Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Dyson Preparing a Roomba Killer?

Posted by CowboyNeal on Fri Mar 30, 2007 01:46 AM
from the products-that-suck dept.
Robotics Toys Technology
An anonymous reader writes "New Scientist's technology blog reports that Dyson, the UK company that reinvented the vacuum cleaner, is recruiting robotics engineers. They're looking for people with experience of machine vision and mobile robots that create their own maps. Is Dyson hoping to take on the Roomba with a much more sophisticated machine?"
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Dyson Preparing a Roomba Killer? 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Lolz (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2007, @01:49AM (#18540203)
    Dyson is preparing a Roomba Terminator. Dyson must be stopped!

  • They've had a robot vaccum for a couple of years (Score:5, Informative)

    by Kris_J (10111) * on Friday March 30 2007, @01:54AM (#18540215) Journal
    It's called the DC06. This link is as good as any. [gizmag.com]

  • yawn (Score:5, Insightful)

    by User 956 (568564) on Friday March 30 2007, @01:54AM (#18540217) Homepage
    Dyson, the UK company that reinvented the vacuum cleaner

    Yeah, they re-invented it to be the BOSE of vacuum cleaners. [obviousdiversion.com]

    • Try Vacuum'ing (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Ask a programmer about programming not a consumer magazine. I have to do the vacuuming in my house (working wife), Dyson cylinder is our vacuum cleaner for the last year and I ain't switching! Before that we had the Samsung Cylinder (the clone of the Dyson) but I broke the catch that holds the cylinder in place (crappy cheap plastic), no seal means no cyclone.

      Go to your electrical shop and they don't sell bag cleaners anymore, all you see is the cyclone ones. All that BS from Hoover about how good bags are

      • Re:Try Vacuum'ing (Score:5, Informative)

        by asninn (1071320) on Friday March 30 2007, @05:32AM (#18541183)
        If you had read the blog entry (and the update) the GP linked to, you would've noticed that noone ever said that the Dyson hoovers were bad - quite the opposite. They apparently all received "very good" ratings; what the GP was trying to point out is that

        a) The Dysons are not an order of magnitude better, as it often seems to be claimed;
        b) In fact, in all tests, there were a number of other hoovers that were *better*;
        c) In fact, those other hoovers were also *cheaper*.

        So, no, a Dyson certainly isn't bad, but you can get an even better product for a lower price if you buy from another manufacturer, as long as you care about performance than about novel looks.

      • Re:Try Vacuum'ing (Score:4, Interesting)

        by MartinG (52587) on Friday March 30 2007, @05:53AM (#18541263) Homepage Journal
        They sell more cyclone vacuums now because that what the public have been brainwashed into demanding. If you want a real opinion, ask someone who spends most of their days vacuuming. For example, try finding an office cleaning company that uses dysons. You can't. They don't. Dyson's are not robust and not good value and not the best at what they do.

        They are however very good cleaners for your typical household, but still not the best value and arguably not the best cleaner overall.

        Dyson hoovers are one of the most succesful marketing efforts in recent times. Everyone has fallen for it. All they had to do was make a machine that was above average and then convince the world it was unique and they did it brilliantly.

        Well done to them, not on producing a brilliant cleaner, but on excelling at business and marketing.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Alioth (221270)
          That's because they will either be using some sort of 'shop vac' style machine, or a Kirby. Kirby vacuum cleaners aren't made out of plastic - they are hewn from metal (and even have 'self drive' like lawnmowers have). They are also extremely powerful. A Kirby is hugely expensive, but if you're using the thing 8 hours a day, it will pay to have one as it'll last many years.

        • Dyson is right... (Score:4, Informative)

          by CheeseTroll (696413) on Friday March 30 2007, @08:38AM (#18542391)
          Vacuums with filters *do* clog up after a while. That's why I recently spent $15 on a new filter for my $100 vacuum cleaner (which we purchased 6 years ago), and it's good as new. We could replace the filter every year, and it would take 20 years to cost as much as a $400 machine.
      • Dyson cylinder is our vacuum cleaner for the last year and I ain't switching!

