|
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 13:18:01 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy
wrote: krw wrote in : On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 17:45:08 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , says... krw wrote in news:opqmva14cik686vlr9h8ogbaunome4m4fg@ 4ax.com: Exactly right. I read the patents with a reasonably trained eye and don't see how Bosch can win but I'd never bet on the outcome of any civil case in the US courts. Agreed. Unless the court decides SawStop's patents are overly broad ("a woodworking machine that retracts a cutting tool by pivoting" is pretty damn broad), and invalidates them completely, which is possible but not too likely. Or perhaps Bosch has discovered prior art that would invalidate the patents. Perhaps but the courtroom is an expensive place to show it off. If they really had something, they'd go to Gass and get a cheap license in trade for burying the prior art. Simply ignoring a patent is a very risky proposition. Bosch may think they can afford it, though. Prior art is a good point, tho. The Patent Office doesn't look for prior art any longer before issuing a patent (they haven't done for decades), so it's not uncommon for someone to find it and challenge a patent on that ground. Not usually but there is a chance to show the USPTO prior art before a patent is granted. The point is that the normal way of dealing with this is to go to the patent holder with prior art in hand and negotiate a license. That usually does the trick because once that prior art is out of the bag it's out for everyone. It's in both parties interest to keep it out of court. Courts are expensive, in the best case and can mean the whole Magilla if things don't go so well. And we don't know what conversations Bosch and SawStop may have had. Perhaps Bosch did go to them with the prior art, and Gass said "you're full of it! That wouldn't hold up in court." And so Bosch decided to find out. Bosch could have sued to negate the patents, too. This way, they may end up with tripled damages. It's a big risk. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
|
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
"J. Clarke" wrote in
: (1) We do not know that Bosch did not try this. In fact I do not believe with know with any certainty that Bosch has not obtained a license from Sawstip. There is a suit filed against Bosch by SawStop in the Oregon courts (*). While it's certainly possible for a company to sue another that they have previously licensed, it's uncommon and unlikely to prevail. John (* Oregon does not, apparently, beleive in free access to public records, or else I'd quote the details) |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 06:41:44 -0400, "J. Clarke"
wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 13:18:01 +0000 (UTC), John McCoy wrote: krw wrote in : On Fri, 18 Sep 2015 17:45:08 -0400, "J. Clarke" wrote: In article , says... krw wrote in news:opqmva14cik686vlr9h8ogbaunome4m4fg@ 4ax.com: Exactly right. I read the patents with a reasonably trained eye and don't see how Bosch can win but I'd never bet on the outcome of any civil case in the US courts. Agreed. Unless the court decides SawStop's patents are overly broad ("a woodworking machine that retracts a cutting tool by pivoting" is pretty damn broad), and invalidates them completely, which is possible but not too likely. Or perhaps Bosch has discovered prior art that would invalidate the patents. Perhaps but the courtroom is an expensive place to show it off. If they really had something, they'd go to Gass and get a cheap license in trade for burying the prior art. Simply ignoring a patent is a very risky proposition. Bosch may think they can afford it, though. Prior art is a good point, tho. The Patent Office doesn't look for prior art any longer before issuing a patent (they haven't done for decades), so it's not uncommon for someone to find it and challenge a patent on that ground. Not usually but there is a chance to show the USPTO prior art before a patent is granted. The point is that the normal way of dealing with this is to go to the patent holder with prior art in hand and negotiate a license. (1) We do not know that Bosch did not try this. In fact I do not believe with know with any certainty that Bosch has not obtained a license from Sawstip. Since you put two ideas under one bullet, I'll separate them for you... 1a) We don't know whether they approached SawStop with what they consider prior art but we do know that if they did, it didn't impress SS much. 1b) Yes, we certainly do know that Bosch has not obtained a license from SawStop. If Bosch had obtained a license, SawStop would not have sued them. That makes no sense at all. (2) That it may be "the normal way of dealing with this" does not mean that doing so is mandatory. Why license something for which no license is actually needed? Again, with the run-on ideas... 2a) Of course it's not mandatory but courts are exceedingly expensive and unreliable. There is a reason things are done the way they are. 2b) A license is required if a patent is in force. Their only hope to come out of the situation without major financial losses is to win the court case totally. This is pretty rare since the USPTO is considered the expert on patents, deserved or not. That usually does the trick because once that prior art is out of the bag it's out for everyone. And this is a bad thing because? Do try to follow along. It's not a good thing for SawStop. It's not even a good thing for Bosch, if they can get a license cheap (or free). Patents limit competition, which is in their interest. Bosch may see invalidating the Sawstop patent as a public service. If that's the only alternative but only if. Remember how Mercedes-Benz handled their antiskid brake patent? They could have done like Gass and demanded huge licensing fees for it, but instead, since they saw it as having a major impact on highway safety, they licensed it to everyone at no charge. But Gass is not MB, quite obviously. It's in both parties interest to keep it out of court. Courts are expensive, in the best case and can mean the whole Magilla if things don't go so well. It's true that courts are expensive. However there is a long history of those with deep pockets using this fact to beat the crap out of those with shallower pockets. Last financials I can find show Sawstop with about 6 million in total sales. Bosch has about 16 billion in profits. Bosch is far far more capable of absorbing that expense than is Sawstop. OK, how much of their corporate profits are going to come from table saws? Are the executives willing to risk the expense of a court trial against the profits generated by one product? How do they pay this cost out of profits of a table saw over five years, especially considering that they're looking at treble damages. Not