> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of > Toralf Lund > > On 9/16/12 15:51, Bob W wrote: > >> From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] 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. > 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. 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. B -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