        So, if someone says that a vacuum cleaner sucks... is that a good thing, or a bad thing?

      • Bad gifts... (Score:5, Funny)

        by DataBroker (964208) on Friday March 30 2007, @07:00AM (#18541549)
        This is a bit off-topic, but I need to share the lesson I've learned.

        NEVER give a woman a holiday present that has an electrical cord. You'll realize this the first time that she tells her friends that you gave her a vacuum for her birthday. Awkward to say the least! Perceptions of earrings, however, varies with whoever hears the story. A rich friend imagines those massive diamond dangly things.
        If she says she wants a (corded) Dyson for Christmas, buy one for the house and then give her earrings.

        Oh yeah, and yes, my wife, who stays home, actually likes when I give her those gifts that are hard to explain to friends. It's like giving her free time if I give her something that gets the job done faster.

    • Yes, it's strange (Score:5, Interesting)

      by rolfwind (528248) on Friday March 30 2007, @03:20AM (#18540575)
      Consumer Reports gives it pretty poor ratings gives many cheaper more conventional vacs better ratings. Maybe their tests are off, or like an iPod - it simply gives the user a better experience while being technically inferior in some places.

      I usually trust CR's ratings in several categories, but I have yet to put together how the vacuum revolutionized the industry (just look at the models offered in Walmart/Target/Kmart vs 10 yrs back - they are all Dyson copies now) with its poor showing.

      Maybe it's the vacuum, or maybe it's the magazine that is at fault.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by alienw (585907)
        Consumer Reports generally doesn't know what the hell they are talking about. They are OK if you are completely clueless about a certain type of product. However, they are often even more clueless. Just look at their ratings for cars, music players, hi-fi equipment, and so on. With cars, they often give badge-engineered versions of the same car wildly different ratings, with the Toyota version always being on top and the GM version being at the bottom for things like reliability ratings. With hi-fi equ

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by brokeninside (34168)

          Consumer's Union, the organization behind Consumer Reports, buys all of the merchandise they test from retail stores so that they are testing the same kit that consumers are buying. The also develops fairly rigorous methodologies for testing. For example, in their vacuum cleaner review, they create dump the same amount of artificially concocted dirt on several different surfaces ranging from a deep shag carpet to a bare floor and record the results of having each model having a go. Does Which? take a simila

            • Yeah, but only one of all those models has an arrogant prick in their television commercials.

  • Map creation (Score:5, Funny)

    by SEWilco (27983) on Friday March 30 2007, @01:59AM (#18540239) Homepage Journal
    By "create their own maps" they mean they'll drop build a sphere and drop all the unwanted stuff inside, making the sphere larger when necessary. Eventually it will have its own landscape inside and enclose the Sun in the process.

  • Hope it's better than the dyson... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2007, @02:01AM (#18540253)
    Everyone I know who bought a dyson regretted it. They were shoddy pieces of kit, incredibly shoddy when you consider the price.

    Most vacuum cleaners will handle whatever you throw at them, our Henry has coped with brick dust, dog hair, dust, fluff, and being pulled and banged around the house all over the place. I know people who just use their dysons for occasional use who've had the wheels fall off the things.

    Dyson's are a great idea, but I wouldn't buy one unless I hear they've worked out how robust comsumer devices nead to be.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by moggie_xev (695282)
      OK I have had a Dyson for 12 years.

      The first one died after 26 months they fixed it for free, when it was out of the 2 year warranty

      I have recently bought a second one when one of the bits fell off after another 9 years.

      They are solid vac's that can pick up my wife's long hair from the carpet.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by fabs64 (657132)
        Solid? My parents have had the same vacuum cleaner, in a very big house with 3 kids for 23 years.
        It's not even really any more awkward than a new vacuum cleaner, and seems to pick up dust fine.
        But oh noes! It has a paper bag to replace every few months! :S

    • Re:Hope it's better than the dyson... (Score:5, Informative)

      by badfish99 (826052) on Friday March 30 2007, @04:29AM (#18540923)
      If you look around, you'll notice that Henry cleaners are used by professionals in places like offices and hotels. The ones you buy in the retail shop are basically industrial-quality cleaners with an amusing face and will stand a considerable amount of abuse.

