons and acute
dysonsitis.

I don't give a stuff if others hate every individual domestic appliance I
chose to buy.

When I talked about a Dyson cult, I was joking. Not so sure now.


Its the same with anything that gets huge exposure on TV. I've seen the
same with Apple, and Windows.

People don't want to admit they were actually conned by smart
advertising into buying something very ordinary, so they have to affirm
their choice was really about the quality and excellence of the product,
by telling everybody else. The more people can be persuaded to buy the
nasty piece of consumer ****, the less isolated and stupid they feel*

Think Ratner***. Before the head of it told everybody they were idiots
buying complete crap they were happy consumers thinking they had top
bling at affordable prices. Afterwards no one would buy exactly the same
products at exactly the same price, for anythng.


*http://www.gradesaver.com/the-advent...uide/section5/
** 'harry'
*** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Ratner

--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

In article ,
Mike Tomlinson writes:
In article , Andrew Gabriel
writes

Secondly, most of the problems
with Dysons are caused by the user not emptying it when it needs
emptying.

Frequent filter changes are also a very good idea. Dirt cheap off ebay.

The filter only starts collecting dust when the container
overfills and there's no space for a cyclone to operate.

The pre-motor filters have all been washable for years,
even the replacements for the very first non washable one.

--
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

On 8/31/2012 2:18 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
People don't want to admit they were actually conned by smart
advertising into buying something very ordinary ...

That's because we haven't been. As I said, my DC01 was bought at the
recommendation of a relly, and the DC35 at the recommendation of
another. And we don't see ads here, SWMBO turns 'em off.

Same here.

If we'd thought the first Dyson was crap or even just ordinary, unlikely
we'd have bought another.

Indeed.

Tim Streater wrote:
In article ,
The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
The Medway Handyman wrote:
Suggesting that changing filters is somehow comparable with
changing a
bag is another example of the nonsense being spouted by the Dyson-
haters.
Are you from the Dyson Liberation Front?
Why is anyone who doesn't regard the Dyson as the answer to world
problems
a Dyson hater?

Because te cult of Dyson will stuff them down your throat in a very
'Royal Nonesuch*' way which leads to a surfeit of dysons and acute
dysonsitis.

I don't give a stuff if others hate every individual domestic
appliance I
chose to buy.
When I talked about a Dyson cult, I was joking. Not so sure now.

Its the same with anything that gets huge exposure on TV. I've seen
the same with Apple, and Windows.

People don't want to admit they were actually conned by smart
advertising into buying something very ordinary ...

That's because we haven't been.

well, you would say that wouldnt you?


As I said, my DC01 was bought at the
recommendation of a relly, and the DC35 at the recommendation of
another. And we don't see ads here, SWMBO turns 'em off.


Exactly. so. You rellys were conned and passed the virus on along.


If we'd thought the first Dyson was crap or even just ordinary, unlikely
we'd have bought another.

Thats what all the Ratners customers said too.

"You fink we is stpopid or summink, we wouldn't have gone back and spemt
£330 on the earrings if the ring had been crap"




--
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc-ra-cy) €“ a system of government where the least capable to
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a
diminishing number of producers.

Talking of Dysons, the latest adverts talk about them being
"digital". How the H??? can a vacuum cleaner be digital? It's
an electric motor, that's conversion of electical energy into
motion energy, ie /electrical/, *NOT* electronic, and very
definitely not digital electronic.

JGH

wrote:

Talking of Dysons, the latest adverts talk about them being
"digital". How the H??? can a vacuum cleaner be digital?

Marketing bollox

http://dyson.co.uk/Vacuumcleaners/DDM.aspx

On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 20:46:44 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:


Sebo uprights are the mutts nuts.

Excellent bits of kit.
--
rbel