Hi, we're not talking about extra features, we're talking about multiple ways of doing the same thing.
--- Bob Sunday, November 24, 2002, 11:36:24 PM, you wrote: > I feel that we aren't paying anything extra for the features that we may > not use. We are paying for the features that we must have. The PZ-1p > has as many features as many higher priced cameras but is more > economically priced, as is the MZ-S. > Pentax didn't make a PZ-1p or an MZ-S in models with less or more > features that you can choose, so why do you feel that you are paying > extra for the features that you don't use? Just consider these features > as being at no extra cost and either use them or not as you desire. > Some time in the future you may actually find a need for a specific > feature that you have never used before and you'll be happy it is > available. > Len > --- >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Bob Walkden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Sunday, November 24, 2002 12:55 PM >> To: Chris Brogden >> Subject: Re[4]: Why I won't be buying an MZ-S >> >> >> Hi, >> >> > If you just want to use one and not >> > the other, then leave your camera set up to use your >> preferred method >> > all the time and you won't be confused. >> >> the question that then arises is, why should the customer pay >> for a lot of functions that they'll never use, and for all >> the additional complexity that has to go into making all the >> duplicated functionality work together? For any given >> customer, if each control is duplicated the customer has >> twice as many controls as they need, and the increase in >> complexity is not linear. Why should they have to pay for that? >> >> --- >> >> Bob >> >>