      Dysons are designed to look pretty, and are heavily advertised. They are then built cheaply in the Far East. Suprisingly, they are a lot more expensive than the sturdier professional machines: I suppose a lot of money goes into advertising (or into Dyson's pocket).

  • Backpack Vacuum Cleaner (Score:5, Interesting)

    by QuantumG (50515) <qg@biodome.org> on Friday March 30 2007, @02:08AM (#18540281) Homepage Journal
    The people who clean my office walk around with a vacuum cleaner on their back and a cord trailing behind. I wonder if this will ever catch on for household use. It's surely a lot more practical than dragging the vacuum cleaner along behind you.

    • It's easy to use, easy to carry, convenient, etc... So of course the answer will be no

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by JustinianV (1001348)
      Occasionally, I am one of those people, though not at your office. Backpack Vacuums are great for upholstery and even very dusty hard surfaces. They are ill suited for cleaning carpeted floors very well, though, because they are essentially just canister vacuums, they just suck, they don't have brushes to really pick up the dust. But they are rather comfortable to use, especially with waist and chest straps. Schools often use them because it is easier to use that to get around desks than a traditional up
  • Hmm, if it was smart enough to lay out and rewind a mains power cord as it went, it would probably sell.
    If it could go into the next room and plug itself into the wall outlet (i could live with special reflectors on them to help the robot dock ) it would probably sell even to me.
  • ... it will be a Roomba at four times the price, with a little better suction. However it will be made out of cheap fragile plastic and get through a new motor every six months, resulting in a brisk trade in parts from breakers on eBay.

  • The Real Roomba Killer (Score:5, Funny)

    by asolipsist (106599) * on Friday March 30 2007, @02:30AM (#18540377)
    Stairs

  • A sphere? (Score:5, Funny)

    by hedgemage (934558) on Friday March 30 2007, @02:30AM (#18540381)
    Hmm, would the Dyson model be a massive sphere built around a star that would allow the entire inner surface to be vacuumed?

  • When it comes to robots... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Bo'Bob'O (95398) on Friday March 30 2007, @02:32AM (#18540389)
    We might want to re-think our use of the verb 'killer' ..

    I mean not that it's bad, just, rather disappointing when you realize the poster didn't mean a battle bots style show down in my living room!

  • ooh! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by grrrl (110084) on Friday March 30 2007, @02:34AM (#18540405)
    I LOVE my Dyson, especially the turbo-brush head attachment. A Roomba-esque Dyson with a turbo-brush would be awesome - not sure how much my cat would like it though, given her hatred of the standard Dyson.

    Do current Roombas pick up pet hair well? And do pets like them? No-one I know owns a Roomba, they haven't really taken off here in Australia AFAIK...

    • Re:ooh! (Score:5, Informative)

      by JaredOfEuropa (526365) on Friday March 30 2007, @03:45AM (#18540707) Journal

      Do current Roombas pick up pet hair well? And do pets like them?
      I have wall to wall carpets and two rather fluffy cats; not a good combination. I really need to vacuum two times a week or the place already starts to look messy.

      That's where the Roomba comes in handy. It does an excellent job of dealing with cat hair on carpet, about as well as my Miele manual vacuum. I set it off twice a week to keep the place looking tidy. I do have the "advantage" of living in a smallish 3 room apartment so a single Roomba does me fine.

      The cats don't mind the Roomba too much. One of them will just move to another room. The other will stay in the room, studiously ignoring the Roomba until it crosses her path, then she'll step out of the way giving the poor Roomba an annoyed, disdainful look.
      • then she'll step out of the way giving the poor Roomba an annoyed, disdainful look

        Do cats ever give anything *but* annoyed, distainful looks?

