
James Dyson's vacuum cleaner required 5,127 prototypes: In Praise of Failure - acconrad
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/04/in-praise-of-failure/
======
alayne
I know the point is accepting the process of failure, but it reminds me of
Edison vs Tesla. Tesla supposedly said "If Edison had a needle to find in a
haystack, he would proceed at once with the diligence of the bee to examine
straw after straw until he found the object of his search. I was a sorry
witness of such doings, knowing that a little theory and calculation would
have saved him ninety per cent of his labor."

~~~
smanek
Edison: _Genius is one percent inspiration, ninety-nine percent perspiration._

Telsa: _If Mr. Edison had thought a bit more he wouldn't have to sweat so
much_

(full disclosure: I've never found an original source on the Tesla quote, so
it's probably apocryphal).

------
huhtenberg
> _it took 5,127 prototypes and 15 years to get it right_

This works out to 341 prototypes a year. I understand this is based on a true
story and it's probably a good vacuum cleaner, but - c'mon, give me a little
break here.

(edit)

Worth adding - I was buying a vacuum for myself not long ago and looked at
Dyson. Their marketing materials are full of exaggerations, inaccuracies and
half-truths. One of their central claims is that their vacuums "do not loose
suction". A reasonable question here is what happens when a dust canister
fills up? Does it keep sucking dust and ejecting it back into the air? They
also claim it is _the only_ cyclonic vacuum (followed by some fine print), and
this is simply not true.

All in all, it is really well marketed, but otherwise severly overpriced
vacuum of an average manufacturing quality (can't lift certain portable models
by their carrying handle, because some seal opens up and, ironically, they
loose suction) and it was designed by an interesting person. That's about it.

~~~
gamble
I would be curious to know if anyone here has had a good experience with
Dyson. The marketing woo, high price, and the flimsy, plasticky look of their
vacuums has always turned me off.

~~~
enko
I happened to need a new vacuum a few months ago, and I asked a professional
cleaner friend for her advice (don't laugh - it's a _very_ lucrative business
here in Sydney). She said, basically, Nilfisk or Miele, whichever's on sale.

I asked about Dyson since I'd also been at least somewhat impressed by their
marketing materials. The response was that while their performance is
reasonable in a light use context, they are not at all durable and their use
is unheard of in a commercial environment. They also have no commercial
products, which is a red flag because while a company's marketing might be
able to bamboozle consumers, the professionals are far less impressed with
glossy brochures and only concerned with consistent performance, reliability
and TCO. Nilfisk and Miele have commercial products.

That was pretty much "case closed" for my decision making process and I bought
a Nilfisk. YMMV.

~~~
retube
Yeah. I've always taken the same view. Dyson's are not used by comercial
cleaners _anywhere_. A big brand for pro cleaners is Henry. You can buy for a
£100. The suction is immense, they're super durable, you can get the head into
the smallest/lowest spaces and they don't really seem to lose suction that
i've noticed, even when the bag is jammed full.

------
daimyoyo
Every time someone pulls out that tired Edison quote I'm reminded of a
response Nikola Tesla gave when he heard it:

“If Edison had a needle to find in a haystack, he would proceed at once with
the diligence of the bee to examine straw after straw until he found the
object of his search. I was a sorry witness of such doings, knowing that a
little theory and calculation would have saved him ninety per cent of his
labor.”

While not giving up after the first time your idea doesn't work is vital, it's
equally important to avoid work when a little theory and math will save you
the trouble.

------
cstross
I suspect the "5,127 prototypes" figure covers the entire development cycle to
date, including 35 models and a highly successful business -- not 5,127
prototypes in his garden shed before the DC01 went on sale! (That'd be some
shed ...)

Lest we forget, these days Dyson has a research, design and development centre
with 350 engineers working for him:

<http://www.dyson.co.uk/insidedyson/article.asp?aID=dysonhq>

------
catechu
For those who enjoyed the author's story, there's plenty more in his well-
written autobiography: [http://www.amazon.com/Against-Odds-Autobiography-
James-Dyson...](http://www.amazon.com/Against-Odds-Autobiography-James-
Dyson/dp/1587991705).

