nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Big Brand names whose products are way overrated

Capt. Autumn

Can I kick off with Dyson?

A huge launch and massive marketing drive for Dyson products but I've always been underwhelmed by how they actually perform. Maybe the fuss generated is something to do with it being the first UK designed product to make a big splash in many the year but, for me, they are the Apple of products from a marketing perspective but an Acer in terms of performance.

When I finally kicked my under-performing Dyson to the kerb and replaced in with a big ugly Meile, I nearly cried in gratitude when I heard the motor rumble to life and watched as my carpet was sucked to within an inch of it's life.

So, what brands do you think are overrated?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

fryup

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Herpes was better than Windows XP.

but xp was way better than 98

kingtiger

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

for the bottom of a Mac Pro are €849 :eek: :eek: :eek

If you are still not happy with the 34% less rolling residence, you can opt for more stability

the feet kit is available for bargain €350

https://www.apple.com/ie/shop/product/MXNM2ZM/A/apple-mac-pro-feet-kit

neris

Dyson. I got nagged into buying a dyson and while it might have good suction its a flimsy piece of plastic that wouldnt be hard to break or damage compared to other vacuum cleaners

daithi7

Renault

Goldstar stereos

People before Profit

The Green Party (promise a lot, deliver sfa, can't cost anything)

tedpan

Augeo wrote:

Indeed, on the hole they aren't much different to cheaper toilet rolls.

Get some Regina Softis, one of the cheaper rolls, softer and stronger 'on the hole'

tedpan

daithi7 wrote:

Goldstar stereos

Don't think Gold star was ever a premium brand, although LG products are not too bad these days..

Titzon Toast

Mad_maxx wrote: »

Brand appeal is second to none though

Yep, to people who haven't got a clue. BMWs are troublesome in the extreme and very over rated.

Roger the cabin boy

Titzon Toast wrote: »

Yep, to people who haven't got a clue. BMWs are troublesome in the extreme and very over rated.

Dreadful cars to own longterm

bit of a bogey

Tommy Hilfiger jeans

vard

This little film pretty much sums up the Android vs iPhone debate www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0mm086xqQE

RandomViewer

daithi7 wrote: »

Renault

Goldstar stereos

People before Profit

The Green Party (promise a lot, deliver sfa, can't cost anything)

Renault were never considered a good product, France needed an indigenous car maker so Renault and Peogeot produced questionable quality cars that sold well in their home country

Hotblack Desiato

At one point France actually banned Japanese car imports because they just couldn't compete.

Goldstar was always a bargain basement brand. Rebranded as LG and moved into the middle market.

Samsung were a cut price OEM unknown outside Korea, everything they made was sold in the west under various brands belonging to other companies until the mid 80s, then when they launched as a brand they got your man from Hi-De-Hi to do an ad:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5JgEPsSI5E

FVP3

vard wrote: »

This little film pretty much sums up the Android vs iPhone debate www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0mm086xqQE

It's funny, not sure how it sums up anything though.

RandomViewer

fryup wrote: »

but xp was way better than 98

XP still running on lots of business computers, won't be replaced until it calves

Capt'n Midnight

RandomViewer wrote: »

Renault were never considered a good product, France needed an indigenous car maker so Renault and Peogeot produced questionable quality cars that sold well in their home country

Citroen was the relatively high tech car company in France until they were taken over by Peugeot.

Suckit

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

The whole Apple vs Android thing is extremely tedious. If you cannot afford an Apple device then you buy an Android, and fool yourself into believing that your €250 Chinese import phone has the same features, camera quality, and build as something that costs a multiple of it.

It's the same sort of delusion that has people believing the food they buy in Aldi is of comparable quality to that which you'll find in an artisan grocer, or even a Supervalu/Dunnes.

See also - Dacia/Hyundai/Skoda etc owners, Nespresso, and cheap off-the-peg suits. People love the idea of a bargain or an offer, and will jump through mental hoops to delude themselves into thinking that the tat they've bought is of excellent quality.

I would agree with the first sentence, but after that.....
They are non comparable. You can buy an android device that costs the same price or less than it's gen version of apple, and it will perform every bit as good, maybe better in some cases.

Android phones also are not 'android' phones, they are phones with android installed on them. Android devices are also far more likely to be repurposed after they have been put in the drawer or wherever a phone usually goes to die. Other OS's can be installed on many of them via communities, and all of them if you know how to.

Apple devices (with the exception of their pc's) aren't usually repurposed and apple themselves make it harder to do it, as they render older versions of their OS's useless within their own ecosystem.

Other OS's may keep them alive.

As for the 'bargain' argument, you can buy an equally, or more expensive 'android' phone.

Apple are definitely overrated.

_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_

Sony are a company I always believed to be overrated.

Better Than Christ

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

See also - Dacia/Hyundai/Skoda etc owners, Nespresso, and cheap off-the-peg suits. People love the idea of a bargain or an offer, and will jump through mental hoops to delude themselves into thinking that the tat they've bought is of excellent quality.

With regard to cars, people who buy premium brands are the ones jumping through mental hoops to delude themselves into thinking that the vulgar chunk of instantly depreciating metal they've bought is of superior quality to something half the price. The truth is that you've been conned into believing that (a) your BMW is a valid substitute for a personality, and (b) that it'll be even half as reliable as a basic Skoda.

snoopboggybog

Aongus Von Bismarck wrote: »

The whole Apple vs Android thing is extremely tedious. If you cannot afford an Apple device then you buy an Android, and fool yourself into believing that your €250 Chinese import phone has the same features, camera quality, and build as something that costs a multiple of it.

