Problem Atomisers

[chris86]

Dec 31, 2013 4:23:20 GMT 4madcats said:

Dec 31, 2013 2:05:30 GMT chris86 said:

A bad workman might always blame his tools, but I think that manufacturers and vendors haven't got it right if vaping requires hard work and carefully handled tools. My point is that vaping shouldn't be hard work - it's supposed to be recreational and an alternative to smoking. So manufacturers should be looking at ways to minimise the possibility of user error, and I'm not convinced that they are focusing enough on this. To my mind, the pinnacle of vaping technology won't be an incredibly beautifully engineered RBA that allows you to make quintuple nano coils at 0.000001 ohms, but a system that's as simple, consistent and foolproof as a ready made cigarette. 

Let's face it, taking a cigarette out of a packet, lighting it and inhaling is almost impossible to get wrong. There are no special skills or techniques needed. Rolling tobacco has a learning curve, but smoking can be as easy as lighting a cigarette and inhaling the smoke. I firmly believe that vaping will not replace smoking as the most widespread way of consuming nicotine until there are devices that are equally consistent and immune to user error. Many people aren't interested in learning new techniques - they just want an easy and foolproof way to consume nicotine while cutting out the tobacco, and that's what vaping should ideally offer. 

I understand that the technology is still in its infancy, but my worry is that manufacturers and vendors are heading in the wrong direction. Instead of trying to design foolproof, consistent and simple devices, they are bringing out new products with more and more advanced features to attract the die-hard enthusiasts. A lot of energy is spent designing RBA's (which require more user input and therefore increase the possibility of user error), while the more basic end of the market is left to Chinese mass production with poor quality control. This will only change if consumers complain and demand foolproof basic devices that minimise the possibility of user error. 

chris86 we've already got that, they're called cigalikes, take away the excessive claims & they do exactly what they say on the tin, if you want something with a longer run time you could try one of these screwdriver maxi. The guy who sells them has been vaping for around 5yrs & has the same thoughts about simplicity & consistency as you, which I do not mean to imply is a bad thing in any way, & it's why he came up with this, a grown up cigalike. So with that in mind he should be dominating the vaping market - nope by his own admission he has a fairly small but regular customer base which doesn't appear to be growing in any noticeable way, much less have people beating down his door demanding he goes into mass production. 

Think of vaping like buying a mobile, what people need is something that will make phone calls, what they want is something that will do everything their computer, TV & stereo will do. There is enough choice on the market to suit both camps, but which one do the majority of folks pick even if all they can do is manage to make phone calls with it . . . 

Consumers want choice & choice means innovation & innovation can mean that you don't always get it right the first time, specially when it's moving at this speed.

But if the EU get their way a foolproof, basic, consistent method of delivering nicotine is exactly what we'll get, (ignoring the fact we've already got it in the form of NRT) & that's all we'll get, but at least it'll work, it'll have to to make to the market, so everyone should be happy right.  ???

If I were you I'd be careful what you wish for it might come true sooner then you think.

Cigalikes are fairly consistent, but they suffer from poor vapour delivery, an inconveniently short battery life and there are a relatively limited range of flavours available. This is why they're less successful  in getting people off tobacco than more advanced setups. What I think we need is a device that integrates the superior battery life and vapour delivery of a mod / atty setup, while keeping the foolproof, simple and reliable character of a cigalike. This might not be possible to achieve, but it's what I think manufacturers should be aiming for. 

I'm aware of Trog and the SD keyring / maxi, and I own an SD keyring. It's a great little device that has suffered from poor marketing - I think that many more people would own one if they had heard of it in the first place. But it still has it's limitations because it uses cartos, which come pre-filled in a very small range of unexciting flavours. Of course users can refill their own cartos, but this reintroduces the need to fiddle and the possibility of user error into the equation.

The problem is that the basic devices on the market are very limited in terms of flavour range, battery life and vapour delivery compared to the advanced devices. If you want a device that allows for a wide range of flavours, has a long battery life and delivers a decent amount of vapour, then you have to fiddle and learn new techniques. And many people are reluctant or unable to do this, so they end up going back to the cigarettes.

I understand that, much like with mobile phones, some people want all the additional features that come with advanced devices. But there's one key difference between the mobile phone industry and the e-cig industry. Mobile phone companies strive to ensure that even their top of the range devices are ergonomically designed and user-friendly, so that customers can learn to use them without too much effort. But if phones were designed by modders, you wouldn't be able to make a call until you had taken the back of the phone off and used a screwdriver to fiddle with the wiring!     

I'm not suggesting that we should have better basic devices instead of mods and RBA's. I believe in consumer choice and I'm completely opposed to EU proposals for medical regulation, which would severely restrict that choice. But it seems to me that a lot of energy is going into designing devices which require advanced knowledge in order to operate them, while those who aren't interested in tinkering are left with a second-rate vape. So I think that the 'high-end' designers and manufacturers should also devote some effort to producing improved basic devices that remain user-friendly and foolproof while overcoming the limitations of cigalikes.