------
SeanLuke
I have a house with 36 stairs and landings, most of them carpeted. Much of the
rest is wood floor, so I needed a canister vacuum which was light yet high
quality, and could handle a variety of attachments with aplomb. Being HEPA
would be a benefit.

I came to the realization that Dyson's canisters vacuums are terrible
machines. They are (except the microscopic capacity DC26) amazingly heavy --
20 pounds, have poorly constructed plasticy parts, are poorly maneuverable,
are very leaky (this is what passes for HEPA?) and are noisy. Did I mention
that the usable ones are _unbelievably_ heavy? Does Dyson not understand what
canister vacuums are used for?

I thought: this took 5,127 prototypes to produce?

I eventually bought what I think is generally regarded as the best vacuum in
this category: a Miele. (In my case, a Neptune with additional Parquet
attachment). Exceptionally quiet, only 11 pounds, entirely sealed with high
quality filtration, durable, very powerful, and maneuverable. A very well
thought out, obviously German machine. The difference between the two is very
much like a BMW versus a Pontiac Sunbird. The BMW is obviously a more refined
machine, but the Sunbird is the flashiest thing you'll find at Best Buy.

~~~
kylecordes
The best answer is not a better vacuum you lug around. Rather, install a
whole-house vacuum. It will cost as much as a few decent vacuums, but will
also last as long as a few of them. More importantly, it will eject all the
air (laden with all manner of things you'd prefer not to breathe) _outside_.

~~~
SeanLuke
Well, a whole-house vacuum's not an option here. But as it turns out I
installed a whole-house vacuum for my parents while helping to build their
house. And we basically never used it, for two reasons. First, we didn't find
its cleaning capabilities as good as a standard vacuum. And second, one should
not underestimate the inconvenience and weight of long hoses.

------
Uchikoma
I have a Dyson - and after some years I think it's only a hype product. I
couldn't realize for a long time I've fallen for a 90% marketing, 10% product
thing. My next vacuum will not be a Dyson.

------
juiceandjuice
My mom's Royal has been working for 20+ years without losing suction, although
it's heavy as shit because it's all metal. She bought it when she worked at a
sewing and vacuum place.

My friend got a used kirby for $350 that kicks any dyson's ass all over the
place.

~~~
nathos
> My friend got a used kirby for $350 that kicks any dyson's ass all over the
> place.

As long as you never have to carry it up or down stairs. Or need to replace
the bag. Or use cleaning attachments. Or disassemble to remove something stuck
in the works.

Granted, Kirbys are built like tanks, but I'll choose my Dyson DC14 any day.

~~~
juiceandjuice
It's still heavy, but the newer ones are a breeze for attachments, bags,
pushing it around, and all that other stuff.

------
api
If you're not failing, you're not trying hard enough to push yourself to the
boundary-of-ability where you learn.

There is actual basis for this in learning theory.

------
thom
I've always thought Dyson make terrible _products_. The innards of a Dyson
vacuum cleaner are no doubt ingenious, but the early models all weighed a ton
and were incredibly difficult to lug around the house and actually clean
stuff.

Same with the AirBlade. Clever idea, but it doesn't dry your hands, and the
blast of air knocks your hands into the sides, negating all the claims of
better hygiene.

I'm sure the Dyson process involves tons of prototypes, but I don't for a
second believe they actually spend much time looking at people _using_ the
damn things.

~~~
GiraffeNecktie
Never used a Dyson vacuum but I've used the Airblade and it worked
astonishingly well.

~~~
eru
I like the Airblade, too. It does dry your hands quite fast. And I've never
had my hands knocked to the site by it.

(I can't say anything about the economy or hygiene, but it's one of the hand
driers I actually use. I am much to impatient for the conventional ones.)

------
jonkelly
I loved this one. Maybe the best example yet of a great idea being necessary
but totally insufficient for a great outcome.

------
ck2
I have to imagine in this day and age they did it 5000 times because they
didn't know how to use flow-modeling software?

~~~
cubicle67
er, yeah, this was late 70's. Don't think using flow modelling software was a
viable proposition (this is one guy, living off savings, working in his shed)

