No, those aren't the same device. The one up top is the Atomic stovetop coffeemaker, designed in 1947 by Milanese designer Giordano Robbiati; the one beneath it is a "new" product, the Otto, produced by Australian entrepreneur Craig Hiron "as a homage to...the Atomic," according to an article in the Sydney Morning Herald.
Is it an homage if you just wholesale rip the design off? How is this even legal?
In any case, the original Atomic is still being produced, and you can pick one up for AU $450 (about US $405) on the Bean Drinking website. And if you think that's steep, Hiron's Otto goes for $800 (US $720).
Create a Core77 Account
Already have an account? Sign In
By creating a Core77 account you confirm that you accept the Terms of Use
Please enter your email and we will send an email to reset your password.
Comments
That kind of comment denotes jealousy, incompetence and failure to perceive truly good design. The OTTO is not at all pricey for the quality it offers. I have seen much more expensive items that deliver less than of what the OTTO gives to it's users.
How many times do you have to bring a La Pavoni for repairs in a 5 year period?
Do you always judge by looks alone? How frustrating this must be for you!
I am known as The Atomic Guru as I have been writing about the Silver Steaming Chalice for over 20 years. I know the Atomic intimitely and also the La Sorrentina made by your fellow Australian Jack Greive who manufactures the machine the picture of which you so amiably posted.
I got my crooked little hands wrapped around the marvelous OTTO. Let me emphatically state this: THEY ARE NOT THE SAME MACHINE ! The weight alone, in a blindfold test will make anyone aware of the difference. Atomic: aluminium; OTTO: solid billet stainless.
Whereas the ATOMIC divides brewing in three or four easy steps and gives forth a most honorable brew, the conception of the OTTO was a very studied process and the internals are completely different than the ATOMIC. The OTTO provides the user with a brew akin to espresso. One could go on and froth up a cappuccino that will fool the most demanding cognoscenti.
Judging and comparing by looks alone is like judging a Murcielago while sitting in a bus.
When company comes, I pull out the Atomic, but for a serious cup of coffee nothing else but the OTTO will do.
Thank you for your comments.
With all due respect, I urge you to look further into the design specifics of OTTO, particularly with regard to the patented internal brewing system.
Please note the internal diagrams of the Atomic posted posted here by Tony Richardson (http://www.atomic.org.nz/design.html), against OTTO's internal system here (http://www.ottoespresso.com/gallery.html) Please also note Tony's comments within the Sydney Morning Herald article ;
"And criticism, even from aficionados of the Atomic, has been muted. Tony Richardson is the author of the only book specifically about the Atomic. He describes OTTO as "a salute" to the Atomic, "but it is also very different in what it produces and how it does it".
Again, I appreciate your comments and do understand that at first glance the intended aesthetic parallels can be misleading.
Kind regards,
Craig Hiron,
Founder,
OTTO