smart but it appears that's what's afoot. And we don't know what conversations Bosch and SawStop may have had. Perhaps Bosch did go to them with the prior art, and Gass said "you're full of it! That wouldn't hold up in court." And so Bosch decided to find out. Bosch could have sued to negate the patents, too. This way, they may end up with tripled damages. It's a big risk. For certain values of "big". If it amounts to three times Sawstop's total revenues then it's about 0.1 percent of Bosch's profits. Look at the risk/reward. The reward for Bosch is miniscule. The risk, large. They are taking on a pretty big risk for a couple of years in the market. Note that Bosch is privately held--they do not have to explain themselves to shareholders--if they choose to risk a tiny fraction of profits to swat an annoying fly, so be it. Perhaps but how is SawStop annoying them? Why now? I might agree more if they'd done it fifteen years ago. However they should have just bought the *******, waited until he stuck his hand in the cookie jar, and then fired him for cause. But maybe they tried and he was too stupid to sell. This might be a Ford vs Ferrari situation--Ford tried to buy Ferrari, Enzo told them to sod off, and so Henry wrote the engineers a blank check and told them to beat Ferrari on his own ground, and of course they did. Except Ferrari didn't have the patent on the internal combustion engine and wasn't up against the power of the federal government (and Goliath vs. David in courtroom full of technical illiterates. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
|
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/19/2015 4:44 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
-MIKE- wrote: Then you have cases in which a good, persuasive trial attorney performed in court well enough to convince the musically illiterate that one musical artist "stole" another artist's song. In the latter, most musicians would shake their heads and say, "There are only 12 notes on a piano and only so many ways to arrange them, so if you dissect a song enough you'll soon come to the conclusion that there hasn't been an original song written in 500 years." As evidenced by the conclusion (not a trial decision), that the Beatles ripped off Bethovan. The very same point was raised in the "discussions" that surrounded that whole thing. Anyone using a single note is copying some aspect of another artist. Do you think Beethoven had copywrites? Then there was ELO that had, IIRC, Roll Over Beethoven. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 2015-09-20 12:42 PM, Leon wrote:
On 9/19/2015 4:44 PM, Mike Marlow wrote: -MIKE- wrote: Then you have cases in which a good, persuasive trial attorney performed in court well enough to convince the musically illiterate that one musical artist "stole" another artist's song. In the latter, most musicians would shake their heads and say, "There are only 12 notes on a piano and only so many ways to arrange them, so if you dissect a song enough you'll soon come to the conclusion that there hasn't been an original song written in 500 years." As evidenced by the conclusion (not a trial decision), that the Beatles ripped off Bethovan. The very same point was raised in the "discussions" that surrounded that whole thing. Anyone using a single note is copying some aspect of another artist. Do you think Beethoven had copywrites? Then there was ELO that had, IIRC, Roll Over Beethoven. Roll Over Beethoven was a Beatles song, ELO did a remake of it. -- Froz... Quando omni flunkus, moritati |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/20/2015 5:41 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
Snip That usually does the trick because once that prior art is out of the bag it's out for everyone. And this is a bad thing because? Bosch may see invalidating the Sawstop patent as a public service. Remember how Mercedes-Benz handled their antiskid brake patent? They could have done like Gass and demanded huge licensing fees for it, but instead, since they saw it as having a major impact on highway safety, they licensed it to everyone at no charge. Does anyone know for a fact know what Gass asked for in license fees? Considering the fact that when other brand vehicles offered anti lock brakes that this option was offered mostly on the top of the line vehicles and at a pretty premium additional cost, there was plenty of wiggle room. And because it was an option the full expense was probably passed on directly the customer, maybe it also added to the cost of the base vehicle whether it as included or not. There are reports that Gass wanted too much for licensing but for an industry that only now is beginning to not go with status quo and offer this technology I would be willing to bet that they rejected Gass's offer more to keep him from proceeding and the good old boys club could continue to do what it was doing, turning out the same old technology that we had come to expect. Any deal may have qualified as too expensive. Letting competition in and watering down the field is too expensive. It was only after Gass produced his saw and introduced his safety features, including the use of a riving knife, that the competition started to improve their products as far as user safety is concerned. As what appears to have happened, not taking Gass's license deal, has probably been more costly. Delta is hardly in the business any more and not by the same people that owned them 10`15 years ago. Powermatic is still in business but owned by another company, the same as the one that owns Jet and a lot of Powermatic and Jet machines for a long time simply had different paint and stickers. I believe most American brands have had to restructure or sell to remain in the market. While paying Gass for his license may have been very costly and may have sunk some companies it was a mistake and a lesson on short sightedness. It would have been to Gass's advantage for his competition to remain viable so that he could profit from his licenses and maybe not even produce a saw. If your customers/license holders, are not selling saws, your are not selling licenses. I understood the licenses were offered as, per unit, sold with the technology. Fortunately the PM 2000 and their bandsaws appear to be unique, possibly some others. And fortunately I believe the quality has not suffered and most likely why they continue to probably be the strongest competition to SawStop. But then they, IIRC, were the one of the first, if not the first, American company to offer the riving knife. From what I have read SawStop has take more than the lions share of the market with their own saw. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/20/2015 11:57 AM, FrozenNorth wrote:
On 2015-09-20 12:42 PM, Leon wrote: On 9/19/2015 4:44 PM, Mike Marlow wrote: -MIKE- wrote: Then you have cases in which a good, persuasive trial attorney performed in court well enough to convince the musically illiterate that one musical artist "stole" another artist's song. In the latter, most musicians would shake their heads and say, "There are only 12 notes on a piano and only so many ways to arrange them, so if you dissect a song enough you'll soon come to the conclusion that there hasn't been an original song written in 500 years." As evidenced by the conclusion (not a trial decision), that the Beatles ripped off Bethovan. The very same point was raised in the "discussions" that surrounded that whole thing. Anyone using a single note is copying some aspect of another artist. Do you think Beethoven had copywrites? Then there was ELO that had, IIRC, Roll Over Beethoven. Roll Over Beethoven was a Beatles song, ELO did a remake of it. Really! Lesson learned. ;~) |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
"J. Clarke" wrote in
: And in fact I suspect that Ferrari helds a variety of patents relating to high performance engines. Which were of no relevance since Ford beat them with brute force and awfulness. I don't think I'd describe the GT40 as "brute force" and certainly not "awfulness". Awesomeness, maybe. What's interesting there is that, having been given a blank check by Henry Ford, his engineers took advantage to not only beat Ferrari at Le Mans, but also to fund Meyer-Drake to build an Indy engine (later sold to AJ and known as the Foyt-Ford); to fund Holman-Moody in NASCAR; and to fund Cosworth to build the DFV that dominated F1 for so long. John |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in
: On 9/20/2015 11:57 AM, FrozenNorth wrote: On 2015-09-20 12:42 PM, Leon wrote: Then there was ELO that had, IIRC, Roll Over Beethoven. Roll Over Beethoven was a Beatles song, ELO did a remake of it. Really! Lesson learned. ;~) Roll Over Beethoven is a Chuck Berry song. And of course Chuck Berry "copied" it from Johnny B Goode (just like ringin a bell), but since Berry was also the author of Johnny B Goode that wasn't a problem. John |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
|
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On Sunday, September 20, 2015 at 10:00:03 AM UTC-5, J. Clarke wrote:
Smacking self in forehead. Why, oh why do I go online when I'm having fits of insomnia. I dunno... For those of use that see one of these threads that is based on smut, rumor, hearsay, conjecture, conspiracy, pontificating based on Google research, mountains of faux legal expertise and all the other things that make them up, it provides a few minutes of entertainment. Sure, punishment for someone like you that wants to make a point. But not so bad for the home players. The sheer volume of conjecture and "knowledgeable" postulation that leads the other self appointed pundits to start the shredding process of one another they disagree with has to be recognized for some entertainment value. When it gets personal, it's time to get the popcorn. Now we get to see who has the best internet connection and searching skills. Internet-fu. Google-fu. Search-fu. Hearsay-fu. It gets old when people get huffy, get their feelings hurt, or can't believe others don't understand the gravity and value of their opinion. All part of the entertainment provided at no cost to you! Chomping on the corn over here... Robert |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/20/2015 5:37 PM, John McCoy wrote:
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in : On 9/20/2015 11:57 AM, FrozenNorth wrote: On 2015-09-20 12:42 PM, Leon wrote: Then there was ELO that had, IIRC, Roll Over Beethoven. Roll Over Beethoven was a Beatles song, ELO did a remake of it. Really! Lesson learned. ;~) Roll Over Beethoven is a Chuck Berry song. And of course Chuck Berry "copied" it from Johnny B Goode (just like ringin a bell), but since Berry was also the author of Johnny B Goode that wasn't a problem. John How can that be? Wasn't Chuck Berry before Beethoven? ;~) |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
"J. Clarke" wrote in
: In article , says... "J. Clarke" wrote in : And in fact I suspect that Ferrari helds a variety of patents relating to high performance engines. Which were of no relevance since Ford beat them with brute force and awfulness. I don't think I'd describe the GT40 as "brute force" and certainly not "awfulness". Awesomeness, maybe. Ferrari won with small displacement and lots of cylinders. Henry just stuck a NASCAR 427 in the thing,. That's actually a condemnation of Ferrari's engineering. For a long endurance race, a large, low-revving engine is more likely to be durable. Using the largest engine the rules allowed was intelligent engineering. The same idea was used by Jaguar many years later, when they used a turbo V6 for the short races, and the big V12 for Le Mans. As for NASCAR, all the automakers at the time backed NASCAR teams. Your understanding of NASCAR history is somewhat lacking. John |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
In article ,
says... "J. Clarke" wrote in : In article , says... "J. Clarke" wrote in : And in fact I suspect that Ferrari helds a variety of patents relating to high performance engines. Which were of no relevance since Ford beat them with brute force and awfulness. I don't think I'd describe the GT40 as "brute force" and certainly not "awfulness". Awesomeness, maybe. Ferrari won with small displacement and lots of cylinders. Henry just stuck a NASCAR 427 in the thing,. That's actually a condemnation of Ferrari's engineering. For a long endurance race, a large, low-revving engine is more likely to be durable. Using the largest engine the rules allowed was intelligent engineering. The same idea was used by Jaguar many years later, when they used a turbo V6 for the short races, and the big V12 for Le Mans. As for NASCAR, all the automakers at the time backed NASCAR teams. Your understanding of NASCAR history is somewhat lacking. Perhaps. Living memory is often at variance with book learning. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
|
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
|
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
J. Clarke wrote:
In article , says... J. Clarke wrote: Perhaps. Living memory is often at variance with book learning. That's kind of funny. It's clear you do not know John or understand anything about him. I won't bother to instruct you in how badly you just made yourself look - I'll just let that happen naturally. I don't know who he is and I don't care who he is and quite honestly I neither know nor care who you are either. Yeah - that's fine by me. Judging by the number of people you manage to insult and get into arguments with here, I figure I'm in some pretty good company in hearing you express your feelings. -- -Mike- |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
"J. Clarke" wrote in