I absolutely despise Apple phones. The OS on them is just absolutely horrendous.

Honestly if i had the choice of the Apple 11 Pro max (1200 euro) and the Hauwei P Smart (130 euro). I would pick the Hauwei P Smart as my daily phone.

The OS is just shocking.

corks finest

Regatta

corks finest

Terrontress wrote: »

That newest family sized Peugeot, the 508, is one of the best looking cars I’ve seen in a long while.

I think Peugeot are in the middle of sharing mechanicals with Opel and soon they’ll be in the same company as Fiat and Chrysler. Once the accuntants get their way, anything can happen.

Having had Citroen Peugeot and Renault cars they are comfortable, cheap, but electronically unreliable.
Products from apple overrated
FG/FF

FVP3

Suckit wrote: »

I would agree with the first sentence, but after that.....
They are non comparable. You can buy an android device that costs the same price or less than it's gen version of apple, and it will perform every bit as good, maybe better in some cases.

Android phones also are not 'android' phones, they are phones with android installed on them. Android devices are also far more likely to be repurposed after they have been put in the drawer or wherever a phone usually goes to die. Other OS's can be installed on many of them via communities, and all of them if you know how to.

Apple devices (with the exception of their pc's) aren't usually repurposed and apple themselves make it harder to do it, as they render older versions of their OS's useless within their own ecosystem.

Other OS's may keep them alive.

As for the 'bargain' argument, you can buy an equally, or more expensive 'android' phone.

It's perfectly legit to use the term Android phone. Everybody knows what that means.

iPhones in fact last far longer than Android phones up to twice as long, and continue to get OS updates for years. It's clear in the data, but just walking around that people are quite happy with the older devices. iPhones are for normal people.

snoopboggybog wrote: »

I absolutely despise Apple phones. The OS on them is just absolutely horrendous.

Honestly if i had the choice of the Apple 11 Pro max (1200 euro) and the Hauwei P Smart (130 euro). I would pick the Hauwei P Smart as my daily phone.

The OS is just shocking.

I find the exact opposite, as does the data. iOS is fluid, and most Android devices I have used are buggy, laggy or crashy. To be fair the android phones I use are cheap. I do have both as I said, because I need to use Android where the iPhone's security stops me from some work.

But as I said above, its a certain type of nerd who loves Android. Not the brightest nerds, as someone who is around the campus of Facebook and Google quite a bit because my company does work there, the iPhone predominates, as does the Mac.

thequarefellow

Have to second Dyson. Overhyped, plasticky, but most of all just don't deliver on suction.

Cadbury's chocolate too. Dreadful. I worked in a place where all the old Dears buy me a box of Cadburys Roses at Christmas. They went straight in the bin.

Hesh's Umpire

thequarefellow wrote: »

Cadbury's chocolate too. Dreadful. I worked in a place where all the old Dears buy me a box of Cadburys Roses at Christmas. They went straight in the bin.

You could at least have given them to charity! They aren't inedible.

Roger the cabin boy

thequarefellow wrote: »

H
Cadbury's chocolate

thequarefellow

Hesh's Umpire wrote: »

You could at least have given them to charity! They aren't inedible.

I honestly tried (I had three big plastic tubs - interestingly I think the quality plummeted around the same time the tins turned to plastic). The second hand shop didn't want them, they don't take food items. A Penny Dinner type charity didn't want them either. They had a surfeit, it being Christmas and they were also trying to promote healthier eating.

thequarefellow

Asics running shoes. I was talked into spending almost €200 on a pair of these for their 'superior quality and support; choice of top runners etc etc' when I started running a few years ago. They fell apart after 6 months.

razorblunt

thequarefellow wrote: »

Asics running shoes. I was talked into spending almost €200 on a pair of these for their 'superior quality and support; choice of top runners etc etc' when I started running a few years ago. They fell apart after 6 months.

How many miles did you cover in them? If it's serious miles you're not really going to be getting that much longer out of them.
If you're into running it's well worth getting your gait analysed and proper shoes fitted, that way you can fork out the cash there and then, keep the name and brand and jump on sales when they arrive.
I got fitted for a pair of Brooks and they were brilliant, if I ever get back to doing serious (semi) miles again I'll get another pair.

corks finest wrote: »

Regatta

They've hit rock bottom though, Debenhams and other outlets were flogging them for bargain prices lately.

Capra

thequarefellow wrote: »

Asics running shoes. I was talked into spending almost €200 on a pair of these for their 'superior quality and support; choice of top runners etc etc' when I started running a few years ago. They fell apart after 6 months.

Nah, ASICS are a serious quality item. Of course you may have got a bad pair as they literally make hundreds of different styles and they are bound to have some duds. but of all the brands I think they are right up there with the best in their category.

[Deleted User]

Suckit wrote: »

Android phones also are not 'android' phones, they are phones with android installed on them.

This is why android will always be inferior, apple co-design their hardware and software to work flawlessly together while android is a mismatch of different companies software and hardware resulting in laggy, buggy devices with poor use-ability and badly utilised hardware. Android is also a horrible operating system to use from a navigating around it perspective etc.

As someone else said on the thread, look at any real tech people not your bargain basement type - they all use iPhones and Macbooks etc.

magic_murph

Durex. Simple