The Dyson company has built a reputation as a true innovator.
Not only has it turned decades of vacuum cleaner technology on its head with its bagless, filterless designs, it has done the same with hand dryers, fans and other household and domestic appliances.
So when I read that it was investing heavily in a start-up that has already distinguished itself in the area of battery technology, I was not in the least surprised.
“While the performance and capabilities of all of these devices have increased massively in recent years, battery technology does not seem to have kept pace at all”
Wearable pressure
There has been much focus lately on battery technology, not least because smart phones are getting smarter, tablets are getting more power hungry, wearable technologies are becoming more practical and capable, and electric cars are as hamstrung as ever in terms of range, performance and charge time.
While the performance and capabilities of all of these devices have increased massively in recent years, battery technology does not seem to have kept pace at all.
Energy density, charge times and longevity have all been major issues for batteries, and increasingly, the raw materials from which they are made are becoming an issue, ethically and politically.
The best example is the advent of the smart watch. What possible sense does it make to have to charge a watch every day, or even every second day? The very idea goes against more than a hundred years of the wrist watch usage model. Even when you had wind up a watch, it lasted more than a long day.
Right approach
Dyson appears to be taking the right approach to the idea that cordless appliances about the house should be able to function in a manner which suits their existing usage models, by investing in the battery technology. By ensuring that something can endure a heavy usage period without expiring, as opposed to under laboratory conditions, the company is likely to cement its position as offering a different user experience.
We’ve all seen the claims of battery life for various smart devices, electric appliances and even electric cars, only to find that in actual operation, it falls far below this. It doesn’t matter if usage figures are quoted that show “all day battery life” if the damn thing starts complaining about low battery when you are miles from home/half-finished a job/nowhere near a charge point (delete as appropriate).
It appears the approach here is to acknowledge that the battery is the weak point, spend money on improving it and not go to market with an underperforming product.
The import is that as wearables, in particular, grow in capability, their use in anything other than enthusiast mode would be severely curtailed by current battery technologies. Think of those in healthcare, emergency services, law enforcement and even in enterprise, where a full usage session might be anything up to 24 hours, and that does not allow for re-charging on the way.
The potential for wearables is vast, as is that for a truly practical electric car, but until battery technology sees the same level of investment that chip, screen and software development gets, that potential will go unfulfilled. Let’s hope the Dyson move opens the floodgates.
Ltd