: In article , says... "J. Clarke" wrote in : As for NASCAR, all the automakers at the time backed NASCAR teams. Your understanding of NASCAR history is somewhat lacking. Perhaps. Living memory is often at variance with book learning. Yeah, memory is a tricky thing. I'm guessing you're thinking NASCAR of the 70's more than the 60's. After the 1955 Le Mans disaster, all the automakers agreed to get out of racing. All of them then pretty quickly started supporting teams under the table, but for several years there was no official backing of NASCAR teams. Then in the early 60's Plymouth started backing Petty, and as noted upthread, Ford started funding Holman-Moody. GM stayed out of official involvement in NASCAR until 1970. John |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
In article ,
says... "J. Clarke" wrote in : In article , says... "J. Clarke" wrote in : As for NASCAR, all the automakers at the time backed NASCAR teams. Your understanding of NASCAR history is somewhat lacking. Perhaps. Living memory is often at variance with book learning. Yeah, memory is a tricky thing. I'm guessing you're thinking NASCAR of the 70's more than the 60's. You're probably right. I would have been around 11 when Ford first won LeMans. After the 1955 Le Mans disaster, all the automakers agreed to get out of racing. All of them then pretty quickly started supporting teams under the table, but for several years there was no official backing of NASCAR teams. Then in the early 60's Plymouth started backing Petty, and as noted upthread, Ford started funding Holman-Moody. GM stayed out of official involvement in NASCAR until 1970. John |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/20/2015 11:21 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
Look at the risk/reward. The reward for Bosch is miniscule. I think you grossly underestimate the public relations value of "beat the crap out of that Sawstop asshole and made the technology freely available for everybody". I like this idea, unlikely as it is. I would rather cut my arm off than buy anything from that Sawstop asshole. If Bosch wins, my next saw will be a Bosch. Chances are good I'll be well over 100 years old before I wear out my current saws that depend solely on user for safety. If I ever cut myself, which gets more likely as I age, I'll simply have to sue myself... -- Jack Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life. http://jbstein.com |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/23/2015 7:55 AM, Jack wrote:
On 9/20/2015 11:21 AM, J. Clarke wrote: Look at the risk/reward. The reward for Bosch is miniscule. I think you grossly underestimate the public relations value of "beat the crap out of that Sawstop asshole and made the technology freely available for everybody". I like this idea, unlikely as it is. I would rather cut my arm off than buy anything from that Sawstop asshole. If Bosch wins, my next saw will be a Bosch. Chances are good I'll be well over 100 years old before I wear out my current saws that depend solely on user for safety. If I ever cut myself, which gets more likely as I age, I'll simply have to sue myself... Well Jack, you are of the persuasion that makes emotional decisions rather than rational, I strongly suspected that. Not saying that there is anything wrong with that but leaving emotion out of the decision process typically makes for better decision making. And that is often hard to do. When I read your comments, I'll try to remember that. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/23/2015 9:04 AM, Leon wrote:
On 9/23/2015 7:55 AM, Jack wrote: On 9/20/2015 11:21 AM, J. Clarke wrote: Look at the risk/reward. The reward for Bosch is miniscule. I think you grossly underestimate the public relations value of "beat the crap out of that Sawstop asshole and made the technology freely available for everybody". I like this idea, unlikely as it is. I would rather cut my arm off than buy anything from that Sawstop asshole. If Bosch wins, my next saw will be a Bosch. Chances are good I'll be well over 100 years old before I wear out my current saws that depend solely on user for safety. If I ever cut myself, which gets more likely as I age, I'll simply have to sue myself... Well Jack, you are of the persuasion that makes emotional decisions rather than rational, I strongly suspected that. Not saying that there is anything wrong with that but leaving emotion out of the decision process typically makes for better decision making. And that is often hard to do. When I read your comments, I'll try to remember that. Everyone one has emotions. In this case, you can call it emotions, I'll call it principles. That "Sawstop asshole" tried to get the government to require every saw manufacturer to license his crap. That to me is an underhanded way to make a buck, not surprising for a lawyer. My emotions tell me the first one to cut off a finger and sue Sawstop for every penny they have would make my day. My principles tell me not to support an asshole, and, after almost 60 years of safely using saws w/o his crap hanging on it I can probably live without it. Others may be better off with it, that's fine by me. Aside from that, if Bosch has a way to do the same thing w/o ruining your blade, not to mention a $100 mechanism you need to buy from Goss, then I would buy that tech in my next saw, which will not likely happen until I'm well into my 100's. -- Jack Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life. http://jbstein.com |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/24/2015 8:52 AM, Jack wrote:
On 9/23/2015 9:04 AM, Leon wrote: On 9/23/2015 7:55 AM, Jack wrote: On 9/20/2015 11:21 AM, J. Clarke wrote: Look at the risk/reward. The reward for Bosch is miniscule. I think you grossly underestimate the public relations value of "beat the crap out of that Sawstop asshole and made the technology freely available for everybody". I like this idea, unlikely as it is. I would rather cut my arm off than buy anything from that Sawstop asshole. If Bosch wins, my next saw will be a Bosch. Chances are good I'll be well over 100 years old before I wear out my current saws that depend solely on user for safety. If I ever cut myself, which gets more likely as I age, I'll simply have to sue myself... Well Jack, you are of the persuasion that makes emotional decisions rather than rational, I strongly suspected that. Not saying that there is anything wrong with that but leaving emotion out of the decision process typically makes for better decision making. And that is often hard to do. When I read your comments, I'll try to remember that. Everyone one has emotions. Absolutely but if used to make decisions the result is a 50/50 chance that it is not a good one. In this case, you can call it emotions, I'll call it principles. I'll call it emotions. You are basing a decision on a product, not by the product, but by your feelings