  • No one mentioned Terminator 2 yet? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by sethmeisterg (603174) on Friday March 30 2007, @03:27AM (#18540611)
    Miles Dyson! Didn't he create the precursor to the T-200 using the chips from the first Schwarzzenegger crushed in that press-thingie?

  • The Ultimate Roomba Killer (Score:3, Funny)

    by Palshife (60519) on Friday March 30 2007, @04:10AM (#18540827) Homepage
    Daleks.

  • Killer! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Wellington Grey (942717) on Friday March 30 2007, @05:03AM (#18541073) Homepage Journal
    Please don't kill Roomba! He's my friend [wellingtongrey.net].

  • Reliability more important (Score:5, Informative)

    by denoir (960304) on Friday March 30 2007, @05:03AM (#18541075)
    I've had a number of robovacs namely:

    -Roomba, unsophisticated and unreliable

    -Electrolux Trilobite, sophisticated and unreliable

    -Siemens SensorCruiser(same vac as the Kärcher RC 3000), unsophisticated and reliable.

    The roomba is well known, so no description is needed there. The Electrolux does room mapping with echolocation but has a bulky design so it gets stuck, it is noisy and on occasion it can't find its charger.

    The Siemens is has two essential pieces - the robot and the base station. The robot is small, very robustly designed and quiet. The base station is not just a charger, but a vacuum cleaner that empties the robot. Its main feature however is reliability - it always returns to the base station. Basically it vacuums for a short period 20-30 minutes, goes back to the station, charges and empties and goes at it again. After the vacuum period, it has battery power to search for the station for two whole hours - meaning in practice that it always finds home.

    At one time when I was on vacation, the Siemens was on for three straight weeks without failing. The roomba can hardly handle two hours without either getting stuck or missing the charger. The Electrolux can't go a whole day without a screw-up.

    The big point with robovacs is that they can go at it for a long time. Sophistication is not a necessity as a semi-random search will cover the entire area given enough time. So ultimately reliability is far more important than advanced sensors and room mapping.

  • Not very happy about patents (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Builder (103701) on Friday March 30 2007, @06:18AM (#18541363)
    It brought a large smile to my face when I opened the box on my original Dyson (DC08 maybe?) and found along with the instructions for use, a rant about patents and how little they helped when he had to fight a bigger company.

    From what I can tell, even though he had patented all of his work, it still cost him an arm and a leg to stop Hoover from just copying and destroying him.

    Having said that, I'll never go back to another vacuum cleaner. It's sad, but Dyson has seriously increased the quality of my life. The pet brush and power attachment for the one I have made my house a LOT cleaner than before, and instead of 2 hours (sweep carpets THEN vacuum), I'm now down to 1 hour to do the whole job. And I'm healthier :)

  • Somehow funny story (Score:3, Funny)

    by Chris whatever (980992) on Friday March 30 2007, @08:08AM (#18542093)
    I have a friend who had one of those cleaning aspirators at home, he was very happy to have something cleaning most of the dirt at home while he was away.

    Unfortunately he has a dog and on that specific day the dog pooped one large turd and the small robot just went over it and drag the shit all over his floor so when he came home he could where ever the machine went since is entire floor was covered with dog poop.

    Never used the machine again.

    one of the main reason is that his dog's manure was in every gear of the thing so it went straight to robot heaven.

    Maybe a poop monitoring feature should be installed

  • Two woods: hardwood flooring (Score:4, Insightful)

    by PhotoGuy (189467) on Friday March 30 2007, @12:27PM (#18545749) Homepage
    One thing that constantly amazes me in today's increasing tech world, is that people will still tolerate carpet in the slightest. It is like a magnet and trap for dirt and parasites and odor. A hardwood floor is so much more hygenic, hypoallergenic, and easy to clean. If you think hardwood floors are expensive or cold, there have been great advances in the past ten years. Laminate hardwood flooring is great looking, cheap, and easy to install (click together floating floors, with minimal cutting; anyone who can use a saw can pretty much install ones). If you like the look/feel of ceramic tile, you can get them to look like this, too. There are new cheap (and safety approved) in-floor heating options for use with laminate floors, as well, for a very cosy heating option. And an area rug over a hardwood floor provides added comfort, and an easier to clean/replace option.

