Technically advanced and feature rich don't always translate to best.
Best is what does the job. Sometimes a "lesser" product that has what
you need is the best.
Toralf Lund wrote:
John Forbes wrote:
I suspect Toralf is alluding to the fact that more than half of the
human beings who have ever lived are still alive today. As they
haven't yet died, we cannot be certain that they will. (This is
very worrying.)
Exactly ;-)
I just wish that everyone on this list shared one hundredth part of
Toralf's optimism.
I don't mind the pessimism in general so much myself. What can get me
a bit worked up, is the continuous assertion that Pentax will always
be one step behind because they are a smaller company than some of
their competitors, that Canon will always make the best cameras
because they have more money to spend on R&D etc. I just don't think
this is the case. In fact truly great products often come from more
minor players, and the highest amount of latest- and-greatest features
or the longest list of three-letter abbreviations, is not the same
thing as making the highest-quality products.
- Toralf
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
- Re: Pentax Future? What's next for Pentax... P. J. Alling
-