towards the inventor. And that's ok if you feel better making decisions that way. But for some one that might value your opinion on a product yours will not be based on fact if you let your emotions stand in the way of an honest evaluation of the product. It is important that I and others understand that. That "Sawstop asshole" tried to get the government to require every saw manufacturer to license his crap. That to me is an underhanded way to make a buck, not surprising for a lawyer. Welcome to the American way. At least he went about that in a legal way and in a way that was perfectly with in his rights. My emotions tell me the first one to cut off a finger and sue Sawstop for every penny they have would make my day. I think you are way too invested in wanting revenge for something that might have happened in the past but did not happen. While I understand your feelings towards Gass, it is unlikely that his insurance would not cover the loss and IIRC there are limitations to this type settlement. Again emotions interfering logical judgement with what is likely to really happen, if it happened. At least eight years in production and I don't think there has been a report of even a cut. It is likely that information would come up in a trial and the jury would probably favor the defendant rather than sacrifice ending a great safety feature on a good tool, if they took every penny. My principles tell me not to support an asshole, and, after almost 60 years of safely using saws w/o his crap hanging on it I can probably live without it. Others may be better off with it, that's fine by me. Your emotions have lead you to believe that Gass is an asshole. Have you met him? He might be a nice guy, not an ass hole. He did not do any thing wrong, that we know of, other than pursue promoting his product in a way that you apparently do not agree with. Ignorance is bliss. There is no telling how many products you use that have come to reality that affect you every day that yu don't know any thing about. Aside from that, if Bosch has a way to do the same thing w/o ruining your blade, not to mention a $100 mechanism you need to buy from Goss, then I would buy that tech in my next saw, which will not likely happen until I'm well into my 100's. Ok, again with the emotional exaggerations. I know the SS brake is under $70. for the single blade brake and under $90 for the dado brake. IIRC the Bosch tripping insert is approximately $80. But it is true that it can be used two times so the effect cost would be about half of what either SS brake costs. See, I'm using facts here so the it is easier to form a valid decision. Emotions do not care about facts of what the real decision process should be considering. And the assumption of the blade being destroyed is just that, an assumption. I have seen many pictures and demonstrations of a brake stopping a blade. Never have I seen a destroyed blade. I understand that it is not unusual for a blade to be resharpened, re-flattened, or repaired. IMHO the blade is more likely to need to be re-flattened than anything else. The brake is aluminum. I would not care to say how many times I have cut into my aluminum miter fence with not damage to the blade. And direct power is immediately disconnected from the blade as it droops down below the table surface so the brake does not have to harness the energy of the motor too. Now, would "I" have a blade repaired and reuse it? that has not happened yet and I don't have enough information to make that decision right now. If I were letting my emotions enter into that decision process I might cut my nose off to spite my face to bolster my thoughts on the whole subject. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 09:48:51 -0500
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: my thoughts on the whole subject. the amount of time you spend defending your tool purchases/choices is astonishing you do know that no one really cares but i think you should ask the respective manufacturers for some free stuff t-shirts, blades, spare parts, etc. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/24/2015 10:28 AM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 09:48:51 -0500 Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: my thoughts on the whole subject. the amount of time you spend defending your tool purchases/choices is astonishing Not really defending, that is unnecessary. I'm just pointing out facts. you do know that no one really cares Perhaps you do not but I get questioned about the Festool products quite often. So perhaps you are jumping to conclusions with out facts. but i think you should ask the respective manufacturers for some free stuff I'm not a mooch. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/24/2015 10:28 AM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 09:48:51 -0500 Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: you do know that no one really cares 70 responses by others at least 3 by you. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:20:16 -0500
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: Not really defending, that is unnecessary. I'm just pointing out facts. you have that thing that is opposite of buyer remorse forget what it is called Perhaps you do not but I get questioned about the Festool products i never get asked about festool products i do not even know what festool means quite often. So perhaps you are jumping to conclusions with out facts. a long slow jump of years reading internet discussions maybe if i said that people barely care it would be easier to accept I'm not a mooch. get on their payroll then if you have not already why go on and on for free when you can receive remunerations |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:24:17 -0500
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: 70 responses by others at least 3 by you. discussion is good but still no one really cares that is just human nature reading and discussing is one thing caring is another because that involves taking things to heart i like reading about your tools but i do not care beyond that if i win a festool i will post here and people will read it for whatever reason but they will not care and it will have zero impact on their life _ |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/24/2015 11:37 AM, Electric Comet wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:24:17 -0500 Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: 70 responses by others at least 3 by you. discussion is good but still no one really cares that is just human nature reading and discussing is one thing caring is another because that involves taking things to heart i like reading about your tools but i do not care beyond that if i win a festool i will post here and people will read it for whatever reason but they will not care and it will have zero impact on their life Oh, ok, that is sensible. FWIW there are some here that do buy products based on my reviews. