On 9/16/12 19:19, Bob W wrote:
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Toralf Lund
On 9/16/12 15:51, Bob W wrote:
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Toralf Lund I don't know, personally I'm not convinced that
chasing the "latest and greatest" and focusing on higher numbers (in
various specs) or a longer list of features, is generally a good way
to make products.
if you are Nikon or Canon and your market is professional journalists
and such-like then it is the only way to make products, because if
they don't make them someone else will and they will end up as also-
rans.
That may well be, but does that really make them better products? Which
is, quite frankly, all I care about.
Presumably it makes them better products for their market, otherwise they
wouldn't be the leading camera makers.
Depends on your definition of "better". They may be "better" in the
sense of being products more people want to buy, although as someone
else pointed out, there are lots of reasons not directly related to the
products themselves why customers choose a certain brand. Anyhow, I'm
not sure this necessarily means they are "better" in the sense of being
the more suitable tools for the needs of these buyers.
I mean, I'm somewhat selfishly
interested in Pentax only if they build cameras *I* want to use, and
I'd rather see them go out of business trying to do that, than survive
by creating uninteresting products that collect cheap marketing points.
Well, you did say " I'm not convinced that chasing the "latest and greatest"
and focusing on higher numbers (in various specs) or a longer list of
features, is generally a good way to make products.", which is a general
point, and the one that I responded to.
I meant that as a "general" remark about the quality or usefulness of
products in and of themselves, as opposed to their ability to generate
sales through marketing points... I though that was implied by the way I
put it, but perhaps not.
Now you say "I'm somewhat selfishly interested in Pentax only if they build
cameras *I* want to use", which is a specific point, and of course is
perfectly reasonable, but not the same thing. Since you didn't make that
point, I couldn't respond to it.
See above. Also, instead of "I", I may have said "we, PDML". As surely,
we are all more interested in the intrinsic quality of our cameras, than
their ability to raise envy or generate look-at-what-his-camera-has-gots?
- Toralf
B
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
