If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
my take on Kodak downfall
On Mon, 10 Feb 2014, Paul Ciszek wrote:
In article , nospam wrote: In article , Dale wrote: having worked there consumer film was where the big money was the key is the word *was*. although kodak pioneered digital photography, they completely failed to manage the transition to digital and went bankrupt. The second mouse gets the cheese. Sometimes the third or fourth. But that's a good analogy, the computer mouse didn't take off till the Macintosh in 1984, when it had been demonstrated in 1968 (so it had to exist before that) and work done on it at PARC. Michael |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
my take on Kodak downfall
On 02/10/2014 01:13 PM, Martin Brown wrote:
the raw Bayer array should never be used, an XYZ related array should be used -- Dale |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
my take on Kodak downfall
In article , Dale
wrote: the raw Bayer array should never be used, an XYZ related array should be used what is an xyz related array?? bayer is the best solution that exists today and will be for the foreseeable future. foveon's layered approach has been a disaster. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
my take on Kodak downfall
On 10/02/2014 19:13, Dale wrote:
On 02/10/2014 01:13 PM, Martin Brown wrote: the raw Bayer array should never be used, an XYZ related array should be used The raw data is what you actually measured at each sensor site - there is *nothing* more fundamental than that. You are showing your ignorance. We can conclude that the reason Kodak failed was because they were daft enough to employ people like you and the other ****wits in marketing that managed to launch products almost simultaneously with names that were anagrams, homophones or synonyms of each other. Kodak at one time had world leading digital technology but chose to squander their advantage to milk the analogue film cash cow until dry. They succeeded but the cash cow died as a direct result. -- Regards, Martin Brown |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
my take on Kodak downfall
On 10/02/2014 18:36, nospam wrote:
In article , Martin Brown wrote: A bit like the later Kodak launch confusing professional grade PhotoCD scanning .PCD with the newer poxy consumer grade PictureCD with the same acronym. You only got caught out once and went and bought your own scanner. Shame as PhotoCD was a very good service until they ruined it, but you could not afford to take the chance of getting a disk with toy low quality consumer grade scans half the time. photocd was doomed from the start. it was proprietary and kodak was restrictive on licensing it. few companies supported it and never gained traction. At the time it was very good if you needed existing material digitised. plus, nobody wanted to buy a special player to watch photos on a tv. I agree. That TV player part was dead in the water. The PCD file format and the archive quality of the media was for its time very innovative. I suspect that without the train wreck that was PictureCD the professional scanning service would have made it at least in the UK. The technical quality was excellent and painless until they started randomly returning crappy PictureCDs when you needed PhotoCDs. -- Regards, Martin Brown |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
my take on Kodak downfall
In article , Martin Brown
wrote: A bit like the later Kodak launch confusing professional grade PhotoCD scanning .PCD with the newer poxy consumer grade PictureCD with the same acronym. You only got caught out once and went and bought your own scanner. Shame as PhotoCD was a very good service until they ruined it, but you could not afford to take the chance of getting a disk with toy low quality consumer grade scans half the time. photocd was doomed from the start. it was proprietary and kodak was restrictive on licensing it. few companies supported it and never gained traction. At the time it was very good if you needed existing material digitised. plus, nobody wanted to buy a special player to watch photos on a tv. I agree. That TV player part was dead in the water. The PCD file format and the archive quality of the media was for its time very innovative. I suspect that without the train wreck that was PictureCD the professional scanning service would have made it at least in the UK. The technical quality was excellent and painless until they started randomly returning crappy PictureCDs when you needed PhotoCDs. photocd might have been innovative for the time but it was poorly designed and poorly marketed and quickly obsoleted. the clueless management had no idea what to do with it. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
my take on Kodak downfall
On 2014.02.10, 00:28 , Dale wrote:
having worked there consumer film was where the big money was IMO they should have broken up the company into oldco (Kodak) and newco (DigKo). Use oldco to milk the brand in film, paper, chemicals and related products and the newco, completely divorced from oldco, to invest cash (from oldco and IPO) into new digital oriented imaging. Eventually oldco would quietly wind down while newco developed new markets without brand confusion. That later bit could include new sensors, camera systems, printers, inks, paper, processing, etc. Instead they took an approach that underserved the milkable market (FujiFilm have soaked that up by diligently serving it) and failed to leverage their R&D in digital markets. -- Those who have reduced our privacy, whether they are state or commercial actors, prefer that we do not reduce theirs. - Jaron Lanier, Scientific American, 2013.11. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
my take on Kodak downfall
On 02/10/2014 01:36 PM, nospam wrote:
yep. kodak pioneered digital photography and knew it one day would replace film, but management didn't want to do anything to impact the revenue from film. very stupid. for the record I worked in R&D as a systems engineer it really wasn't the money, it was the people Rochester's nickname is "smug-town" existing connection circles prevailed over performance and even organizational responsibility there were all kinds of groups vying too do the new stuff film had the money, film people got the careers remember this is entertainment technology careers for the most part and entertaining work as opposed to necessity work, fun prevailed too the last job I had was hybrid systems integration on the film side we couldn't have the word integration in the name of our group, since there was an equipment group was responsible for integration,, but we got the budgets and careers, while the equipment people had "jobs" doing not much if it weren't an entertainment business that didn't really matter too much, in much cases, the money and performance would have prevailed there is your business case study this was a publicly held company, public means socialism whether you think so or not, and the public suffered, there needs to be better law for socialized business private companies can set pecking orders however you want socialized companies have a trust, and pecking orders other than by performance should be called anti-trust, in fact I can't think of any other anti-trust that is worse -- Dale |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
my take on Kodak downfall
In article , Dale
wrote: film had the money, film people got the careers which is why they went bankrupt. they knew digital was going to replace film, but they refused to let go of the film business. had they invested in digital, like their competitors did, they'd still be a player. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
my take on Kodak downfall
On 02/10/2014 05:52 PM, Dale wrote:
there is your business case study want some verification? they tried George Fisher from Motorola as CEO with a BIG pay to shake things up, he left they tried Dan Carp from equipment side to shake up film probably, I don't know where he went might want to hear what these two have to say about their experience -- Dale |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
mail to kodak person: kodak V550) | santosh | Digital Photography | 2 | December 16th 05 08:54 PM |
Kodak's LS443 Camera *or* Kodak's Greediness at its Worst | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 0 | October 19th 05 10:44 PM |
Kodak Gold 100 vs Kodak Bright Sun vs Kodak High Definition Colour Film | Graham Fountain | 35mm Photo Equipment | 9 | October 5th 04 12:57 AM |
kodak software ,unable to down load from kodak | JSN61 | Digital Photography | 1 | August 9th 04 01:48 AM |
Kodak T400CN vs Kodak BW400CN vs Fuji Neopan 400Cn (C-41) | Chris Wilkins | Film & Labs | 0 | May 14th 04 10:50 PM |