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 09:48:51 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote: On 9/24/2015 8:52 AM, Jack wrote: On 9/23/2015 9:04 AM, Leon wrote: On 9/23/2015 7:55 AM, Jack wrote: On 9/20/2015 11:21 AM, J. Clarke wrote: Look at the risk/reward. The reward for Bosch is miniscule. I think you grossly underestimate the public relations value of "beat the crap out of that Sawstop asshole and made the technology freely available for everybody". I like this idea, unlikely as it is. I would rather cut my arm off than buy anything from that Sawstop asshole. If Bosch wins, my next saw will be a Bosch. Chances are good I'll be well over 100 years old before I wear out my current saws that depend solely on user for safety. If I ever cut myself, which gets more likely as I age, I'll simply have to sue myself... Well Jack, you are of the persuasion that makes emotional decisions rather than rational, I strongly suspected that. Not saying that there is anything wrong with that but leaving emotion out of the decision process typically makes for better decision making. And that is often hard to do. When I read your comments, I'll try to remember that. Everyone one has emotions. Absolutely but if used to make decisions the result is a 50/50 chance that it is not a good one. In this case, you can call it emotions, I'll call it principles. I'll call it emotions. You are basing a decision on a product, not by the product, but by your feelings towards the inventor. And that's ok if you feel better making decisions that way. But for some one that might value your opinion on a product yours will not be based on fact if you let your emotions stand in the way of an honest evaluation of the product. It is important that I and others understand that. Emotions? Perhaps but there are several companies I refuse to do business with because the way they do business is counter to my interests. Sony, for instance. I haven't bought anything with the Sony name on it since the rootkit debacle. Any company who would even consider such a thing gets crossed off my list. That "Sawstop asshole" tried to get the government to require every saw manufacturer to license his crap. That to me is an underhanded way to make a buck, not surprising for a lawyer. Welcome to the American way. At least he went about that in a legal way and in a way that was perfectly with in his rights. "Rights" and "right" are only close in spelling bees. My emotions tell me the first one to cut off a finger and sue Sawstop for every penny they have would make my day. I think you are way too invested in wanting revenge for something that might have happened in the past but did not happen. While I understand your feelings towards Gass, it is unlikely that his insurance would not cover the loss and IIRC there are limitations to this type settlement. Again emotions interfering logical judgement with what is likely to really happen, if it happened. At least eight years in production and I don't think there has been a report of even a cut. It is likely that information would come up in a trial and the jury would probably favor the defendant rather than sacrifice ending a great safety feature on a good tool, if they took every penny. My principles tell me not to support an asshole, and, after almost 60 years of safely using saws w/o his crap hanging on it I can probably live without it. Others may be better off with it, that's fine by me. Your emotions have lead you to believe that Gass is an asshole. Have you met him? He might bea nice guy, not an ass hole. He did not do any thing wrong, that we know of, other than pursue promoting his product in a way that you apparently do not agree with. Ignorance is bliss. There is no telling how many products you use that have come to reality that affect you every day that yu don't know any thing about. How many monopolies do I support? Dunno of any. Aside from that, if Bosch has a way to do the same thing w/o ruining your blade, not to mention a $100 mechanism you need to buy from Goss, then I would buy that tech in my next saw, which will not likely happen until I'm well into my 100's. Ok, again with the emotional exaggerations. I know the SS brake is under $70. for the single blade brake and under $90 for the dado brake. IIRC the Bosch tripping insert is approximately $80. But it is true that it can be used two times so the effect cost would be about half of what either SS brake costs. See, I'm using facts here so the it is easier to form a valid decision. Emotions do not care about facts of what the real decision process should be considering. And the assumption of the blade being destroyed is just that, an assumption. I have seen many pictures and demonstrations of a brake stopping a blade. Never have I seen a destroyed blade. I understand that it is not unusual for a blade to be resharpened, re-flattened, or repaired. IMHO the blade is more likely to need to be re-flattened than anything else. The brake is aluminum. I would not care to say how many times I have cut into my aluminum miter fence with not damage to the blade. And direct power is immediately disconnected from the blade as it droops down below the table surface so the brake does not have to harness the energy of the motor too. Now, would "I" have a blade repaired and reuse it? that has not happened yet and I don't have enough information to make that decision right now. If I were letting my emotions enter into that decision process I might cut my nose off to spite my face to bolster my thoughts on the whole subject. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 12:20:24 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet
wrote: On 9/24/2015 11:37 AM, Electric Comet wrote: On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:24:17 -0500 Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: 70 responses by others at least 3 by you. discussion is good but still no one really cares that is just human nature reading and discussing is one thing caring is another because that involves taking things to heart i like reading about your tools but i do not care beyond that if i win a festool i will post here and people will read it for whatever reason but they will not care and it will have zero impact on their life Oh, ok, that is sensible. FWIW there are some here that do buy products based on my reviews. You'd better hope you never meet my wife! ;-) |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