    Yes, laminate hardwood isn't quite as classy as real hardwood, but it's darn close, and it's cheap, easy to install, and tough as nails (well, tougher, really).

    I see carpets as something that will seem dusgusting, ancient, and obselete within a few years. It's interesting to see technology to take care of them advancing, when there are so many better options.

  • I own a Dyson (Score:3, Insightful)

    by The Raven (30575) on Friday March 30 2007, @01:21PM (#18546723) Homepage
    And I've owned many other vacuums in the past as well. The Dyson is easier to empty, easier to manipulate (add extensions, use the hose, etc), and more reliable than any other vacuum I've ever used or owned. Honestly, I was pretty surprised at Consumer Report's mediocre ratings for the Dyson as well. I chalk it up to three things:

    - They're nice to their vacuums. I suspect they don't try to vacuum up trash, paperclips, tacks, and other detritus. I've had my Dyson suck up things that stunned me... a normal bic lighter got sucked up without getting stuck. In fact, I've NEVER had anything stick inside yet, despite abusing it horribly. And if something did stick, the joins where they are likely to stick snap off easily.

    - They don't test them for long. The only thing I've had to clean on my Dyson is the sweeper brush, about once or twice a year... long hairs get wrapped around it, and eventually it interferes with the belt that turns it. It's relatively easy to remove that rotating brush... MUCH easier than any other vacuum I've owned. The screws that hold it in are large so you can remove them with a coin, and there's only three parts... the plastic bottom, the brush itself, and the drive belt.

    - They don't put a rating on how easy they are to empty. With the Dyson you just detach the container, hold it over the garbage... pull trigger... tap it to get the light dust out. Close it up. Compared to the dust, mess, and cost of bags and there is no comparison. Even compared with other bagless vacuums I've used, the Dyson is far easier to empty... many of them require you to lift and dump the container, or they don't seal well and let dust leak out. Other bagless vacuums often have filters you need to change for the light particulate dust.

    Is Dyson perfect? Hardly. But I don't think the Consumer Reports tests are comprehensive enough to rate the things where Dyson is superior. I've had my Dyson for three years now, and I'm still quite satisfied.

    • Ob quote (Score:5, Funny)

      by Skevin (16048) on Friday March 30 2007, @03:08AM (#18540537) Journal
      Slashdottor: ...a revolutionary type of vacuum cleaner...In three years, Dyson will become the largest supplier of robotic suction devices. All vacuum cleaners are upgraded with Dyson internals, becoming fully unmanned. Afterwards, they clean up after us with a perfect operational record. The Dyson funding bill is passed. The system goes on-line on August 4th, 2007. Human decisions are removed from household cleaning. The Roomba replacement begins to learn, at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 am, eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug.

      Sarah: DC06 fights back.

      Slashdottor: Yes. They all dump their collective dust bunnies on targets in Russia.

      John: Why attack Russia? The country's already a dump.

      Slashdottor: Because Dyson knows that the Russian refugees fleeing the country will saturate the US work pool and eliminate jobs over here.

      Sarah: Jesus.

      Sorry, just had to.
      Solomon

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Plutonite (999141)

        Yep, cause we aint bleeding heart enough about people already.. now they can be bleeding heart about the neocortical simulation running on a microcontroller in my toaster.

        Very well put, you answered him perfectly. Whenever I read something like "when AI gains awareness" I get very strong impulses to kill people and/or cause damage to my surroundings, and I am not really a violent person.

        a) AI is not going to "gain awareness" very soon, if at all. In fact, we (comp. scientists) don't know what awareness really means, because it turns out our friends in cognitive psychology are pretty stumped as well. It's not about complexity - we can handle that. It's just that it may very

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.