On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 03:31:37PM -0400, Christian wrote: > Cory Papenfuss wrote: > > > > To say absolute statements such as your above, "Samsung bodies > > are, and will always be, re-named Pentax bodies." ... or (paraphrased > > from previous posts), "The aperture simulator is dead, never to return." > > Without proof, I think those are rather bold statements.... Might be true, > > but certainly might not just as easily. > > > > Put money on it. It may be a bold statement but I'm willing to put > money on the line. Are you? > > > > > ... but most here have agreed that marketing is what got us into > > the lack of aperture simulator mess to begin with. > > And this is the part I don't give a crap about. I don't care if it was > sunspots that made the aperture simulator go away. Who cares why? > Really? And why do you think surveys and a raving lunatics rantings > will bring it back?
Especially a "survey" as poorly worded as this one. It's too much of an all-or-nothing thing; anyone who would be quite happy if the aperture simulator returned, but doesn't regard it as a big deal (which, IMO, is the vast majority of the entire Pentax user base) doesn't really have a way to express that viewpoint. It's the old "You're either with us, or against us" false dichotomy. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