krw wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 09:48:51 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: On 9/24/2015 8:52 AM, Jack wrote: On 9/23/2015 9:04 AM, Leon wrote: On 9/23/2015 7:55 AM, Jack wrote: On 9/20/2015 11:21 AM, J. Clarke wrote: Look at the risk/reward. The reward for Bosch is miniscule. I think you grossly underestimate the public relations value of "beat the crap out of that Sawstop asshole and made the technology freely available for everybody". I like this idea, unlikely as it is. I would rather cut my arm off than buy anything from that Sawstop asshole. If Bosch wins, my next saw will be a Bosch. Chances are good I'll be well over 100 years old before I wear out my current saws that depend solely on user for safety. If I ever cut myself, which gets more likely as I age, I'll simply have to sue myself... Well Jack, you are of the persuasion that makes emotional decisions rather than rational, I strongly suspected that. Not saying that there is anything wrong with that but leaving emotion out of the decision process typically makes for better decision making. And that is often hard to do. When I read your comments, I'll try to remember that. Everyone one has emotions. Absolutely but if used to make decisions the result is a 50/50 chance that it is not a good one. In this case, you can call it emotions, I'll call it principles. I'll call it emotions. You are basing a decision on a product, not by the product, but by your feelings towards the inventor. And that's ok if you feel better making decisions that way. But for some one that might value your opinion on a product yours will not be based on fact if you let your emotions stand in the way of an honest evaluation of the product. It is important that I and others understand that. Emotions? Perhaps but there are several companies I refuse to do business with because the way they do business is counter to my interests. Sony, for instance. I haven't bought anything with the Sony name on it since the rootkit debacle. Any company who would even consider such a thing gets crossed off my list. That is ok IMHO, I will not do business in the foreseeable future with HP because of the problems I had with all 3 of their printers an their service. Yours and mine are valid reasons for making decisions. We were both actually affected. That "Sawstop asshole" tried to get the government to require every saw manufacturer to license his crap. That to me is an underhanded way to make a buck, not surprising for a lawyer. Welcome to the American way. At least he went about that in a legal way and in a way that was perfectly with in his rights. "Rights" and "right" are only close in spelling bees. My emotions tell me the first one to cut off a finger and sue Sawstop for every penny they have would make my day. I think you are way too invested in wanting revenge for something that might have happened in the past but did not happen. While I understand your feelings towards Gass, it is unlikely that his insurance would not cover the loss and IIRC there are limitations to this type settlement. Again emotions interfering logical judgement with what is likely to really happen, if it happened. At least eight years in production and I don't think there has been a report of even a cut. It is likely that information would come up in a trial and the jury would probably favor the defendant rather than sacrifice ending a great safety feature on a good tool, if they took every penny. My principles tell me not to support an asshole, and, after almost 60 years of safely using saws w/o his crap hanging on it I can probably live without it. Others may be better off with it, that's fine by me. Your emotions have lead you to believe that Gass is an asshole. Have you met him? He might bea nice guy, not an ass hole. He did not do any thing wrong, that we know of, other than pursue promoting his product in a way that you apparently do not agree with. Ignorance is bliss. There is no telling how many products you use that have come to reality that affect you every day that yu don't know any thing about. How many monopolies do I support? Dunno of any. How about the government you send your hard earned dollars to? :-) Aside from that, if Bosch has a way to do the same thing w/o ruining your blade, not to mention a $100 mechanism you need to buy from Goss, then I would buy that tech in my next saw, which will not likely happen until I'm well into my 100's. Ok, again with the emotional exaggerations. I know the SS brake is under $70. for the single blade brake and under $90 for the dado brake. IIRC the Bosch tripping insert is approximately $80. But it is true that it can be used two times so the effect cost would be about half of what either SS brake costs. See, I'm using facts here so the it is easier to form a valid decision. Emotions do not care about facts of what the real decision process should be considering. And the assumption of the blade being destroyed is just that, an assumption. I have seen many pictures and demonstrations of a brake stopping a blade. Never have I seen a destroyed blade. I understand that it is not unusual for a blade to be resharpened, re-flattened, or repaired. IMHO the blade is more likely to need to be re-flattened than anything else. The brake is aluminum. I would not care to say how many times I have cut into my aluminum miter fence with not damage to the blade. And direct power is immediately disconnected from the blade as it droops down below the table surface so the brake does not have to harness the energy of the motor too. Now, would "I" have a blade repaired and reuse it? that has not happened yet and I don't have enough information to make that decision right now. If I were letting my emotions enter into that decision process I might cut my nose off to spite my face to bolster my thoughts on the whole subject. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
Baxter wrote:
Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in : ... You are basing a decision on a product, not by the product, but by your feelings towards the inventor. Actually a resonable factor in one's decision. Environment, source, impact on others, etc are all important factors in any decision. Certainly reasonable to boycott a product based on an unethical manufacturer. That is an emotional decision and perfectly fine if that way of deciding which is best for you, I try to use facts about the product with out considering anything else. You are not buying the manufacturer, you should not consider that if you want to make the best educated decision on closing a product that best works for you. |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
Leon wrote:
Baxter wrote: Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote in : ... You are basing a decision on a product, not by the product, but by your feelings towards the inventor. Actually a resonable factor in one's decision. Environment, source, impact on others, etc are all important factors in any decision. Certainly reasonable to boycott a product based on an unethical manufacturer. That is an emotional decision and perfectly fine if that way of deciding which is best for you, I try to use facts about the product with out considering anything else. You are not buying the manufacturer, you should not consider that if you want to make the best educated decision on closing a product that best works for you. That reminds me of the "prisoners dilemma" (problem from game theory). |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/24/2015 7:03 PM, krw wrote:
On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 12:20:24 -0500, Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: On 9/24/2015 11:37 AM, Electric Comet wrote: On Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:24:17 -0500 Leon lcb11211@swbelldotnet wrote: 70 responses by others at least 3 by you. discussion is good but still no one really cares that is just human nature reading and discussing is one thing caring is another because that involves taking things to heart i like reading about your tools but i do not care beyond that if i win a festool i will post here and people will read it for whatever reason but they will not care and it will have zero impact on their life Oh, ok, that is sensible. FWIW there are some here that do buy products based on my reviews. You'd better hope you never meet my wife! ;-) LOL! But if I met your wife, she might want me to build something for her and then it would all even out. ;~) |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/24/2015 10:48 AM, Leon wrote:
On 9/24/2015 8:52 AM, Jack wrote: Everyone one has emotions. Absolutely but if used to make decisions the result is a 50/50 chance that it is not a good one. In this case, you can call it emotions, I'll call it principles. I'll call it emotions. You are basing a decision on a product, not by the product, but by your feelings towards the inventor. And that's ok if you feel better making decisions that way. But for some one that might value your opinion on a product yours will not be based on fact if you let your emotions stand in the way of an honest evaluation of the product. It is important that I and others understand that. Well, I partially agree with you, but my decision is not based solely on emotions (principles) I also know, for a fact, that I have been using table saws for going on 60 years with zero safety gadgets, and have not once nicked a finger, cut of a hand, or killed myself. There are 40,000 motor vehicle deaths in the US every year, and most of them could be prevented by simple crash cages, crash helmets and so on. I take my changes dying with cars, I reckon after 60 years of sawing, I'm not overly worried about loping off a pinkie. That "Sawstop asshole" tried to get the government to require every saw manufacturer to license his crap. That to me is an underhanded way to make a buck, not surprising for a lawyer. Welcome to the American way. At least he went about that in a legal way and in a way that was perfectly with in his rights. The American way is to make a better product, and they will come to your door. He made the product, then tried to force everyone to use it via government mandate. My principles tell me not to support an asshole, and, after almost 60 years of safely using saws w/o his crap hanging on it I can probably live without it. Others may be better off with it, that's fine by me. Your emotions have lead you to believe that Gass is an asshole. Have you met him? He might be a nice guy, not an ass hole. Actually, someone eles, (Clark?) called him an asshole, I just went with that. He did not do any thing wrong, that we know of, other than pursue promoting his product in a way that you apparently do not agree with. Yes, thus me agreeing with Clark that the guy is an asshole. Asshole is just a simple way of saying what I really think about him, and I don't really give a damn if he is the nicest, or the worst guy on the planet. Ignorance is bliss. There is no telling how many products you use that have come to reality that affect you every day that yu don't know any thing about. A principle is based on what you know, what I don't know, well, I don't know. Aside from that, if Bosch has a way to do the same thing w/o ruining your blade, not to mention a $100 mechanism you need to buy from Goss, then I would buy that tech in my next saw, which will not likely happen until I'm well into my 100's. Ok, again with the emotional exaggerations. I know the SS brake is under $70. for the single blade brake and under $90 for the dado brake. I always thought the brake was $70, I read your post somewhere that it was $90, so I rounded it off to $100 (with taxes?) So shoot me. IIRC the Bosch tripping insert is approximately $80. But it is true that it can be used two times so the effect cost would be about half of what either SS brake costs. See, I'm using facts here so the it is easier to form a valid decision. Emotions do not care about facts of what the real decision process should be considering. If I needed the tech, I would buy the Bosch simply on the fact it works, and is NOT Saw Stop. I might add that when the SS first came out, I looked at one at a Saw store show room and it looked like a nice saw. I wasn't in the market, so didn't buy one. I didn't really care all that much about the safety crap, just not a big concern for me then or now. I did like the overall fit and finish, much as I (emotionally) hate to admit it. And the assumption of the blade being destroyed is just that, an assumption. I read all over the place, including, I believe, from your very own keyboard that triggering the device destroys the blade. Considering the importance of a true running blade, I can readily see how this dramatic event would render a blade useless, and either in need of expensive repairs or replacement if not using the worlds most expensive saw blade. I understand that it is not unusual for a blade to be resharpened, re-flattened, or repaired. By "understand" I assume your mean you are making an assumption? If I were letting my emotions enter into that decision process I might cut my nose off to spite my face to bolster my thoughts on the whole subject. If you were a man of principle, you would not do business with someone that violates your principles, ie, an asshole. You don't mind his business tactics, I do, simple as that. -- Jack Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life. http://jbstein.com |
Bosch Reaxx Table Saw
On 9/25/2015 2:11 AM, Leon wrote:
krw wrote: How many monopolies do I support? Dunno of any. How about the government you send your hard earned dollars to? :-) Government monopoly is called socialism. You can't choose not to support it on principle. This is what SawStop tried to impose on the world. It is not, as you say, the American way. So now, my principles tell me to shoot the bird at Gass. -- Jack Add Life to your Days not Days to your Life. http://jbstein.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:53 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter