With all reviews for all sorts of different grinders, I smile a bit when the grinder gets compared with a Niche, This, Weber Key, Lagom etc… Especially when the companies themselves do it. I have done many jobs and one of them was marketing…a golden rule was not to set up a competitor product as a standard to beat. Modern ideas seem to break many of the rules?
The Eureka seems to me to be a tweak of the existing tech, rather than really innovate to make something new. At each step of that development process to think, Is this good enough, can it be made better, does this improve the product? Finally coming up with something that’s right…not just as good as it can be, but right…..Obviously this has to be within the cost you are trying to achieve. for the consumer. So I do disagree with this guy when he seems to think it’s a bad thing that development was budget constrained, in the real world it needs to be.
The end price must be a strong consideration…..the development cost really needs to be slightly set aside, as something does need to be “right”. As a developer/participant in creating a new product, it can’t just be a job, you have to love what you are doing a little bit. The other thing corporates often lack is any real connection with the end customer for their products e.g. “we sent it to several professional Baristas, and got their input”, as if this means anything vs consumers buying it for home use, or that Professional Baristas have any idea about design and engineering.
P.S. In fairness I have not used this new production Eureka.